Editorial1st March 1998 |
Front Page | |
|
47, W. A. D. Ramanayake Mawatha Colombo 2. P.O. Box: 1136, Colombo 2.
|
||
We need unWhat’s the United Nations for? Ide- ally we think to bring our diverse world together and as the UN motto says to turn swords into ploughshares but with petty dictators around the world in the East and in the West there doesn’t seem to be, as things stand, much hope. Yet recent events in relation to presumed Iraqi threats to world peace through its development of horrendous nuclear, chemical and biological arsenals and the self-righteous confrontational stance taken by the US as policeman of the world show that the UN is still needed in this world. Even if we may not be all that much better off with the UN we could have been much worse off without it. The gung-ho US policy no doubt makes it clear that the UN has still an essential role to play, that there is still the need for the soothing diplomacy of the UN to solve problems and resolve world conflicts which may seem unresolvable. The United States and Britain which had girded up to attack Iraq in order to make them comply even at cost to the limits of its sovereignty as a nation, realised that they did not have the support of world opinion — certainly not from the countries of Gulf region and most elsewhere. It was widely felt that US muscle flexing was being carried too far on an issue where the rest of the world doesn’t share the same commitment with the US while it cannot be forgotten that objectivity when taken too far could become an obsession. US embargoes on countries like Cuba, Libya and Iraq, even Iran, have been brought to bear on these countries largely because they have adopted an anti-US position, not because they are dictatorships poised to subvert a so-called democratic world. After all much of West Asia, Gulf countries like Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, even Egypt and such like are well dyed dictatorships and they yet are lily white goodies because they toe the US line. Embargoes be it known always hit the poorest of the poor — you only have to watch western television and read western news reports to realise this. When these embargoes are seen as US-backed or engineered, it only helps Fidel Castro or Saddam Hussein to take on the role of martyrs and stay in power while their citizens suffer. So embargoes of this nature obviously have a negative reaction. This was the rationale Britain employed when they opposed sanctions being applied against the apartheid regime of South Africa at one time. They said it would hurt the poor not the powerful. Now it is a different story in a typical case of immoral opportunism where there are no permanent friends or principles, but permanent self interests. According to US conservative hardliners in Congress, the crisis with Iraq is not yet over but only on hold. They are now seeking a Security Council resolution empowering the US to take automatic military action against Iraq if Saddam Hussein does not comply with the terms of the agreement for weapons inspection. The UN should not give in to this diplomacy of brinkmanship. And not from the US which has yet to pay its subscriptions to the august world body. Sri Lanka has not thrown up leaders who may take on the mantle of martyrs but we suffer too, especially because of the doors that remain closed to Sri Lankan trade especially with Iraq so long as embargoes are in place. Then again the Sri Lankan poor are those who are hit hardest when it comes to Sri Lankans seeking out a living in their home country wishing to be gainfully employed in countries like Iraq but are unable to do so in the face of such powderkeg situations. The Gulf crisis and related West Asian issues have meanwhile produced two Sri Lankans who have been called upon to play a key role. Jayantha Dhanapala, UN Under-Secretary General for Disarmament Affairs, has been appointed as the Special Commissioner to head the team that would carry out the vital weapons inspection mission in Baghdad — a mission that could make the difference between peace and possible world war. On Friday distinguished Sri Lankan, Christy Weeramantry as head of the world court in the Hague gave a widely-awaited judgment in the Lockerbie bombing case — a judgment which most analysts see as a fine balance between US-British interests and the larger interest of the world community while upholding the principles of international law. Sri Lanka is possibly still respected in the world community as a country that can bring about justice and fairplay with a balance between US-led vested interest and international interest in world affairs.
|
||
Please send your comments and suggestions on this web site to The Sunday Times or to Information Laboratories (Pvt.) Ltd. |