Pakistan News Service

Monday Dec 22, 2014, Safar 29, 1436 Hijri
Logo Logo
LATEST :
Pakistan News Home -> Speakouts -> Speakout

58th Session of United Nations General Assembly

25 September, 2003

  Related News  
UN says Pakistan has food 'emergency', but donors look elsewhere
Iraq forces arrest top insurgent
  Related Articles  
The US and human rights
By Momin Iftikhar
United Nations & the Global Social Development
By Dr. Ghulam Nabi Fai
  Related Speakout  
  More on this View All
  Related News Poll

Fifty Eighth annual session of United Nations General assembly is under proceedings in UN head quarters. This session possesses importance as it is held just after US invasion of Iraq.

President Bush has asked the world body to reconcile US doctrine of pre-emptive action in his speech to UNGA.

Other representatives in General Assembly including UN Secretary General criticized US policies and declared they brought united nations to a "fork in the road" as decisive as 1945 when the world body was founded.

Do you think recent textual criticism on United States from world body still weighty?

Is it still righteous for President Bush to seek intl. help from world body?

How should world body respond USA's request on sending troops to Iraq after Pres. Bush's speech in General Assembly?

Will United Nation be able to revive Iraqi status quo ante bellum?

Reader Comments:

to talk of status quo is totally meaningless now and ante bellem is far beyond than intl. expectations and hopes as all veto powered countries favored breakage of status quo glass, which was set by the same 50 years ago.
it is possible to revive iraqi status ante bellum but it is not just of iraq, it is world's status quo.

Ata Bux, Pakistan - 25 September, 2003

Might is Right

The only thing which we as layman gather from these speeches at General Assembly and all other forums that the rule of thumb is that, "Might is Right"

U.N. can do nothing infront of USA, neither anyone else in the world. God moves in mysterious ways, so let's see for how long this worldly mighty power USA remain the sole super power. I am dying to wake up to see a better world in 2020.


Agha, Pakistan - 25 September, 2003

Wake Up

One way to respond to USA's double standards in the world is by first waking up to the fact that America is the biggest bully we have ever witnessed in the world history.

No one is eager to send its troops to die for American cause of Oil.

U.N. has never been able to revive anyting other than the flag of red tapism and bureacracy hurdles for developing nations.

SIJ, Pakistan - 25 September, 2003

1. This is not textual criticism. The matter of fact is that majority of the world has rejected the idiotic idea of bailing Americans out of their own created mess very diplomatically. Bush regime did not get any promise of getting troops or money from none of the participating countries leaders. There was more criticism on Bush than praises. Only our super hero Musarraf champion of everything found Bush speech very powerful. Bush and Musrarraf must be on leven of IQ which is below 10.

2. Bush is in lots of trouble at home with the increasing cost and lost of the lives of troops. Bush will crawl on his knees in private to the world leaders for help without giving up any of their authority in Iraq.

3. There will be no firm commitment of sending troops to protect American troops and strenghten their occupation. None of the nation is ready for this because of strong opposition which do exists amoung the population. Let the Americans suffer for their mistakes is the common French opinion.

4. Solution: Americans completely withdrawal of Iraq unconditionally. Americans must pay the price of destruction. Troops from Muslim and Arab countries under U.N. umbrella get control of Iraq immediately.

K, Pakistan - 25 September, 2003

Ante Litem Motam{Before a Suit is put in motion} vs US !

Crussade-US vs Iraq-Islam
Ante litem motam
{Before a suit is put in motion} versus USA !
Iraq in The Law-Language is "Arrest of Judgement" by US=UN on Iraqi status quo
ante bellum vs ante motem
"Arrest of Judgement"
A Staying or With-Holding of Judgement, although there has been a verdict in the case, on the ground that there is some error on the face of the record{MDW} from which it appears that the plaintiff{Opposition} has at law no right to recover in the action, or that the prisoner{Saddam-Party} should not be sentenced.
Mr.Faridullah.Koch{JAIC}
MoslimHumanRightsWatch
Postbus: 5875, 3008 AW Rotterdam-Holland

Mr.F.Koch{JAIC}MHRW{IPN}KBK, Netherlands - 25 September, 2003

1- It keeps weight only sharing of iraqi resources, in context of human rights it is an empty jug.
2- Bush is rightous as none of any govt. spoke in way of acting against through UN. some activity could be done agoinst US if any country was courageous enough.
3- world body is crippled,lame and this way it should keep on playing mouth organ.one can imagine when mouth organ is played by a handicapped.
4- status quo of the time before the war began in iraq cannot be revived back through world body. natural agents may do so.thnx

asghar ali, Pakistan - 26 September, 2003

New Organization

Like new technology has replaced the old. This is too need to be replaced with a new organization with no veto powers to anyone Or alternatively world must be divided by civilizations and each civilization has its own UNO.

Sunny, Pakistan - 28 September, 2003

To Questions 2 and 3

I asked the readers of the UK
INDEPENENT FORUM.
"WHO OWNS THE WORLD,
WE or USA". Find your answers
there.

Khalid Rahim, Canada - 30 September, 2003

The Reform of the UN

This international organization was founded with the goal of preventing another world war because of the conflict of interests of the five super powers. In other words, the purpose was to establish and retain their dominance through mutual understanding among the super powers. It should be mentioned that according to the charter of this organization the fundamental authority of the organization has been vested in the Security Council and the US, Britain, France, Russia (then Soviet Union) and China are the permanent members of the Security Council. The UN charter has granted veto power to these super powers. It means no resolution can be passed against the will of these dominant powers. As a result, this organization does not possess the power to take any step against the wrongful actions of these super powers. It is such a deficiency of this organization which negates all the positive sides of it (it is not too difficult to comprehend this in the context of the crisis in Palestine). With the help of the veto powers conflicts have been kept alive; illegal occupations have been allowed in many parts of the globe and particularly in the regions inhabited by the Muslims. Later on, though Soviet Union has been replaced by Russia but the situation has not changed a bit. Because of its very nature the UN is completely unable to resist the illegal activities of the five super powers and the invasion of Iraq is the latest evidence of that. Under various pretexts the UN orchestrates many different forms of punishments and imposes embargoes against economically and militarily weak third world countries and all that with a background of its failure to make any meaningful stand against the aggressions, domination and inhuman activities of the five super powers. There is no justice against the wrongful activities and injustices of the super powers and their stooges yet this organization is unfailingly firm against other states; it is practically a crime. Through its discriminatory charter the UN has legalized the unlawful dominance and the wrongful acts of the super powers. This organization secures the security and interests of the super powers by undermining the interests of the weak nations. The activities of the IAEA are the classic example of that unscrupulous conduct of the UN. Though the NPT is being imposed upon the non-nuclear states in the name of peace but the real purpose is anything but peaceful. There is a good reason to believe that preventing other states from developing nuclear deterrence against the nuclear blackmail of the super powers is the real goal of the IAEA, and NPT is the vehicle which has so far enabled IAEA to achieve its goal. The UN has absolutely no power to compel the super powers to abandon their huge nuclear stockpile but it insists on pressuring the victims of the super powers to renounce nuclear weapons programme, this is a disguised proxy war of the UN, funded and designed by the so-called established nuclear weapon states and directed towards the non-nuclear states. In order to enhance their defence capabilities and safeguard their national interests the five super powers can build and stockpile every possible type of nuclear, chemical, biological and conventional weapon but the weaker nations, particularly Muslim states cannot do the same. A pack of wolves disguised as lambs will determine what kind of weapons the lambs will be allowed to possess; this is the message being conveyed by the UN and its agencies like the IAEA to the lambs of this wicked world. It is under this circumstance a reform of the UN has been proposed. The wishes of Mr. Anan and the world community are being cited as the source of the drive but after viewing some of the draft proposals it has become quite clear that when those draft proposals were made the wishes of the world community received little attention instead the wishes of power hungry and the powerful received undue consideration. Anyway, which countries made it to the list and which countries didn't, is not important. What is important, is the article of the UN Charter which has allowed permanent membership and the veto power; it is a threat to world peace and stability for it contradicts the principles of democracy, equality and fair-play. Therefore, is there really any need for permanent membership and veto power in the Security Council? The real purpose of the draft resolutions which propose to increase the number permanent and temporary seats in the Security Council, is to divert attention away from any real reform.Many argue against the possible reforms which I've stated by saying that the permanent members of the Security Council would never allow this kind of reform to take place, so we should come up with reform plans which the possessor of veto powers would accept. I say, it is a shrewd attempt to protect the interests of the possessors of the veto power. If the Third World countries form a united front the monarchs of the UN will give in.

Tarek Masud, Bahrain - 08 September, 2005

 What do you think about the story ? Leave your comments!

Heading (Optional)
Your Comments: *

Your Name:*
E-mail (Optional):
City (Optional):
Country (Optional):
 
 
Field marked(*) are mandatory.
Note. The PakTribune will publish as many comments as possible but cannot guarantee publication of all. PakTribune keeps its rights reserved to edit the comments for reasons of clarity, brevity and morality. The external links like http:// https:// etc... are not allowed for the time being to be posted inside comments to discourage spammers.

  Speak Out View All
Imran - Qadri long march
Artilce 6 and Musharraf Trail
  Quick Vote Show Results
Question: "In view of the current situation do you think Talks with Taliban should take place only within the ambit of Article 4 of Objectives Resolution that defines our Common Purpose i.e. PM/ President down to all Pakistanis to work till we achieve the rights of Democracy, Freedom, Tolerance and Social Justice for all Pakistanis:"
Yes
No
 
Candid Corner
Exclusive by
Lt. Col. Riaz Jafri (Retd)
LHC tells Sharif family to pay Rs 3.5bn mark-up on loan
Osama's killer comes forward to reveal his name
Suggested Sites