'Diplomatic overkill' - Macleans.ca

‘Diplomatic overkill’


Adam Chapnik explains the wisdom of dysfunction at the United Nations.

To suggest, however, that North Korea’s accession to the presidency of the conference on disarmament – not to mention the conference’s failure to play a role in any recent progress on global non-proliferation initiatives – justifies a Canadian boycott, which could eventually lead to the decline of the conference altogether, misses the point.

The United Nations is nothing more than a framework through which its members can sort out their political, economic, and security-related disagreements. It cannot do the negotiating for them, but it can make it easier to negotiate when the time is right.

The State Department says the United States won’t be boycotting the conference.

“We have chosen not to make a big deal out of this because it’s a relatively low-level, inconsequential event,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said…

“It’s a consensus-based organization, so nothing can be decided just because the chair is a country that we have issues with. So our plan is not to take any particular action with regard to that meeting,” Nuland said. “It is not where the main game on these issues are.”


‘Diplomatic overkill’

  1. At last someone points out that the UN is a planetary body….consisting of about 200 countries!

    That means 200 different cultures, 200 points of view, 200 agendas etc

    It represents over 6 billion people after all.

    So it’s never going to run as smoothly as a local town council………and even THEY sometimes get into nasty scraps

    Being planetary also means it’s not just a body for the western world or the US to tell everyone else how to live.

    It’s major mandate was to prevent another world war….so it’s been successful, and during a Cold War at that when every little thing could be a trigger.

    But that doesn’t mean it’s going to decide or act ‘correctly’ on everything that comes along….the UN has made mistakes….but any body that big is bound to

    It’s also not autonomous…there is no one person, not even the Sect’y General, in charge, that can decide on an action. Without the approval of the Security Council, he can do nothing.

    So it’s a waste of time for us to sweat the small stuff.

    • Whether it’s a waste of time depends on your point of view. For the CPC, it’s certainly not a waste because when they can paint themselves as having the moral purity to not even *talk* to the bad guys (like teh evul opposition does) then obviously it means all their decisions are in the right. 

      Or at least, that’s how they think it’ll play out to the masses who aren’t paying too close attention.

      And given history, I can’t say they’re thinking is wrong.

      • Oh yes, this latest ploy is strictly for the home audience…world affairs used to please a small local political base for gain

        However, we won’t get anywhere globally doing that,  and we do have bigger thinkers in the country

  2. Canada’s foreign affairs directive: Think locally and act globally.

    • Perfect summation…thank you.