Pig Herder

I think Wretchard at the Belmont Club is too modest by half. He sums up today's piece, in which he outlines some things a useful UN might peform, by saying that "I don't expect any of these Belmont Club proposals to be taken seriously, but I do hope the concepts and ideas behind them are given some thought. Honestly, I think they are better than Kofi's."

I can't recall seeing anyone go beyond mere criticism ( most of it dead-on, by the way) of the "world body", to actually laying out some proposals that a new UN might undertake. Even if Wretchard himself lands several withering blows on the UN, he attempts to forumlate a coherent set of principles for it. Don't get me wrong, I love the stinging rebukes of pompous elite do-gooderism; but it really is time that some discussion be given to what a functioning and non-malevolent "world body" might look like.

It is hard to argue with these criticisms:

In the time since [the end of WWII], nothing has changed except the entire political landscape. International affairs is still arbitrated by global alliances and politics and the Security Council remains a museum.... One astounding UN weakness, underscored emphatically by the Indonesian tsunami, is how little detailed operational contingency planning that agency performs.... The standard UN approach of sending a "fact-finding" team to find landing fields, port facilities, resources, etc. is a frank admission of unpreparedness for anything.

As for reforms, or rather, since he is really suggesting starting with a blank slate, reformats, these modest and achievable ideas:

Since the General Assembly is essentially a moderated forum the best way to bubble the major global concerns to the top of the stack is to implement an electronic version of just that -- a moderated forum -- complete with supporting policy papers and discussion. This has the potential advantage of returning control of the agenda-making process to the home countries themselves, instead of being cooked up in back rooms at UN headquarters.

Why a moderated electronic forum as opposed to a physical General Assembly consisting of diplomats in colorful costumes or expensive suits? Because progress in a debate on an electronic forum can be followed by anyone in any country whereas not everyone can afford a ticket to New York and an extended stay at a hotel.

Under this arrangement the Security Council will merely be a setting where important international agreements are announced, like a Town Square. This concept has the advantage of always being in tune with world political reality. Security Council resolutions should be the end product of international politics not its arbitrator.

The UN should invest in logistical planning and prepositioning, run simulated field exercises involving member nations -- in a word do on the international scale what a small town fire department does -- instead of going around with a begging bowl after each unanticipated disaster strikes.