Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword
Like this
0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
United Nations

United Nations

Ratings: (0)|Views: 26|Likes:
Published by api-3844499

More info:

Published by: api-3844499 on Oct 19, 2008
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





United Nations, The U.N. - The Peace FAQ
Frequently Asked Questions:
Wasn't the UN created to promote peace and human rights?
Has the UN displayed a double standard against Israel?
Does UN resolution 242 require Israel to withdraw its forces back to
the June 4, 1967 lines?
What are the obligations of the Arabs under UN resolution 242? What
about the Palestinian Arabs in particular?
Wasn't the UN created to promote peace and human rights?
"...the United Nations was established...to promotep e a ce. [ But] It
consists of a welter of sovereign states whose ambassadors use the
devious language ofp e a ce as a fig-leaf for national self-
aggrandizement. How any human organization can promote genuine
peace or prevent war when egoism is the basic motive of mankind
[ strikes me] as ludicrous".
- Prof. Paul Eidelberg is the Co-founder and President of the
Foundation for Constitutional Democracy in the Middle East
Even though the UN has clearly failed in most conflict situations to
promotep e a ce andse cu r i t y -- its primary function -- at one task it is

really unmatched. It excels at legitimizing or delegitimizing targets chosen for political reason by a coalition of dictators who dominate the world body and whose tainted authority the UN launders.

- Dr. Harris O. Schoenberg , President of the Center for UN Reform
Education, author of A Mandate forTe r r o r
Arab slave trade continues. U.N. condemns Israel. World thirsty for
NurMu h a m m a d al-Hasan emerges from the Sudanese bush. His
loose, once-bright whitej a l a b i y a flutters as he strides towards me. I
in turn step through the long, dry grass towards him, stooping
slightly as I walk under the weight of a U.S. army kit bag full of
grimy Sudanese bank notes. It is April 1999 and the midday sun is
oppressive. Nur and I greet each other with a handshake and "Salam
'alaykum." We slip under the shade of an enormous mango tree
http://www.peacefaq.com/un.html\ue000(1 of 10)8/9/2007 9:43:44 AM
United Nations, The U.N. - The Peace FAQ
where we have some important business to discuss: The liberation of
slaves, mainly wom en and children.
Our enterprise is not to everyone's liking. Last spring, Sudan's
government, the radicalI sl a m i st regime of the NationalI sl a m i c Front
(NIF) headed by Hasan at-Turabi and Gen. 'Umar al-Bashir,
protested to the United Nations Commission on Human Rights about
our work. The regime claims that my organization,Ch r i st i a n

Solidarity International (CSI), is the main source of the abduction
and kidnapping of children in southern Sudan. In April, the Khartoum
regime also initiated proceedings to deny CSI its consultative status
at the United Nations (U.N.), alleging that we act contrary to the
purposes and principles of the U.N. charter.

About the same time, the world's richest and most influential child
welfare organization, the United Nations International Children's
Emergency Fund (UNICEF), ended its long silence on the
enslavement of Sudanese woman and children. Instead of
condemning the slavers, UNICEF-whose mandate requires it to work
in partnership with the government of Sudan-echoed Khartoum by
calling our liberation ofsl a v e s "absolutely intolerable," and by
accusing us of violating theSl a v e r y Convention. Others, with

agendas of their own, perhaps working with the Sudanese regime or
trying to salvage their own tarnished reputations, have spread
rumors of fraud about these activities.

Then in late October, the U.N. Economic and Social Councilv o t e d by
a tally of 26 to 14 (with 12 abstentions) to withdraw our consultative
status, thus effectively excluding CSI from the U.N. system. Yet if
anything is "absolutely intolerable," it is that the international
community has allowedsl a v e r y and other crimes against humanity to
be institutionalized by a member state of the United Nations.
All of this campaigning has had some effect, making the "out of
sight, out of mind" attitude less tenable. In February 1999, soon
after Dan Rather of CBS News highlighted the plight of Sudanese
slaves and CSI's role in freeing them, UNICEF broke its silence and
admitted: "Slavery in Sudan exists." Even as it said this, however,
UNICEF appeased the Khartoum regime by condemning the
redemption ofsl a v e s as "absolutely intolerable."
...UNICEF's executive director Carol Bellamy made a series of
widely publicized press statements attacking CSI's antislavery
campaign, claiming that Dinka efforts to retrieve theire n sl a v e d
women and children contravenes the Slavery Convention and is not
in their own best interests.
...The U.N. High Commissioner for Human Rights, Mary Robinson ,
has also kept mum on the issue, despite her own staff and
http://www.peacefaq.com/un.html\ue000(2 of 10)8/9/2007 9:43:44 AM
United Nations, The U.N. - The Peace FAQ
independent U.N. special rapporteurs confirming the existence of
slavery in Sudan and the government's key role in abetting the slave
trade-in particular, the reports submitted by the former Special
Rapporteur on Sudan Gaspar Biro and his successor Leonardo
Franco. The 1999 Sudan Resolution of the U.N. Commission on
Human Rights failed even to mention the word "slavery." The U.N.
secretary-general, Kofi Annan, has also never publicly condemned
the revival ofsl a v e r y in Sudan.
And the U.S. government? It too is reluctant. In 1999, for the first
time in six years, Washington declined to serve as the main sponsor
of the Commission on Human Rights' Sudan resolution, leaving this
responsibility to the lukewarm European Union; and the Clinton
administration assented to the commission's "slavery-free"

resolution. Why the change? Because in return, the Sudanese were
prepared not to press hard for a condemnation of the United States
for the rocket attack on Khartoum's Ash-Shifa pharmaceutical factory
in August 1998. However, with an eye on the abolitionist movement

at home, the State Department tried to maintain the moral high
ground by condemning the (U.S.-supported) Sudan resolution as
"deeply flawed" for failing to "confront fully the practice ofsl a v e r y."

This did not convince; just four days later, the Clinton administration announced a weakening of sanctions on Sudan (by allowing the sale of agricultural goods and pharmaceuticals).

...The sad truth must be acknowledged: Sudanesesl a v e s and other
victims of the NIF's genocidal jihad count for little in a world
preoccupied with other matters. Millions of lives have been lost and
disrupted while the world has largely turned a blind eye toward gross
violations of human rights in Sudan.
Whatever may be the future of the international abolitionist
movement, the Dinkas are right not to wait for help from the U.N. or
any state but to find their own ways to liberate their people from
bondage. Still, they can count on my colleagues and me, as well as a
growing number of abolitionists for support until the lastsl a v e is

- John Eibner , historian and human rights specialist, assistant to the international president ofCh r i st i a n Solidarity International. He has led over twenty fact-finding visits to Sudan and neighboring

countries and has pioneered CSI's antislavery program. Source:Th e
Middle East Quarterly
Has the UN displayed a double standard against Israel?
http://www.peacefaq.com/un.html\ue000(3 of 10)8/9/2007 9:43:44 AM

Activity (4)

You've already reviewed this. Edit your review.
1 thousand reads
1 thousand reads
1 hundred reads
Dee H. Sukarni liked this

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->