Playing politics with the tsunami

Earlier this week, Kevin addressed UN Official and asshat (but I repeat myself) Jan Egeland, who denounced the US and other nations as being “stingy” over relief for the tsunami-struck area of Southeast Asia, based on our initial pledges of assistance.

I was as horrified as anyone by the disaster, but I am by nature a political thinker. I couldn’t help myself; I immediately started thinking of the political ramifications of the tragedy, and how to deal with them.

At first I felt guilty, but I realized that politics are an essential part of human nature, and they will not be stifled or suppressed for long for any reason. The best we can do is try to anticipate them and shape things to promote the most good — or, at the very least, minimize the harm.

So I took Mr. Egeland’s pronouncements and immediately started thinking of how best the United States could respond. And I think I came up with a win-win scenario for us.

]]>< ![CDATA[

The US should immediately pledge a very sizable amount of money to the UN for tsunami relief. (The first three thoughts I had were half a billion, a billion, and to match dollar-for-dollar the amounts three or so leading US charities raise privately for the cause, just to show what the American people can and will do on their own.) Just take the money and give it straight to the UN, then quietly sit back and watch like a hawk just what happens to that money.

If virtually every penny goes to helping the victims, that’s wonderful. We will have shown the world that we can work with the international community, and taken a huge lead in helping recover from this tragedy. We will have shown that we can rise above our previous disputes with UN officials when the need is there and done what few other nations have both the ability and inclination to do.

But if the UN reverts to its kleptocratic nature and healthy portions of the money are skimmed off, disappear into corrupt individuals’ pockets, is channeled into favored parties and corporations, is flagrantly wasted, or is in any other way used for anything BUT helping the tsunami victims, we will have been handed a huge moral club to beat the corrupt swine that currently hold the reins of the United Nations. Those who are pushing for reforms at the UN will be strengthened with irrefutable proof that the UN is little more than an effete gang of petty crooks.

And those bomb-throwers who want the US out of the UN (and the UN out of the US) — whom every day I find less and less extremist, and more and more pragmatic — will be given the political equivalent of a nuclear bomb.

One of President Bush’s favorite political tactics over the years has been to spot when there is a difference between what his opponents SAY they want and what they REALLY want. What he does is devastatingly simple: he simply gives them what they want, then sits back. If they accept it, they have to shut up about their real goals for a while. And if they reject it, he beats them over the head with their deceptions, shredding their public credibility. And for some reason, it keeps working. People keep falling for it, like the marks in a street corner three-card monty game.

The UN’s ultimate goal isn’t to get the United States to give more money to disaster relief. It’s to get the US to give more control to the UN. The US is by far the greatest single power on the face of the earth, and we refuse to kowtow to our “betters.” In fact, we often tell them that we will do what we think is best for us and the world, regardless of their opinion. And then we do it.

I once heard someone say that “if a friend owes you $100.00 and you never hear from them again, it was probably worth it.” If we give the UN a billion or so dollars and they use that money to utterly destroy their credibility and moral standing instead of using it as they promise, to help the devastated people of Southeast Asia, I think it’s more than worth it.

And the beauty of this is, if I’m wrong, what’s the worst that happens? Those people get a whole bunch more aid a lot faster.

J.

Merchant of Death
Bonfire of the Vanities - Week 78

46 Comments

  1. John December 29, 2004
  2. curtis December 29, 2004
  3. John December 29, 2004
  4. Jay Tea December 29, 2004
  5. schnuerbel December 29, 2004
  6. John December 29, 2004
  7. John December 29, 2004
  8. Jay Tea December 29, 2004
  9. John December 29, 2004
  10. basil December 29, 2004
  11. Jay Tea December 29, 2004
  12. McGehee December 29, 2004
  13. VA Jim December 29, 2004
  14. schnuerbel December 29, 2004
  15. Vulgorilla December 29, 2004
  16. [email protected]&R December 29, 2004
  17. Dale December 29, 2004
  18. Boyd December 29, 2004
  19. Marc December 29, 2004
  20. Lysander December 29, 2004
  21. Carrick Talmadge December 29, 2004
  22. firstbrokenangel December 29, 2004
  23. VA Jim December 29, 2004
  24. John December 29, 2004
  25. John December 29, 2004
  26. John December 29, 2004
  27. Drew - Dallas, TX December 29, 2004
  28. John December 29, 2004
  29. Jay Tea December 29, 2004
  30. John December 29, 2004
  31. Jay Tea December 29, 2004
  32. John December 29, 2004
  33. andrew December 29, 2004
  34. John December 29, 2004
  35. Jay Tea December 29, 2004
  36. Jinx McHue December 29, 2004
  37. Lysander December 29, 2004
  38. Les Nessman December 29, 2004
  39. Mark Aase December 30, 2004
  40. Ironbear December 30, 2004
  41. Monjo December 30, 2004
  42. schnuerbel December 30, 2004
  43. chupacabra December 30, 2004
  44. Mark Aase December 30, 2004
  45. Farkesota December 30, 2004
  46. tee bee December 30, 2004