Opinion / Columnist
United Nations was deliberately created to cause wars
20 Sep 2017 at 01:51hrs | Views
Tendai Ruben Mbofana
When the United Nations (UN) was formally established on 24 October 1945, soon after the Second World War, there was much hope that this signalled the end to all wars - but it only was the beginning of some of the most devastating conflicts this world had ever witnessed.
When the founding members of the UN signed the organisation's Charter, they pledged to "save succeeding generations from the scourge of war", and to "reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person".
They also committed themselves to "promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom".
All these are very noble ideals that every member of the UN still subscribes to.
Needless to say, the organisation has disappointingly failed in achieving these goals, and today has been reduced to a mere platform for witchhunts and accusations.
Understandably, it would be foolhardy to assume that achieving these goals would be a walk in the park, but the blame for the dismal failures rests squarely at UN Headquarters.
The organisation's structure is the very reason that an already tricky undertaking was made even more complicated.
The UN is one of the most dictatorial establishments in the world, yet it seeks to bring about democracy and justice to all so as to prevent conflicts!
Is that not the irony of all times!
The setting up of the Security Council - with 5 veto-weilding members - is the most bizzare decision made at the establishment of the UN.
Although, these were the so-called 'victors' at the end of the Second World War, it did not - and still does not - make sense as to why they seriously considered themselves the custodians of global peace.
These countries - the United States (US), Russia, Britain, China, and France - had, and still have, diametrically opposed ideologies - which actually bordered on animosity.
They knew very well - as did with Germany, which they divided up -that they would be split into two main camps and would fight for geopolitical hegemony.
Thus, in setting up the Security Council, which has only 15 members - including the 5 permenant veto-wielders - to have dormination over today's 180 rest of members, was a deliberate decisions meant for nothing else but a fight for hegemony.
These 5 'victors' knew very well that this set up was never meant to achieve global peace, but was a platform for dormination.
As such, the UN was created for the 5 'victors' to scramble for satellite state.
In other words, the UN is a huge fraud!
All members of the UN are just pawns in the 5 'victors'' chess games - they are just being used.
The 5 'victors' already knew that by giving themselves such powers, they could easily re-colonize the world - it was a well-designed modern day 'scramble for Africa' or 'Berlin Conference'.
Nevertheless, it was also a recipe for endless wars, as that 'scramble' was obviously going to be nasty.
And that was not long in coming, as witnessed by the Cold War, and the 'hot' wars that characterised it - such as in Vietnam, and Korea.
In fact, the liberation struggles on the African continent were a result of the Cold War - maybe, the only positive to come out of this.
Today, although the Cold War is arguably over, the conflicts continue unabated, due to the same UN skewed set up.
Conflicts that could have, most likely, been avoided - albeit, not easily - have turned into infernos.
Let us take Syria, for instance.
When its President Bashir al-Assad started butchering peaceful protestors in 2011, the Security Council could not do anything to stop him, as Russia vetoed every proposed resolution against Syria.
6 years later, there is a brutal war, as Assad intensified his crackdown (supported by Russia and Iran), and the country was infiltrated by terrorists, such as ISIL and Nustra - whilst the US arms the SDF, and Turkey fights the Kurdish forces.
What a mess!
Could such a conflict, and numerous others, not have been avoided had the UN genuinely been set up as a peace organisation?
If the 5 WWII 'victors' had genuinely wanted to establish an organisation for global peace, they would have given all the powers to the General Assembly - and decisions made by democratic vote.
The fact that, even today, none of the veto-wielding members want power to go to the General Assembly betrays to real intent behind the formation of the UN - it has nothing to do with global peace, but world dormination, which comes through more wars.
* Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a Zimbabwe-based social justice activist, writer, and author. He is available should any organisations or individuals wish to invite him to participate and speak at any gatherings. Please call him on +263782283975, or email tendaiandtinta.mbofana@gmail.com
When the founding members of the UN signed the organisation's Charter, they pledged to "save succeeding generations from the scourge of war", and to "reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person".
They also committed themselves to "promote social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom".
All these are very noble ideals that every member of the UN still subscribes to.
Needless to say, the organisation has disappointingly failed in achieving these goals, and today has been reduced to a mere platform for witchhunts and accusations.
Understandably, it would be foolhardy to assume that achieving these goals would be a walk in the park, but the blame for the dismal failures rests squarely at UN Headquarters.
The organisation's structure is the very reason that an already tricky undertaking was made even more complicated.
The UN is one of the most dictatorial establishments in the world, yet it seeks to bring about democracy and justice to all so as to prevent conflicts!
Is that not the irony of all times!
The setting up of the Security Council - with 5 veto-weilding members - is the most bizzare decision made at the establishment of the UN.
Although, these were the so-called 'victors' at the end of the Second World War, it did not - and still does not - make sense as to why they seriously considered themselves the custodians of global peace.
These countries - the United States (US), Russia, Britain, China, and France - had, and still have, diametrically opposed ideologies - which actually bordered on animosity.
They knew very well - as did with Germany, which they divided up -that they would be split into two main camps and would fight for geopolitical hegemony.
Thus, in setting up the Security Council, which has only 15 members - including the 5 permenant veto-wielders - to have dormination over today's 180 rest of members, was a deliberate decisions meant for nothing else but a fight for hegemony.
These 5 'victors' knew very well that this set up was never meant to achieve global peace, but was a platform for dormination.
As such, the UN was created for the 5 'victors' to scramble for satellite state.
All members of the UN are just pawns in the 5 'victors'' chess games - they are just being used.
The 5 'victors' already knew that by giving themselves such powers, they could easily re-colonize the world - it was a well-designed modern day 'scramble for Africa' or 'Berlin Conference'.
Nevertheless, it was also a recipe for endless wars, as that 'scramble' was obviously going to be nasty.
And that was not long in coming, as witnessed by the Cold War, and the 'hot' wars that characterised it - such as in Vietnam, and Korea.
In fact, the liberation struggles on the African continent were a result of the Cold War - maybe, the only positive to come out of this.
Today, although the Cold War is arguably over, the conflicts continue unabated, due to the same UN skewed set up.
Conflicts that could have, most likely, been avoided - albeit, not easily - have turned into infernos.
Let us take Syria, for instance.
When its President Bashir al-Assad started butchering peaceful protestors in 2011, the Security Council could not do anything to stop him, as Russia vetoed every proposed resolution against Syria.
6 years later, there is a brutal war, as Assad intensified his crackdown (supported by Russia and Iran), and the country was infiltrated by terrorists, such as ISIL and Nustra - whilst the US arms the SDF, and Turkey fights the Kurdish forces.
What a mess!
Could such a conflict, and numerous others, not have been avoided had the UN genuinely been set up as a peace organisation?
If the 5 WWII 'victors' had genuinely wanted to establish an organisation for global peace, they would have given all the powers to the General Assembly - and decisions made by democratic vote.
The fact that, even today, none of the veto-wielding members want power to go to the General Assembly betrays to real intent behind the formation of the UN - it has nothing to do with global peace, but world dormination, which comes through more wars.
* Tendai Ruben Mbofana is a Zimbabwe-based social justice activist, writer, and author. He is available should any organisations or individuals wish to invite him to participate and speak at any gatherings. Please call him on +263782283975, or email tendaiandtinta.mbofana@gmail.com
Source - Tendai Ruben Mbofana
All articles and letters published on Bulawayo24 have been independently written by members of Bulawayo24's community. The views of users published on Bulawayo24 are therefore their own and do not necessarily represent the views of Bulawayo24. Bulawayo24 editors also reserve the right to edit or delete any and all comments received.
