rembrandt: un a casualty?
Hi rembrandt sorry for naming you re multiple nics but you had posted at the same time yet was not listed as active.
Re the UN; it was scuttled at its inception by the demands of the paranoid Stalin to make decisions voted on the security council unanimous. This was his way of tieing their hands and protecting the USSR from censure. The UN have never been allowed to act militarily, just a paper tiger.
Sadam nationalised Iraq Oil, booted out the US and then asked the French in. They and the Russians have been schmoozing Saddam ever since, the US tried too but got nowhere.
Russia has now said they may write off their debt. This was at the request of the US who say that they dont want to burden the new Iraq with saddams debts.
In the short term the world will be watching the US to make sure they dont start to cash in. Cheney has already been under scrutiny re Haliburton, the same Hal. reported $60B contract was only an estimate for a worst case scenario re oil well fires; it didnt happen.
The US cant finance reconstruction on their own and they will have to get in the EU and Russia.
The EU certainly played the UN for all it was worth; not much as it turns out. Countries will now being forming their own little 'coalitions', Germany with Russia and France and other major EU players are to form some sort of military alliance with a foreign policy. They have been idle for too long and we will now see more proactive europe. NATO is also knocked.
If democracy can be installed in Iraq it could present a real conundrum. They could freely elect a hard line Islamic government - what then? These things take a very long time, tribal loyalties have to be put aside for the national interest. Democracy as we know it is now being played out in Zimbabwe.
