The Week in International DisOrder

The behavior of most of the globe’s nations is discouraging of hopes and actions for increased security, prosperity, and freedom. That American politicians, mostly Democrat leaders, would focus on criticizing the administration and the U.S., and repeatedly propose that there’s a better way in leaning toward the U.N. or other states’ views or amorphous and manipulated international opinion not only encourages such anti-U.S. behavior but increases the tendency toward disengagement by many Americans.

The platitudes voiced by Democrat Party leaders are starkly contrasted this week against the worthless behavior of such international institutions. Whenever these puerile protestations are voiced during the Fall election campaigns, they should be firmly confronted.

Across the globe, international disorder appears more the agenda of our self-appointed “betters.”

118 of the 192 members of the United Nations are meeting in Havana. This Nonaligned Movement (NAM) started in the 1950’s as a “third way” between the West and Soviet Union – more often as a lever for aid from each -- then foundered on the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan as the roughly half of membership comprised of Muslim states took a side. In the post-Cold War world, its agenda has moved toward securing more aid, mostly to prop corrupt regimes, and coalescing to control the United Nations’ agenda to oppose the U.S. and the West. As the CNS report on the NAM’s 2,800-word document, entitled "Declaration on the Purposes, Principles and Role of the Non-Aligned Movement in the Present International Situation,"

Without naming the U.S., it makes numerous references to "unilateralism," "hegemony" and attempts to impose a "unipolar world."

Among the summit's purposes, it says, is "to condemn all manifestations of unilateralism and actions marked by attempts at hegemonic domination."

Principles guiding the NAM include "non-interference" in other states' affairs, "abstention from ... exerting pressure or coercion on other countries" and "abstention from resorting to the threat or use of force."

The document calls on NAM members to strengthen "multilateralism" and to work together at the U.N. and other international agencies on issues of priority to the movement.

These priorities, as listed, include "the rejection of unilateralism and the attempt to impose a unipolar world," "the condemnation and rejection of the imposition of coercive unilateral measures" and "the support of the Palestinian cause."

Apart from the statement on the "present international situation," NAM representatives also will adopt other statements, including a final summit declaration which - according to its draft - expresses support for Venezuela's populist left-wing president, Hugo Chavez, and concern about "aggressive" U.S. policies against his government.

The draft also says NAM members "totally reject the use of the term 'axis of evil' by a certain state to target other states under the pretext of combating terrorism."

Who are these pillars of international virtue in NAM?:

Among some 50 leaders attending the heads of state portion of the Havana summit will be some of the world's most controversial political figures, including Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, Venezuela's Chavez, President Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe, Sudan's Omar al-Bashir and Syrian President Bashar al-Assad. North Korea will be represented by Kim Jong-il's deputy, Kim Yong-nam. Whether ailing Cuban President Fidel Castro will attend remains unclear.

The regimes they represent are not just hostile to the West, they also are among the nations most often censured by human rights organizations for abusing the rights of their citizens.

The AP’s review of the NAM Summit’s agenda focuses on the redefinition of “terrorism” it proposes.

The draft declaration condemns Israel’s invasion of Lebanon, with no balancing comments about Hezbollah’s missile attacks on Israel.

It also hails the Lebanese people’s “heroic resistance to the Israeli aggression” and demands that Israel compensate the Lebanese government and people for the deaths, injuries and destruction the war caused.

Even the usually morally uniopic Amnesty International demurs.

Lebanese guerrilla group Hizbollah committed war crimes in its conflict with Israel by targeting civilians with rockets packed with metal ball bearings, rights group Amnesty International said on Thursday.

It said around a quarter of the nearly 4,000 rockets that Hizbollah launched into Israel during the 34-day war were fired directly into urban areas.

"The scale of Hizbollah's attacks on Israeli cities, towns and villages, the indiscriminate nature of the weapons used and statements from the leadership confirming their intent to target civilians make it all too clear that Hizbollah violated the laws of war," Amnesty's Secretary-General Irene Khan said….

The Hizbollah rocket salvoes forced between 350,000 and a million northern Israelis to flee their homes, Amnesty said. The hundreds of thousands who remained behind spent much of the war in bomb shelters. A million Lebanese were also displaced.

The total damage to Israel from the rockets was $1.8 billion, a parliament panel found. The war damage to Lebanese buildings and infrastructure was estimated at $3.5 billion.

Amnesty said it had met Hizbollah members who argued their rocket attacks on northern Israel were a reprisal for Israeli attacks on civilians in Lebanon.

"This line is totally rejected by Amnesty International," Amnesty said.

The war was sparked by Hizbollah's seizure of two Israeli soldiers in a cross-border raid on July 12.

The 61st annual session of the United Nations General Assembly opened this week, the institution that once was intended as and represented the world’s hopes for peaceful reason, but now dominated by the NAM states. As longtime observer of the UN’s wayward path, Anne Bayefsky, wrote in the NY Sun:

Together, these nations represent the majority of the 132 developing states and the majority of 192 U.N. members. They are unified not by a desire to democratize, or even to develop, since many are quite content with kingdoms and with servitude in their own backyards. They are a team because they are adroit at U.N. politics, and they have learned that the cartel is good for business. This holds true particularly for the largest single bloc amongst them – the 56-member Organization of the Islamic Conference.

Ever wonder why you don’t hear the ambassadors of the NAM countries calling for a relocation of the UN to one of their countries? It would mean losing their luxury Manhattan apartments. Their free ride on the almost complete funding of the UN by the U.S. and a few other developed countries would come to a screeching halt. And, who would want thousands of double-parking, double-dealers in their capital?

Meanwhile, the Arab states at the core of the Islamic Conference expressed their compassion for the penurization of their fellow NAM members, as Reuters reported their primary concern is “Will oil’s drop rob producers of power?”

It’s not much better in Europe, as its NATO members recoil from providing adequate support for their mission in Afghanistan, supposed by critics of the U.S. in Iraq to be the “true” core of the war on terror.

Nato staff asked for extra troops in Afghanistan more than a year ago but the request has still not been granted, the alliance’s top commander in the country said on Monday.
Speaking to the Financial Times, Lieutenant General David Richards, the commander of Nato’s 20,000-strong force in Afghanistan, said Nato countries were asked 18 months ago for a reserve battalion of 1,000 soldiers.
His comments were made ahead of a crucial few days for Nato, in which the spotlight will be on member countries’ readiness to send reinforcements to hard-pressed British and Canadian soldiers in southern Afghanistan. Last week General James Jones, Nato’s supreme commander, revealed that he had sought but so far failed to obtain 2,500 extra troops, comprising the reserve battalion plus up to 1,500 air support staff.
Nato officials will meet on Wednesday in an attempt to secure enough pledges to fill the gap. But Gen Richards’s remark indicates the request was more long-standing than was previously thought.
“That reserve . . .  is nothing more than nations knew was the military advice that was required for 18 months now, endorsed by the Nato chain of command,” he said.
“That requirement has never been met by nations. The bit it lacked was a hard-hitting reserve of about 1,000 people that I can use wherever I need to use it throughout Afghanistan, although obviously its focus would be the south.”

The 25-nation European Union did have time for a summit in Helsinki with 13 Asian leaders at the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) that AFP reported resulted in more “lofty statements but few promises” on global warming, world trade and the battle against terrorism. The only firm promise was to enlarge the ASEM membership, likely for more opportunities to attend expense paid conferences.

The bulk of the funds used by the World Bank comes from the United States to fund development in poor countries. The New York Times reports the opposition from European members of the World Bank to Paul Wolfowitz’ efforts to eliminate widespread skimming and corruption of these funds by the recipients.

The criticism has been especially sharp among Europeans at the bank, where many officials say that judgments about what constitutes “good governance” could rupture the bank’s delicate relationships with aid recipients, especially if the judgments are based on information gathered from dissidents and other critics in those countries.
“We must not use corruption as an excuse for a massive withdrawal of our help,” a senior French finance official involved in discussions with the bank said. The official was among many who agreed to discuss the internal debate only on condition of anonymity.

In fact, as the NYT’s reports, Wolfowitz replies: “He notes, for example, that the bank’s lending under his leadership actually rose slightly last year, to nearly $23 billion.”

Transparency International’s president strongly supports the anti-corruption efforts:

“It sent a tremor through the bank that Wolfowitz was serious, that he was going to ask hard questions, look at the track record of countries and make some changes.”

The careerism of many World Bank employees takes precedence over anti-corruption efforts, however.

“Let’s face it, promotion at the World Bank comes from spending money,’’ said John Githongo, a onetime campaigner against corruption in Kenya who has fled to safety in Britain and is now an adviser to Mr. Wolfowitz. “If you’re in the field, and too many complaints about corruption interrupt the spending, it has an impact on your career trajectory.’’

As usual, one of the only voices of sanity this week came from Britain’s Tony Blair.

Tony Blair has decried European politicians for their anti-American "madness" in not supporting the war on terror, saying none of the problems facing the West "can be resolved or even contemplated without" the US.

Yesterday, the Prime Minister called on Nato members to pull their weight by sending more combat troops to fight the Taliban in Afghanistan….

In the document, entitled Global Alliance for Global Values, Mr Blair says: "The strain of anti-American feeling in parts of European politics is madness when set against the long-term interests of the world we believe in. The danger with America is not that they are too much involved. The danger is if they decide to disengage.