Global war against Islamic State to be focus at UN General Assembly

With world leaders grappling to stitch together a coalition and plan of action, Ban Ki Moon said he hopes the General Assembly session will help produce an international consensus to act against the al-Qaida breakaway group,


NEW YORK –A brutal terrorist organization that calls itself a state but lacks recognition from any government will take centre stage when more than 140 heads of state and government convene for the annual ministerial meeting of the U.N. General Assembly this week.

The head of the so-called Islamic State, a man called Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi, has not been invited. But the danger posed by his jihadi army will be the overriding theme for an international community horrified by its atrocities in Iraq and Syria, along with a growing concern about random beheadings or larger terror attacks at home inspired by militants abroad.

“Together, we will address the horrendous violence in Syria and Iraq, where conflict and governance failures have provided a breeding ground for extremist groups,” U.N. Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon told a news conference last week.

With world leaders grappling to stitch together a coalition and plan of action, Ban said he hopes the General Assembly session will help produce an international consensus to act against the al-Qaida breakaway group, which U.S. intelligence officials estimate has up to 31,000 fighters including some 12,000 foreigners.

On the sidelines of the global gathering, President Barack Obama will lead a summit meeting of the Security Council to focus on one aspect of the threat _ foreign terrorist fighters.

A draft resolution expected to be adopted by the 15-member council would require all countries to prevent the recruitment and transport of would-be foreign fighters preparing to join terrorist groups such as the Islamic State. It would also require the 193 U.N. member states to ensure that their domestic laws and regulations punish their nationals who travel _ or attempt to travel _ to another country to plan or carry out terrorist acts, and it threatens sanctions against recruiters and financiers for al-Qaida associated groups.

Torbjorn Soltvedt, principal analyst for the Middle East and North Africa at risk advisory company Maplecroft, said the U.N. General Assembly presents an opportunity for the U.S. to consolidate and expand its coalition against the Sunni extremist Islamic State group.

“But while Obama may be able to broaden the coalition and secure additional commitments from allies, the session is unlikely to fundamentally impact the scope and nature of military operations in Syria and Iraq,” he said.

The Islamic State group was established in Iraq but spread in early 2013 to Syria, where it grew in the chaos of that country’s civil war. Its fighters rampaged across northern and western Iraq in June, seizing a huge swath of land and sending tremors across the Middle East.

The group now controls territory stretching from northern Syria to the outskirts of Baghdad. The militants have established what they call an Islamic state, or caliphate, ruled by their harsh interpretation of Islamic law. They have made no effort to hide their brutality, publicizing videos that show them killing their captives, including beheading two American journalists and a British aid worker.

But the complexities and conflicting loyalties inherent in the Middle East present major obstacles to achieving the international coalition Obama is trying to assemble to contain and ultimately eradicate the extremist group.

Several key Sunni-ruled Arab countries, for various reasons, are reluctant to join. Moreover, the U.S. has rejected co-operating with two clear enemies of the Islamic State group: Syrian President Bashar Assad and his fellow Shiite ally Iran. For its part, Iran has also ruled out military co-ordination with the United States.

The U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, Samantha Power, said Sunday that more countries were pledging support for the fight against Islamic State group militants. However, she would not name them or detail their level of support. Power said more than 40 countries have spoken in support of the campaign against the militants, and they will announce their own plans in their own time.

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif described nations participating at a recent conference in Paris to hammer out an alliance against the Sunni extremists as “a coalition of repenters.” He said that most nations there had supported the Islamic State group “in one form or another,” starting with al-Qaida’s emergence in Iraq following the U.S. invasion in 2003.

At the end of the day, he said, they created “a Frankenstein that came to haunt its creators.”

He didn’t name any coalition members, but many believe supporters in Saudi Arabia and Qatar have provided financing to the Islamic State group, and Turkey has allowed thousands of foreign fighters to cross into Syria and Iraq to join the militants.

These regional Sunni powerhouses are reluctant to make a direct move that would be seen as aligning with the Shiite leaderships in Baghdad and Damascus and their Iranian backers.

It is this mix of rival powers and ideologies that will come together in New York this week at the General Assembly, and while back-door dealings are common in Middle East diplomacy, it is unclear whether the meeting will help smooth out differences.

“Conflicting agendas and mutual suspicion between key actors, such as the U.S., Iran and Saudi Arabia, will be difficult to overcome,” Soltvedt said. “Despite the shared interests of world and regional powers in neutralizing the threat posed by the Islamic State, an effective joint effort by all concerned parties is unlikely.”


Global war against Islamic State to be focus at UN General Assembly

  1. The UN is a complete waste of time and money, time to de-fund and send the third world despots and dictators reps home.

    ICAO and the IMO should be kept, the only two useful branches within the existing UN framework.

    • You are sooo confused. The UN exists to prevent WWIII….and it’s doing just fine.

        • Good heavens man, now you’ve misspelled your own name!

          • FOB is an INCO term that can also mean something else.

        • Everything you write means something else…because you never have a clue what you’re talking about in the first place.

          • Emily is back to projecting again.

          • I’m amazed at your continuing fascination with unicorns…and hot air. I’m guessing you’re maybe 12 mentally?

            Time for your milk and cookies from the nurse anyway.

        • That’s what you say everytime you get lost in the canyons of your mind, Billy Bob. Get some new material.

          • Don’t mix up fact and reality with your unicorn fart dreams Emily.

  2. What needs to be done;

    Retired General Paul Vallely, who has been a vocal critic of President Obama, particularly about Benghazi, is calling for the unleashing of the US military on the ISIS army, according to Newsmax.

    The first thing that needs to be done, give the mission to the CENTCOM Commander, a four-star General, give him orders, give him a mission to destroy ISIS. We have the assets to do that.”

    Vallely notes that in the fall of 2001, following the 9/11 terror attack on the World Trade Center, a relatively small group of Special Operations soldiers and paramilitary units joined with local opposition on the ground in Afghanistan, and were able to call in airstrikes and conduct operations that led to the swift toppling of the Taliban as the governing force in the region.

    “ISIS is an armed force now, fighting a very conventional war, so we might want to call them an army at this point in time. That’s why they have to be destroyed and neutralized, that’s why we gotta give a four-star General the job to obliterate them and eliminate them, just like the Israelis have to do with Hamas. They’re the same caliber of radical terrorists that are going to continue to destroy those in the Western world as their enemies.”

    The General is absolutely right, there must be a specific, yet unlimited mission to destroy ISIS as a fighting force and cohesive unit. Simple limited airstrikes will not be effective in preventing ISIS from posing a threat to the surrounding region, and ultimately the world.

    • Isis is no danger to the US….anymore than Iraq, Afghanistan, Iran etc are.

  3. The UN is not just dysfunctional – it’s a criminal enterprise

    It gives validity to zealots and bigots, a voice to international terrorists, and helps to keep tyrannical dictators in power.
    By Tom DeWeese December 22, 2006

    CAMBRIDGE, ENGLAND — It is reasonable that honest, compassionate people seek a means for governments to air their differences.

    It is also reasonable that honest, compassionate people should desire some way to voluntarily pool resources to provide charitable aid to those who are starving or are victims of natural disaster. Indeed, this is the image of the United Nations that has been sold to the world since its inception.

    It is not, however, the reality.

    The UN gives validity to zealots and bigots. It helps to keep tyrannical dictators in power. It gives a voice to international terrorists.

    Delay. Negotiate. Recommend. Study. Reconsider. Do nothing. This is the game the UN has played in nearly every international crisis. It is the reason North Korea remains a threat after 50 years. And it is the reason why a terrorist nation such as Syria can be given a seat on the UN’s Human Rights Council.

    The UN is buried under scandals. It has Oil-for-Food scandals. Smuggling scandals. And theft scandals.

    UN peacekeeping missions – with their record of rob, rape,and pillage – can actually bring fear to the local citizens they are supposed to protect.

    Who has the power to oversee and control its actions? The people don’t vote on UN actions. The media has little access behind the scenes. Who audits the accounting books?

    UN supporters admit such problems, and they call for “reform.” But to them, reform doesn’t mean plugging holes in UN spending or clearing up scandals. Instead, it means global governance.

    Since its inception, the UN’s advocacy has amounted to a desire to eradicate the sovereignty of nations – while imposing what it calls “world-mindedness.”

    A 1949 UNESCO document said, “…nationalism [is] the major obstacle to the development of world-mindedness.”

    Therein lies the UN’s true goal. And that belies its public image of being simply a place where nations may come to air their differences and act responsibly.

    Instead, the UN works to gain power for itself in order to become independent and supreme over its member nations.

    To do that, it needs the power to tax. On Sept. 19, plans were approved by several nations to create a global tax, mostly through airline tickets to help pay for the treatment of AIDS. There are several other tax schemes on the UN wish list. If the UN gains the power to tax, it will become a monster free of its chains. And, of course, the UN wants its own military. It already has its own court.

    Imagine a world run by the justice of China, with the economics of Cuba, and the military might of the United States. Such is the world of the future under UN global governance.

    A glance at recent history shows that the UN is irrelevant as a body to deliver world peace.

    Using images of dire environmental emergencies, life-threatening diseases, or starving children, the UN promotes an agenda that seeks to redistribute the world’s wealth.

    Nowhere is there mentioned in a single UN document that I have read an advocacy for the right to own private property. And it is a fact that the inability to own private property creates poverty. It is also a fact that confiscation of private property never helps to eradicate poverty.

    It is bad economic policy. Yet that is the UN’s only solution to the massive suffering throughout the world. Take it from one source to give to another. And that, I contend, is the very root of the suffering – not the solution.

    The UN is not “dysfunctional” as some “reformists” have claimed. It is a criminal enterprise in which no moral nation should ever participate, let alone perpetuate.

    • Tom DeWeese is president of the American Policy Center, a nonprofit in Warrenton, Va., dedicated to free enterprise.

    • An American right-wing agenda is not what the UN is for. That’s the Repubs job.

      We haven’t had WWIII….so the UN is operating properly

      Could it do better? Of course it could….so could everything.

      • What a load of BS…………even for you.

        • You quote me a bunch of bat-shit crazies, and then think I’m the one with the problem?

          Milk and cookies BB….and then your jammies.

          • You have not a problem, but problems.

        • LOL the only ‘problem’ I have is being a geezer-magnet.

          • There you go showing your delusion again, go back to the beginning of this thread, you are a whack job.

  4. The United Nations is a hotbed for corruption and abuse. It is opaque, diplomatically immune, largely unaccountable – and has come to regard billions in U.S. tax dollars not as a privilege to be earned, but as an entitlement.
    The UN does not issue clear reports to donor nations on how their money is spent. That includes the United States, the U.N.’s biggest donor, which bankrolls roughly 25% of the U.N.’s soaring system-wide spending. In Fiscal 2010 (the last year for which the U.S. administration has provided any total figures), U.S. taxpayers contributed more than $7.7 billion to an incoherent U.N. system-wide budget, which by some estimates has continued to expand to well over $30 billion per year.
    In the 193-member U.N. General Assembly, which shapes the core budget and works on a system of one country-one vote, the U.S. is often marginalized or out-voted, despite contributing funds totaling more than two-thirds of the least-assessed U.N. member states combined. Decisions tend to be dominated by substantially nondemocratic voting blocs, such as the 56 member states of the Organization of the Islamic Conference (headquartered in Saudi Arabia), or the 120 member Non-Aligned Movement, chaired from 2012-2015 by Iran.
    In recent years, the U.S. has done too little to require accountability or responsibility of the UN. Since U.S. law required the cut off of U.S. funding to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization (UNESCO) for admitting the Palestinian Authority to full membership in 2011, the U.S. administration has been pushing not to change UNESCO, but to waive U.S. law. This has emboldened further anti-American moves at the UN.
    The U.N. in some cases uses U.S. money to actively undermine American values and interests. For instance: Procurement of dual-use technology for Iran and North Korea by the UN’s World Intellectual Property Organization (WIPO) in Geneva, or the previous dual-use procurement Cash-for-Kim scandal involving the UN’s flagship agency, the U.N. Development Program (UNDP) violating its own rules to transfer dual-use goods and hard currency to the government of North Korea. Or the U.N. offering itself as a platform for gags on free speech, and for such anti-American anti-Semitic exercises as the 2009 Durban II conference in Geneva (featuring Iran’s President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad as a main speaker), and Durban III conference in 2011 in New York.
    Among many other examples of U.N. abuses: The Human Rights Council, even after a major 2006 “reform,” continues to keep scrutiny of Israel as the only standing item on its agenda, condemns Israel more than any other state, and among its members newly elected in 2012 are such human rights abusers as Pakistan, Cote d’Ivoire, Gabon, Kazakhstan and Venezuela,
    UNRWA, the U.N.’s Palestinian Refugee Agency, to which the U.S. is the biggest donor, was created in 1949 as a temporary outfit, but more than 60 years later has become an entrenched welfare system, its client rolls swollen five-fold to some 5 million recipients, impeding peace and fostering terror in the Middle East. Headquartered in terrorist-controlled Gaza, UNRWA in 2011 opened a representative office in Washington, staffed by former U.S. congressional aides, in effect using U.S. tax dollars to help promote UNRWA’s interests to Congress and the administration.
    The U.N. has failed to reform. Following the Oil-for-Food scandal, in which the U.N. profited from and covered up for billions in Baghdad kickbacks and corruption, the U.N. in 2006 promised greater transparency, accountability, an end to Peacekeeper rape, the elimination of redundant mandates, and a more ethical culture. Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon arrived in office in 2007 promising “to restore trust” and calling for a system-wide audit. None of these things has been accomplished.
    Inside the U.N., a special anti-corruption task force set up in 2006 was dissolved at the end of 2008. The U.N.’s internal audit division, the Office of Internal Oversight Services, has been roiled with scandals and frictions, including a former chief of the unit accusing the UN Secretary-General of “deplorable” actions to impede her hiring of investigators, and charging that “the secretariat is now in a process of decay.”
    Among UN member states, the only serious oversight comes from the U.S., the great majority of the other 193 member states being effectively free riders on U.S. credibility and funding. The only real levers for reform have been exposure of abuses and withholding of U.S. money, and on neither front has the U.S. administration been taking stands strong enough to maintain leadership..
    – See more at: http://www.defenddemocracy.org/united-nations-corruption-and-the-need-for-reform/#sthash.HmgE0OB2.dpuf

  5. The UN is run by it’s Security Council.

    It has 5 members….any one of which has a veto. China, France, Russia, the UK and the US.

    They oversee and direct it.

    If you think the UN is useless, corrupt, criminal…..then blame those responsible. Not the ME. Not the Third World. Not some two-bit dictatorship in the boonies……the big guns on the Security Council.

Sign in to comment.