A Wish On Christmas Eve

World Wars I and II taught important lessons about the need for a global community. They were reminders that the world is a place not immune to dangers and to evils that cannot be avoided through isolation or defeated by independent actions. Rather, unilateralism became acknowledged as part and parcel of any sustainable international peace. The allied forces, not once, but twice defeated foes intent on seizing control of Europe, and in the process they laid waste to fascism.

This recognition of a need for global interconnectedness and mutual protection is the basis upon which today’s global bodies (The United Nations, NATO, etc.) were established. And these bodies have not been without instances of sporadic successes. The U.N. brought an end to genocide in the Balkans and established a multi-state solution that has brought a significant decline in regional ethnic tensions; a coalition force expelled Iraqi troops from neighboring Kuwait during the Gulf War; and many of the U.N.’s humanitarian efforts provide much needed relief to areas infected with poverty, starvation, and disease.

However, amidst these periodic stories of success, I find that these international bodies are most often unable to fulfill their promises of a true global community. Pick up any newspaper or watch any global news network program and you can find any number of examples for how ill equipped and ill-prepared the international community has been to face the challenges that we face around the globe.

The Congo has been decimated by clashes between governmental and rebel forces (not to mention a third and very violent faction called the Mai Mai that seems perfectly content just aimlessly raping, killing, and abducting children). The UN has been put in charge of enforcing a tentative and fragile cease-fire agreement between the two principle sides, but just two weeks ago in Kiwanja, Congo, 100 peacekeepers did nothing while rebel forces overthrew the strategically located town and went door to door demanding payment from locals. If they could not provide sufficient payment, the males in each household were dragged into the streets and executed. Peacekeeping forces did nothing while 150 men’s lives ended with bullets to the head.

In 2006 the Ethiopian government, backed by the United States, invaded Somalia and removed the hard-lined Islamist government that controlled the country, only to put in place a new centralized government that lacked the necessary resources to train and equip a full security force and to rebuild the country’s infrastructure. Now, even more radicalized forces have invaded the country and are fighting back against the government in a bloody civil war that has created what most human rights groups have deemed a human rights nightmare. Furthermore, the country has become a breeding ground for pirates that have staged attacks on international cargo ships and have disrupted worldwide trade networks, threatening to raise the price of a number of different commodities. Not to mention the millions of dollars that multi-national companies have themselves lost in stolen cargo and paid ransoms. The African Union has placed a 3,400-person security force into the country, but that is less than half of the 8,000 that were requested. The U.N. has signaled that they are unlikely to provide any support.

Just Monday “the organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe announced…it would end its 16-year mission in Georgia because it had been unable to resolve a deadlock with Russia over whether to treat the separatist enclaves of South Ossetia and Abkhazia as sovereign nations.” (Barry, Ellen NYT) Russia was the only nation in the 56-member group that voted to discontinue the security mission, but given the council’s requirements for unanimous approval, Russia’s vote proved enough to leave Georgia with reduced military protection in the face of a potential subsequent Russian invasion.

In Afghanistan, the Taliban and other radical Islamic rebel groups have been able to finance a sizeable insurgency against the central government through proceeds predominately generated by transporting Opium into Pakistan and selling it within the global drug market. So, it made sense when NATO commanders called for an increased crackdown on the country’s trade in narcotics. However, those efforts have been thwarted by several allied nations (Germany, Italy, Poland, and Spain) who have been unwilling to wage anti-narcotics missions, citing domestic laws that prohibit military forces from participating in drug enforcement. Simply put, they are fearful of being sued by foreign nationals. That’s why they won’t help cut off the primary supply line for Afghan terrorist funding.

On top of these examples, there is the fact that, despite efforts by the global community, North Korea and Iran continue to pursue nuclear arms and Israel and Palestine are still without any long-term peace accord. Oh yeah, and there are those other historical events such as the Rwandan genocide that occurred without the international community doing anything at all.

I guess that in many ways this is just a rant of all of the reasons that the international community makes me mad. Its one thing after another, and in the end I cant help but find myself questioning what the point of all of these organizations really is? What do they really do? And how can this possibly be the grand vision that leaders such as Winston Churchill and Franklin Roosevelt had in mind when they espoused the need for international cooperation and fortitude?

I think that it is time that more is expected of these institutions and of the world in general. We need to actual fix the problems facing us. Problems of terrorism and violence and disease and death and war. These problems breed opportunity for the evolution of new challenges and dangers that will in due time find their way back to our doorstep. We either repair the world around us, or we simply remain idol until we are forced to deal with the implications of it being broken.

If we want to be serious about creating a multi-national body capable of promoting and ensuring global stability, then it needs to be one that has the determination and the necessary strength to intervene in active war zones. Peacekeeping missions are not entirely effective when the U.N. or NATO is afraid of sending troops into areas where there is a real chance of sustaining casualties. Unfortunately, those are the areas that need intervention most desperately. Furthermore, a multi-national body needs to be independent of individual governmental agendas and influence. It needs expanded funding and increased troop levels, and the global community needs to sustain commitments even beyond the end of regional hostilities. I am of the opinion that, had we spent as much funding on repairing infrastructure such as schools and hospitals in Afghanistan as we did on arming militias to fight Russians in the 80s, then we might very well have stopped the country from becoming a radical hotbed of terrorism.

Sadly, the above stories paint a picture that suggests the international community is not at all ready to take the drastic steps necessary to revamp an existing body such as the U.N. or NATO. Until that changes, there is little opportunity to really bring about the kind of peace necessary to stabilize the world and to truly advance humanity as a whole.

So, on the eve of Christmas, when we all have our own wishes that we make and hope to have delivered, let me hope that there is something deep down in our spirit, some common bond of human experience that will force us to one day do better. I hope there is something that will force us to actually bring about a true global community.