Just over five months ago after United Nations (UN) Secretary General Kofi Annan said that the U.S. should close down the detention facility for terrorist suspects at Guantanamo Bay, I wondered if he had “asked China, Cuba, Iran, Syria, Zimbabwe and other nations which incarcerate and torture political opponents to close down their detention facilities.” Although that post was linked by a number of blogs, not a single person wrote in with evidence that Kofi had asked any of these tyrannies to shut down prisons where there are actual documented cases of torture.
I did a variety of google searches to see if I could come up with any example of Kofi asking these tyrannies to shut down their prisons, focusing on Iran. I could not find any. Although Annan did ask Iran to release a political prisoner from Evin Prison, Annan did not ask the Islamicist regime to shut that notorious facility down. Unlike Guantanamo where the U.S. detains terrorist suspects, at Evin, Iran detains political prisoners whose crime is not taking up arms, but merely speaking out. The left-leaning Human Rights Watch found that “abuse and torture of dissidents have increased in Evin Prison’s solitary cells and secret detention centers. “
Asking that the U.S. shut down Guantanamo while remaining silent about a far worse facility in Iran, Kofi Annan seems ever eager to attack the West for alleged human rights’ violations while remaining silent when tyrannies and terrorist organizations commit far worse atrocities. We saw this attitude again this week when Kofi Annan assumed the worst when Israeli fire hit a United Nations outpost near Khiyam in southern Lebanon. Almost immediately, Annan accused “Israeli Defense Forces” of “apparently deliberate targeting” of the post.
Perhaps had Mr. Annan insisted that UNIFIL (United Nations Interim Force in Lebanon) fulfill its mandate to “restore the international peace and security, and help the Lebanese Government restore its effective authority in the area,” the UN outpost might have escaped damage. For while the United Nations certified that Israel complied with its obligations to leave Lebanon in 2000, it did nothing to disband and disarm the militias operating there, as mandated by Security Council Resolution 1559.
It wasn’t just that the UN did nothing to disarm Hezbollah, that terrorist organization also took of the world body’s complaisance, launching rockets and setting up terror operations from spots close to UN outposts. Indeed, the Canadian soldier from the UN force who was killed by the Israeli strike had complained that:
Hizbullah fighters were all over his position and the IDF were (sic) targeting them and that’s a favorite trick by people who don’t have representation in the UN. They use the UN as shields knowing that they can’t be punished for it.
(Via Captain’s Quarters.) It’s thus clear that Israel did not deliberately attack the outpost as the Secretary General suggested. The real question is that why the United Nations did nothing to prevent terrorists from setting up camp near their outposts — and using the cover of these outposts to launch attacks on the civilian population of a sovereign nation.
And this isn’t the first time UNIFIL sat idly by as terrorists attacked a member nation of the UN. When Hezbollah “showered northern Israel with rockets for three days in September 2004,” this UN force “didn’t act as a deterrent, nor did they do much to stop it.” Jed Babbin wrote that at one outpost along the Israel-Lebanon border “the U.N. and Hezbollah personnel share water and telephones, and that the U.N. presence serves as a shield against Israeli strikes against the terrorists.” Instead of acting to fulfill its own mandate, UNIFIL has instead has provided resources for a group the very United Nations has demanded be disarmed.
I wonder if those who attack the president by claiming he has not followed the laws of the United States have taken as strong a stand against Kofi Annan and UNIFIL for ignoring the very policies of their organization, the UN. It seems the bureaucrats there would rather design a world according to their own internationalist vision than pay attention to the resolutions of the Security Council, the only ones that the UN charter makes binding on all member nations of the UN.
Although he supposedly represents all those member nations, Kofi Annan more readily attacks the Western nations, particularly the U.S. and Israel, than non-Western ones. He asks us to close down the facility at Guantanamo Bay based on allegations, yet remains silent about Iran’s Evin Prison. He jumps to conclusions about an Israeli attack, yet says nothing about Hezbollah setting up shop near UNIFIL outposts, in direct violation of a that very organization’s mandate. He gives far more credit to a terrorist organization operating in direct violation of a Security Council Resolution than he does to a member nation of the UN.
No wonder one of my readers called the UN “terror enablers.”
-Dan (AKA GayPatriotWest): GayPatriotWest@aol.com
ADDENDUM: I am grateful to this post on Michelle Malkin’s blog for reminding me of the Babbin piece (which I had read last week) and providing other important links. Please make sure to read the whole thing!
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.