Thursday, April 10, 2003

The World Weighs In

The State Department summary of international editorial opinion I've linked to above makes quite clear that the majority of opinion in those countries that opposed action in Iraq, as well as amongst that section of the British media that saw no need for "regime change", now wants the United Nations to play a "central" role in a post-war Iraq.

This suggestion, in its' brazenness, its' stupidity, and its' impracticality, tells one everything one needs to know about those making it. Which countries insisted on the need to act, in the face of determined opposition from thosed opposed to "unilateral" action? Which countries were willing to commit the lives of their citizens and their treasure to seeing Saddam deposed? Which countries are even now engaged in the struggle to both flush out the remnants of Saddam's regime, and get humanitarian supplies to the citizens of Iraq? And in counterpoint to all this, which countries have done absolutely nothing to help bring about the present situation, but are best poised to benefit from the exercise of veto-power, given a "central" UN role?

These worthless cockroaches deserve to be paid as much attention now as they deserved when the "UN route" was being traversed. Were President Bush to listen to them, the well-being and future prospects of Iraq's citizens would be jeopardized by the bickering and obstructionism of ruthlessly self-seeking powers like France, Germany and Russia. There are big contracts to be handed out, after all, and who wants to allow the US to tear up old agreements made on sweetheart terms with supporters of a dictatorial regime? The Russians want to be paid the tens of billions of dollars they are owed for Soviet-era weaponry, and they aren't too eager to see a flood of Iraqi oil on the market either, depressing the oil sector that accounts for the majority of their exports. The French too have gigantic debts they want repaid, and big oil concessions that need exploiting. As for the Germans - all that rebuilding's going to need a hell of a lot of machinery, and who better to supply it?

Watching these vermin hustle and maneuver under the cover of a spurious concern for "international legitimacy" makes me sick. France has never shown the damndest concern for international law in deciding whether or not to intervene in the affairs of one African country or another, Russia has been busy slaughtering Chechnyans for years, but now pretends to be concerned about "the plight of the Iraqi people", and the Germans would have been more than happy to let the Balkans bleed each other to death, were it not for the resulting influx of refugees. The vast majority of the other international busybodies complaining about the importance of the United Nations wouldn't know what the rule of law was if it slapped them in the face, while those who do are all impotent nations that have done nothing to preserve law and order outside their own borders.

The chief motivator behind the push for a "central UN role" by those who, unlike France, Germany and Russia, have nothing to gain directly from attaining their ambition, is a seething jealousy and resentment of American power. For these miserable wretches, anything that restrains American might in any way is a thing to be welcomed in itself, regardless of its' consequences. Ask any of them, even the Franco-German-Russia triad, to commit their soldiers and budgets to enforcing the rule of their desired UN authority, and you'll be certain to hear a resounding "NO!" - and yet they want British and American taxpayers, and Anglo-American troops, to bear the burden of enforcing their will on the ground.

The whole thing hardly bears thinking about. If Blair gained my halting respect for his stance on the issue of confronting Saddam, he is rapidly losing it by his continued insistence on the importance of the United Nations. Is he so foolish that that he fails to understand how much of a cesspit it has proven itself to be thus far? Does he really think that there is any goodwill to be found in the calculations of Chirac, Schroeder and Putin, that they should be worth "reaching out" to? If so, Blair is seriously deluded, and more of a weakling than I thought him to be. Rather than trying to "reach out" to this triad of selfish, short-sighted miscalculators, Blair ought to be leaving all the running to them. Instead he allows himself to look like a puppy ever so eager to be liked by an abusive master.