The U.N. has serious structural issues:
‘Sudan is a sinkhole of repression, violence, and even slavery. Its president, Omar al-Bashir, is wanted by the International Criminal Court on charges of genocide. Its security forces are notorious for arbitrary arrests, rape, and torture, which, as the U.S. State Department notes, they usually commit with inpunity.’
‘Unless competition materializes before the election takes place this November, it’s highly likely that Sudan will win a seat on the UN Human Rights Council’
and according to Rosett:
‘It’s also how the UN system works. This is the default mode. Never mind such distractions as genuine human rights. At the UN, tyrannies and democracies all enjoy equal rights — to votes in the General Assembly, and seats and posts within the UN empire of commissions, councils, programs, funds, and organizations.’
It’s not that we don’t need cooperation on areas of vital national interest, including trade, nuclear weapons, war, corrupt regimes and destabilizing violence, but the current model is deeply flawed. The current administration’s liberal internationalist approach subsumes many of our interests to a similar set of ideals and the institutions that support them. Making institutions cleave to such ideals often places impossible demands upon them.
Related On This Site: What about a World Leviathan…a kind of global monarchy or fiscally unsustainable governing class…what about the things that could have been done for those people in need in the meantime: At Bloggingheads Steven Pinker Discusses War And Thomas Hobbes…
What are some downsides of liberal internationalism?: Richard Fernandez At PJ Media: ‘The New Middle East’