When are we going to learn that this model does not work? The very important endeavor to feed people and provide medical assistance to displaced persons is a great undertaking and well worth any risk for the benefit it can provide desperate  people. Yet, for the vastness of its resources and the access the UN has to military assistance, it is incapable of doing anything beyond relief work in these scenarios. The model being used today is like trying to treat a .45 gunshot wound with a bandaid.

Renewed fighting in the Democratic Republic of the Congo’s (DRC) North Kivu province today has forced the United Nations refugee agency to halt the distribution of aid to internally displaced persons and to call off a drive to register newly displaced people in the Rutshuru area.

The UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) suspended operations after reports of new fighting between Government soldiers and fighters from the rebel Democratic Forces for the Liberation of Rwanda (FDLR) near the Kinyandoni Anglican IDP site in North Kivu. Clashes on Saturday and Sunday left at least one woman dead.

There needs to be a great deal of reform in the UN itself, so that people can actually look at these issues holistically and come to some better solution from the international community.

The United Nations - a study in how to call Iran’s sister and request silly things (Monty Python).

Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon called Monday for immediate presidential elections in Lebanon without foreign interference and told Syria and Iran they must support the disarmament of Hezbollah’s well-armed militia.

How odd - what exactly is the message here? Does anyone take United Nations sound-bite declarations seriously?

A recent email thread prompted me to write again about Kosovo. It’s important for people to get an understanding of why there is so much support for Kosovar independence and why Serbia - which would welcome entirely different relations with the US or the West in general – garners no support at all.

I have mostly focused on US efforts to gain the love of Muslims and our projection of power in Russia’s backyard as the main reasons for the US position on Kosovo. However, there are other issues.

The destruction of the Federal Republic of Yugoslavia (FRY) and the relegation of Serbia to the West’s whipping boy came about because of the nationalist ambitions of every ethnic group making up the soviet-era Yugoslavia. The Serbian military support for Bosnian and Croatian Serbian nationalists was probably the geopolitical catalyst for NATO action against them. Milosevic bit off way more than he could chew with Bosnia and Croatia. He drew a line in the sand with regards to those two countries and was thrown under the bus by those he supported. I don’t know specifically if Milosevic was guilty of any war crimes because of the orders he issued. I know he was castigated because of his support for the Serbian uprising across the Balkans - but when it came time to talk in Dayton, as far as diplomacy was concerned, Milosevic was offered all stick and no carrot.

It may be an over-simplification of the issue, but the NATO/US actions against Serbia to stop genocide was a fallacy. A year before Srebrenica the world watched and did nothing as 800,000 Hutus and Tutsis were killed. Yet, Milosevic was seen – as much as Mladic – as the reason 8,300 men and boys were killed and 40,000 residents displaced in Srebrenica.

I have no love for Milosevic. I see him as an oppressive communist with nationalist ambitions of returning Serbians to glory throughout the Balkans. Yet, despite a lack of war crimes evidence against him, Milosevic seems to have been as much a victim of Srebrenica as those who were murdered there. The atrocities at Srebrenica killed him too. Those who were more directly involved in the atrocities are still at large, and the Serbian government is being held responsible for that – fair treatment or excuse to break up a nation? You decide.

Just as anyone else who had an interest in the region, NATO was filling a strategic vacuum and the straw man was genocide. These days, if you look at the news reports, you don’t see a lot of reference to NATO. The terms used now are “international community”, UN, US, and EU as the diplomacy becomes more “civil” in nature - which brings us to Kosovo being carved out of Serbia. Call it whatever you want, but that is exactly what is happening – no different from the parceling that occurred at the end of the Great War. And the reasons are no different, either.

Since 2000, Serbia has had diplomatic relations restored with many countries, including the US, and has rejoined the OSCE and the United Nations. Underscore: Serbia is a member of the United Nations. In 2003, the United States confirmed that Serbia was operating under its commitments of Dayton-Paris. Underscore: Serbia is not in violation of any treaties or “international law”. There is still a carrot and stick scenario for Serbia - again mostly stick. Serbia can ostensibly get back into western favor and join the EU; the stick seems to be lose Kosovo.

The question of Kosovo independence is about what - ethnic demography? Muslims have displaced and oppressed Serbians from this region since the reign of the Ottoman Empire. Kosovo is recognized as a part of a sovereign Serbia in UN resolution 1244. That resolution also requires the KLA to demilitarize – has it done so? That resolution also allows the UN to facilitate a political process to determine the future status of Kosovo. Facilitate a process – the last time I checked - did not mean impose. It means to be the non-interested party in a discussion between the principles in such a way as to keep the discussion alive. The UN is not facilitating the discussion; it is declaring “independence for Kosovo as the only viable option”.

To me, western nations are making the same grunting noises now that were being made during the aftermath of the Great War. Britain, France, and Italy were still steeped in the imperial traditions during the parceling of the Ottoman Empire. I don’t see a great deal of difference between the European Union today and the European parties of the Entente 100 years ago. Back then America was an undecided observer/participant with no real aims for the region – especially since Russia was out of the picture when the Bolshevik kicked off. Today, Kosovo seems to have a two-fold appeal to our government. The first is to show Muslims across the world that the US is not anti-Muslim. The second is to have a strategic bridgehead in or near Russia’s sphere of influence. Kosovo suffices are part of both missions.

My opposition to an independent Kosovo is - ironically – in agreement with what appears to be Russia’s position. Yet, Russia is in a push-pull situation because the Kremlin position on Kosovo is in direct contravention with its position on South Ossetia. However, think of all of the separatist movements existing in just about every nation on the globe. Kosovo can easily become the catalyst for each of those movements to have some measure of international credibility as independent nation-state candidates. Is the UN going to “facilitate” the destruction of those nations too - France, Britain, China, Russia, Georgia, etc? How can you be so sure?

Have you heard the one about the diplomats from 47 countries who walk into a conference room?

The United Nations Human Rights Council condemned Israel for their latest incursion into Gaza by passing a resolution declaring Israel’s aggressive actions against the terrorists in Gaza a means of collective punishment against all Palestinians.

The punch line in this joke is the resolution was introduced by Pakistan - you know that country the US provides a great deal of aid and support to? - and other “Muslim” nations. The vote to pass the resolution was 33-1 (with 13 countries abstaining) with Canada casting the only “No” vote.

Well, I take back every unflattering thing I have ever said about Canada. They seem to be the only one’s with either any sense or any spine.

The IAEA has some questions, which may be difficult for Iranian President Ahmedinejad to answer. The answer I anticipate is some revisionist history piece that gets us all giggling at how stupid he is, while Iran continues to make bombs.

VIENNA/UNITED NATIONS (Reuters) - U.N. investigators want Iran to explain an organizational chart linking projects to process uranium, test explosives and modify a missile cone for a nuclear payload, diplomats briefed on the matter say.

They said a top U.N. nuclear watchdog official last week gave a detailed presentation of intelligence alleging illicit atomic “weaponization studies” by Iran and naming the man who ran them for the Ministry of Defense and Armed Forces Logistics.

In a written summary given to Reuters of the presentation, they said Iran had refused to let inspectors interview Mohsen Fakrizadeh or visit sites where the experiments took place.

The summary also confirmed leaks that the briefing for the first time indicated Iran continued the three projects into 2004, calling into question a U.S. intelligence estimate in December that said Iran shelved weaponization research in 2003.

Any takers on a bet this is going to be yet another CIA failure?

I cannot conceive, nor has it been posed, what we intend to gain by supporting Kosovar independence from Serbia. I have said several times in these pages there is only the obvious desire to show our “even-handedness” to Muslims. We really have no dog in this race. We may get a military base out of this, but with a few thousand troops in the area, we have that already.

We have used the United Nations to conspire the break-up of a member nation for no clear reason other than to gain favor with terrorists. Kosovo is the United States’ Balkan Tragedy.

UPDATE:

The Israeli government reported yesterday that two Katyusha rockets were fired into Israel from Southern Lebanon. The United Nations released this statement today:

9 January 2008 – A United Nations investigation team, including forensics and explosives experts, have inspected a site in northern Israel where two Katyusha rockets fired from southern Lebanon are reported to have landed and UN peacekeepers have combed locations for potential launching sites.

My question is, why bother? The UN has done squat for Israel but condemn them for how many years?

The most recent National Intelligence Estimate on Iran expressed with some confidence that Iran had in 2003 halted active work on building a nuclear warhead.

There are still questions on whether or not this is actually solid intelligence, but I assume for now that it is. It does not obviate our need to be cautious with Iran. We should be investing a great deal of resources into better intelligence, as well as active diplomacy with Iran. This includes the gamut of options from sanctions to bi-lateral talks. It does not, at this time, include military operations - in my opinion.

That being said, I found this article interesting. It coincides with my views on Iran generally and the course the US should take with regards to the NIE.

Foreign Policy: How has the release of the recent U.S. National Intelligence Estimate on Iran’s nuclear program changed the tenor of the Iran debate?

Dmitri Trenin: It allows for a broader range of views. I think that the importance of this debate is not to discuss the technical issues, but rather to use the technical issues as a platform to a higher plane of strategizing about Iran. I’m not an American and I can only say so much being a foreigner, but I think the focus should be on U.S. policy, rather than on what Iran is doing. I am struck by people debating what Iran is doing, and not thinking enough, in all due respect, about what the United States should be doing. In other words, people are prepared to give Iran the initiative, rather than to seize the initiative.

FP: What’s the view from abroad about the new estimate?

DT: I think the view from here is that the intelligence community, heavily battered over Iraq, has thrown a monkey wrench into what they believe could be the possibility of another major blunder. [That possibility] is that strong-willed persons within the administration would persuade the president to finish business, and not pass the Iranian issue onto his successor. But there’s only so much that you can see from several thousand miles away from Washington.

The emphasis is mine. I point this out because I respect a view from this standpoint. Trenin holds views much in line with mine on several topics, and I am an American. Much to the distaste of some of my acquaintances, Trenin and I share views on Putin.

I predict emails and comments regarding Trenin’s motives, qualifications, or integrity, however, we often judge a person’s intelligence by the amount one agrees with us. Trenin is obviously a genius.

It is quite possible Iran has halted nuclear weapon construction in order to garner favor with the US. This does not mean to suggest Iran is going through any radical shift in ideals - but we have to focus on the goal of Iran in the Middle East. Iran wants to be the influence in that region. If America gains enough support in the international community, that goal is finished for Iran. Especially in light of the vast amounts of US money going into Iraq. Iran coming into the fold geopolitically, so to speak, is a possible strategy to ensure Iran is not bypassed as the Mid-East power base.

On the other hand - it this is going to take some very hard work to find out - this could just be a way of defusing the pressure being brought to bear on Iran, while they secretly finish their weapons work with enriched uranium.  Time, and hopefully better intelligence than we currently have, will tell.

 Let me preface this by saying I do not agree with current US policy on Kosovo. This alarms a lot of my GOP peers, but our reasons for supporting the arbitrary carving of an independent nation in the southern Slavic region are strictly driven to appease the Muslim Street. Not only is that ridiculous - it won’t work.

However, I look at this particular article and wonder why it is slanted as if Russia’s stance on the issue is somehow a surprise.

Russia goes its own way

If the deadlock in the UN Security Council over the final status of Kosovo signals any future trends, it is that Russia has finally dispensed with any lingering beliefs that it should work with the United States to set the global agenda.

One of the legacies that Vladimir Putin bequeaths to his successor is Russia’s changed position in the world. Moscow no longer has any interest in making minor modifications to a policy largely predetermined in Washington. And the principal beneficiary of this changed perception may be Iran.

“Russia has finally dispensed…”?

Only the most myopic would think Russia would side with the US on this particular issue. Only the slightly less myopic would tend to believe Russia is going to side with the US, in the UNSC, on much of anything else. The US and Russia tend to be on opposite sides of most issues being presided over in the UN, since many of these issues tend to impact one or the other nation or its surrogates. These are matters of influence for Russia or the US in most cases - or are matters related to support for an ally.

The IHT article linked above makes it sound like Russia is defying the US giant - but the world better recognize that Russia is a world power still, and becoming stronger.

On January 1, the United Nations is set to establish a peacekeeping mission in conjunction with the African Union in the Sudan. The new mission is being billed as becoming the largest UN peacekeeping operation in the world. It is time for rejoicing because the killing of non-Muslim inhabitants of the Darfur region will come to an end, and the beleaguered 8,000 person AU mission will get much needed assistance from United Nations as the force grows to over 19,000.

Except for one small thing.

 Under Security Council resolution 1769, passed 31 July 2007, the joint African Union/United Nations Hybrid Operation in Darfur (UNAMID), is supposed to consist of up to 19,555 military personnel, 3,772 police officers and 5,105 civilians, making it one of the largest peacekeeping operations in the world.

The beleaguered and under-resourced AU force comprises around 7,000 troops and 1,200 police.

Although UNAMID comes into being on January 1, it will initially be made up almost entirely of the AU personnel already on the ground, with major additional deployments not expected for several months.

Aside from the UN’s horrible track record for peacekeeping, the other major problem with a UN solution in the Sudan is simply their inability to get off the dime. The resolution was crafted in July 2007 and it may be July 2008 before any other resources are deployed to provide relief to the AU mission.

Now, the US has gone soft-shoe on Muslims around the world (e.g. Kosovo) so there is no way we are going t help. The UN can’t help (e.g.Rwanda) even when they do get their circus tents set up.  All Khartoum has to do is exert a tiny bit of control on the Janjaweed - kill the non-Muslims a little slower; starve them out a little less aggressively - and there will be no western reprisals that Khartoum isn’t already used to.