Diplomacy and complex anti-Americans: the dilemmas of Europe
George Chaya
November 01, 2008
By George Chaya
"For much of the twentieth century United States has been the major Western power, creating a dependence that Europe had never known before and even with the passing of the years, the United States has sent many of its best young men and women into the danger to fight for the cause of freedom beyond their own borders, has never asked for anything in return, either in economic or land. The only land that eventually the United States has requested have not been more than that necessary to bury those brave soldiers who never returned home, never claim more. Even so, it is not unusual to find European diplomats who still question and oppose the use of language and prefer English to French diplomatic issues. They should know that today have the option to speak English or French by the Americans, Britons, Canadians and Australians gave their lives in World War II so that they do not end up speaking German. "
Winning the war on terrorism depends largely on the ability of governments free to attract and mobilize allies to support the cause of the West. Terrorism in all its expressions is a political enemy that transcends geographical boundaries, so it is necessary to have the approval of Western governments to operate in its territory with the support of its intelligence and law enforcement post which represents a common threat to most of the modern world, both in countries of the West and elsewhere on the planet.
The United States, Spain and England have already been targets of terrorist attacks and have found evidence that suggests planning attacks in France, Italy and Australia. Similarly, terrorists have attacked equally to countries of the Muslim faith who considered apostates from Islam, especially those who have close relations with the West, like Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia.
Though perhaps more comfortable for some leadership in some parts of the world assume they are safe from this threat, this false sense of security can ultimately make that suffer tremendous damage in the future. This is the biggest mistake of anti-Western governments to appear "politically correct", the United States needs the support of other countries in the war against terrorism because of the high value attached to the coalition-building and international support the world today. Win the active support and tacit approval of the international community shows to the peoples of the world that this is a just cause and that terror as a method can not be tolerated by civilized societies. Attracting international support is based largely on the ability of America to harness the tools of diplomacy, which can also help win concessions vital of states that may harbor or support terrorism.
The biggest and most visible instrument of diplomacy and respect for international law in the modern world is the United Nations. The ONU includes many sub-organizations dedicated to preserving peace and promoting human rights around the world.
The ONU is an important organization and with a noble purpose, but faces serious obstacles that make the achievement of its objectives is difficult to achieve when given with hostile entities supportive of international terrorism. Their main obstacle is the lack of cohesion within its ideological composition. The countries that make up the United Nations are characterized by their differences, historical and philosophical terms and interpret human rights in many different ways. Legal prohibitions to large families in China, restrictions on women's empowerment in Saudi Arabia and poor working conditions for children in Southeast Asia are elements that must be defended within the full spectrum of human rights and we see this is not that way in relation to how they are interpreted by those countries; unfortunately this is what is happening. It is difficult if not impossible; to reach an international agreement on human rights by a collection of philosophical and cultural vagaries in the field and this sets a stain on the actions of the United Nations.
Another serious problem in the ONU is the tendency toward corruption and cronyism within its bureaucracy. All bureaucracies to nurturing a unique culture that protects its own members and is resistant to external influence. And finally, the tendency of each country to use the UN as an instrument to gain prestige by virtue of membership of the organization to inflict violence-when-not revenge on their neighbors greatly reduces its usefulness as an idealism of authority, negotiation and peacekeeping. The speeches, votes, and the actions of individual Member States often are the great challenge of overcoming national interests and finding the best policies for the international community.
Given these problems, some people suggest that the USA does not need the ONU and did not consider the organization when making critical decisions related to war and peace, just using it at your convenience. In my opinion, this view is absolutely short-sighted and wants USA absurdly sacrifice its national sovereignty and security.
The truth is that the UN even from their own disasters discrepancies is an organization respected in many parts of the world where it achieves provides humanitarian aid in a timely and effective manner. It is also true that in the other orders and for worse, the ONU has lost international legitimacy at the hands of states which comprise it and are clearly sponsors of terrorism and systematically violate human rights.
In short, this proved so reliable that "the UN has no real authority" to enforce their sovereign decision, its objectives and its resolutions to member states and only have the legitimacy that its members give it. This is a blurred, which has lost its course and is deeply disturbed as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) led by a man who has lost all credibility and respect as he. Mohamad El-Baradei. These factors mean that the United States or any country free from the West who want to preserve freedom before the attacks and threats of terrorism should not necessarily be subordinated to their channels and structures, as the enemies of democracy, freedoms and human rights Not only are not, but they make fun of the legal system prevailing in the international community.
Because the war against terrorism be fought on several continents and with different methodologies, it is important not just for America but for all countries of the West who call themselves democratic build coalitions and alliances to promote one another. The identity and the contribution of these countries depend heavily on their location. The Middle East is obviously an important front in the war against terrorism and several countries have offered assistance in the effort. Countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt who are frequent victims of terrorism have given some assistance to the USA. including intelligence on the activities and individuals located within its borders. However, the assistance of Saudi Arabia in particular has not been totally unqualified. While the Saudi government maintains very close ties to American interests, they also allow their citizens to finance increasing numbers of ultra-conservative Wahhabi doctrine through religious schools (madrazzas) all over the world and has done very little in their policies by allowing full recognition of women's rights among other things.
Europe is another area of major importance in the war on terror. Several countries have been targets of terrorists. There has been an influx of Muslim immigrants in many European countries for years and these communities are growing rapidly, thanks to birth rates are much higher than those of their Christian neighbors. Cities like London and have great voices and Muslim populations, which often take advantage of their political freedoms to express their grievances with secular Western society, both for Spain and France. As a result, Europe faces the twin threats of terrorism from outside and within their borders and their leaders must understand that the continent has a vital interest in the outcome of the war on terror. Some European countries have understood this common interest and the time of emergency to join the American cause for freedom. But others are skeptical of any international cause led by the United States and they feel uncomfortable with their changing roles in international politics.
For much of the twentieth century United States has been the major Western power, creating a dependence that Europe had never known before and even with the passing of the years, the United States has sent many of its best young men and women into the danger to fight for the cause of freedom beyond their own borders, has never asked for anything in return, either in economic or land. The only land that eventually the United States has requested have not been more than that necessary to bury those brave soldiers who never returned, never claim more. Even so, it is not unusual to find European diplomats who still question and oppose the use of language and prefer English to French diplomatic issues. They should know that today have the option to speak English or French by the Americans, Britons, Canadians and Australians gave their lives in World War II so that they do not end up speaking German.
The people and governments of several European countries have not yet surpassed this affront and are eager to exert their growing independence and unify the European continent instead of contributing to a joint effort with the United States.
However, Europe knows that the attacks may continue and that the danger persists, some of its countries are gradually changing their initial reluctance to join the international war against terrorism, it is hoped that these positions will be consolidated and move beyond the outcome of the presidential election of November 4, this will remedy the endemic against international terrorism and consolidate freedom and democracy in most parts of the planet.
"For much of the twentieth century United States has been the major Western power, creating a dependence that Europe had never known before and even with the passing of the years, the United States has sent many of its best young men and women into the danger to fight for the cause of freedom beyond their own borders, has never asked for anything in return, either in economic or land. The only land that eventually the United States has requested have not been more than that necessary to bury those brave soldiers who never returned home, never claim more. Even so, it is not unusual to find European diplomats who still question and oppose the use of language and prefer English to French diplomatic issues. They should know that today have the option to speak English or French by the Americans, Britons, Canadians and Australians gave their lives in World War II so that they do not end up speaking German. "
Winning the war on terrorism depends largely on the ability of governments free to attract and mobilize allies to support the cause of the West. Terrorism in all its expressions is a political enemy that transcends geographical boundaries, so it is necessary to have the approval of Western governments to operate in its territory with the support of its intelligence and law enforcement post which represents a common threat to most of the modern world, both in countries of the West and elsewhere on the planet.
The United States, Spain and England have already been targets of terrorist attacks and have found evidence that suggests planning attacks in France, Italy and Australia. Similarly, terrorists have attacked equally to countries of the Muslim faith who considered apostates from Islam, especially those who have close relations with the West, like Egypt, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia and Indonesia.
Though perhaps more comfortable for some leadership in some parts of the world assume they are safe from this threat, this false sense of security can ultimately make that suffer tremendous damage in the future. This is the biggest mistake of anti-Western governments to appear "politically correct", the United States needs the support of other countries in the war against terrorism because of the high value attached to the coalition-building and international support the world today. Win the active support and tacit approval of the international community shows to the peoples of the world that this is a just cause and that terror as a method can not be tolerated by civilized societies. Attracting international support is based largely on the ability of America to harness the tools of diplomacy, which can also help win concessions vital of states that may harbor or support terrorism.
The biggest and most visible instrument of diplomacy and respect for international law in the modern world is the United Nations. The ONU includes many sub-organizations dedicated to preserving peace and promoting human rights around the world.
The ONU is an important organization and with a noble purpose, but faces serious obstacles that make the achievement of its objectives is difficult to achieve when given with hostile entities supportive of international terrorism. Their main obstacle is the lack of cohesion within its ideological composition. The countries that make up the United Nations are characterized by their differences, historical and philosophical terms and interpret human rights in many different ways. Legal prohibitions to large families in China, restrictions on women's empowerment in Saudi Arabia and poor working conditions for children in Southeast Asia are elements that must be defended within the full spectrum of human rights and we see this is not that way in relation to how they are interpreted by those countries; unfortunately this is what is happening. It is difficult if not impossible; to reach an international agreement on human rights by a collection of philosophical and cultural vagaries in the field and this sets a stain on the actions of the United Nations.
Another serious problem in the ONU is the tendency toward corruption and cronyism within its bureaucracy. All bureaucracies to nurturing a unique culture that protects its own members and is resistant to external influence. And finally, the tendency of each country to use the UN as an instrument to gain prestige by virtue of membership of the organization to inflict violence-when-not revenge on their neighbors greatly reduces its usefulness as an idealism of authority, negotiation and peacekeeping. The speeches, votes, and the actions of individual Member States often are the great challenge of overcoming national interests and finding the best policies for the international community.
Given these problems, some people suggest that the USA does not need the ONU and did not consider the organization when making critical decisions related to war and peace, just using it at your convenience. In my opinion, this view is absolutely short-sighted and wants USA absurdly sacrifice its national sovereignty and security.
The truth is that the UN even from their own disasters discrepancies is an organization respected in many parts of the world where it achieves provides humanitarian aid in a timely and effective manner. It is also true that in the other orders and for worse, the ONU has lost international legitimacy at the hands of states which comprise it and are clearly sponsors of terrorism and systematically violate human rights.
In short, this proved so reliable that "the UN has no real authority" to enforce their sovereign decision, its objectives and its resolutions to member states and only have the legitimacy that its members give it. This is a blurred, which has lost its course and is deeply disturbed as well as the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) led by a man who has lost all credibility and respect as he. Mohamad El-Baradei. These factors mean that the United States or any country free from the West who want to preserve freedom before the attacks and threats of terrorism should not necessarily be subordinated to their channels and structures, as the enemies of democracy, freedoms and human rights Not only are not, but they make fun of the legal system prevailing in the international community.
Because the war against terrorism be fought on several continents and with different methodologies, it is important not just for America but for all countries of the West who call themselves democratic build coalitions and alliances to promote one another. The identity and the contribution of these countries depend heavily on their location. The Middle East is obviously an important front in the war against terrorism and several countries have offered assistance in the effort. Countries like Saudi Arabia and Egypt who are frequent victims of terrorism have given some assistance to the USA. including intelligence on the activities and individuals located within its borders. However, the assistance of Saudi Arabia in particular has not been totally unqualified. While the Saudi government maintains very close ties to American interests, they also allow their citizens to finance increasing numbers of ultra-conservative Wahhabi doctrine through religious schools (madrazzas) all over the world and has done very little in their policies by allowing full recognition of women's rights among other things.
Europe is another area of major importance in the war on terror. Several countries have been targets of terrorists. There has been an influx of Muslim immigrants in many European countries for years and these communities are growing rapidly, thanks to birth rates are much higher than those of their Christian neighbors. Cities like London and have great voices and Muslim populations, which often take advantage of their political freedoms to express their grievances with secular Western society, both for Spain and France. As a result, Europe faces the twin threats of terrorism from outside and within their borders and their leaders must understand that the continent has a vital interest in the outcome of the war on terror. Some European countries have understood this common interest and the time of emergency to join the American cause for freedom. But others are skeptical of any international cause led by the United States and they feel uncomfortable with their changing roles in international politics.
For much of the twentieth century United States has been the major Western power, creating a dependence that Europe had never known before and even with the passing of the years, the United States has sent many of its best young men and women into the danger to fight for the cause of freedom beyond their own borders, has never asked for anything in return, either in economic or land. The only land that eventually the United States has requested have not been more than that necessary to bury those brave soldiers who never returned, never claim more. Even so, it is not unusual to find European diplomats who still question and oppose the use of language and prefer English to French diplomatic issues. They should know that today have the option to speak English or French by the Americans, Britons, Canadians and Australians gave their lives in World War II so that they do not end up speaking German.
The people and governments of several European countries have not yet surpassed this affront and are eager to exert their growing independence and unify the European continent instead of contributing to a joint effort with the United States.
However, Europe knows that the attacks may continue and that the danger persists, some of its countries are gradually changing their initial reluctance to join the international war against terrorism, it is hoped that these positions will be consolidated and move beyond the outcome of the presidential election of November 4, this will remedy the endemic against international terrorism and consolidate freedom and democracy in most parts of the planet.