26 May 2003
Dear Reader,
I have just seen your site for the first time today. I haven't, therefore,
looked at all your documents.
What I really want to know about the UN is how linked it is with the IMF,
World Bank (which I think is a UN institution) and the WTO. These
institutions have done more harm than more conventional weapons and wars. It
seems to me that wherever the UN goes it supports and promotes the horrific
structural readjustments that are forced upon developing countries by these
neo-liberal bullies.
Collaboration with the IMF, World Bank and WTO, couple with the UN's
enforcement of deadly sanctions as in the case of Iraq, makes it seem
unlikely that the UN has the potential for reform. The kind of people that
are capable of inflicting the kind of harm that the UN does inflict are not
liable to be able to grasp the practice of non-violent support and
nurturance of all nations of the world.
Unless the UN takes a stand against free market capitalist marauding ie.
against the economic imperialism of the United States, it can't be anything
but the "foreign policy tool of the US" as Madeleine Albright called it.
Has your organisation covered this issue?
Sincerely,
Stefa Shaler
27 May 2003
Stefa ,
We are aware of the issues surrounding the IMF, World Bank and WTO. Like
many similar organisation such as the United Nations Association we call for
these institutions to be brought under the UN umbrella.
We also support the work of the Bretton Woods Project
http://www.brettonwoodsproject.org who
tackle these specific issues.
We hope you will support our ARC (Arms Reduction Coalition), even to the
extent of setting up an ARC in your country.
Regards ... Karl (secretary)
27 May 2003
As he says we are aware of the position of the World Bank and IMF in the UN system.
They are of course fully independent of the UN.
However we are hearing from many people that the UN is part of the system of coercion and
abuse and therefore gets part of the blame. The UN cannot stand up to this on its own
because there is no majority for opposition.. However part of our campaign will be aimed
at explaining the defects and encouraging our own government to take a more enlightened
view and a more positive attitude.
Best wishes, Jim Addington (action for UN Renewal)
28 May 2003
We share the same goal, Karl: to ensure that our institutions universally
serve the people and avoid kow towing to the power elites. I don't see the
UN as our nose but rather as a ruptured appendix. The structure of the UN
makes it inherently beholden to power elites. How about if we make it truly
an organ of service and employ only volunteer workers at the UN who are so
filled with purpose that they will work tirelessly, like all the volunteers
I know, as long as their modest living expenses are covered? How about the
UN ambassadors stay in accommodating that the people they serve would be
able to use? How about they mingle with all the people they serve? How about
they have their meetings in public, in the communities they serve, so people
can attend and learn about what they do and how they do it and participate?
The minute you have an organization that needs body guards to travel around
and protect you from the people you serve, you're in trouble. It goes beyond
serving a power elite; you are a power elite at that point.
We need new structures that are participatory and resistant to bribery. The
UN as it is now cannot be either.
In hopes of a better world,
Stefa
28 May 2003
Stefa ,
Personally speaking, I cannot agree. The missions, aims and objectives of
some of these organisations are to serve the people. I think we should be
ensuring that the do serve the people and not just the power elites.
You don't cut off your nose because it is always blocked due to colds.
Regards ... Karl