AlterNet: The United Nations Backs Down
'Ironically, one of the many absolutely cosmetic concessions the French wrung from the Americans was the change of the word "collaborating" to "working together," to describe the role of the United Nations Special Representative, who had also been upgraded from Special Coordinator. There may some deep psychology at play here. The French ambassador pointed out that the word "collaborate" has some pretty nasty connotations in French. It does in English as well. And so does the deed of collaboration... the U.S. has secured pretty much all that it wanted... The U.N. Special Collaborator, as some wags about the U.N. have taken to calling him, does have a little more power of initiative than before, if only the power to report back to the Security Council. But cynics cannot help but conclude that unless an extraordinary personality gets the job, then the real job description will be "U.N. Special Scapegoat," to carry the can when the Occupiers make a hash of reconstruction.'

This alternet report is negative in tone, but it could have contained more analysis of what is involved and what might have been hoped for. Of course, it is all too likely that the major players are motivated more by cynicism and self interest at the moment than anything else, and therefore one might be disappointed at the abdication of responsibility on the part of UNSC members. On the whole, the issue of this UN resolution has been very much underreported and undernoticed by the public. The UN, neither now nor in the past, cannot hope to forcibly stop superpower or hyperpower abuses. (In US-speak, 'the UN is irrelevant.') The significance of the UN in dealing with a superpower is not so much what it can achieve or what it can prevent but what it can expose for public view, as was so vividly demonstrated in the UNSC debate prior to the war. The UN could not hope to stop the US aggression against Iraq but it could and did mobilise the public to oppose US hegemonic ambition. In other words, the UN and its ideals of international law and human rights is largely a tool of mobilisation and public education and should be approached in that way. Another way of putting it is that contrary to appearances real power does not lie with the Security Council or even with the superpowers but with world public opinion, and the most serious players have an eye on this at all times.

AlterNet: The United Nations Backs Down
'Ironically, one of the many absolutely cosmetic concessions the French wrung from the Americans was the change of the word "collaborating" to "working together," to describe the role of the United Nations Special Representative, who had also been upgraded from Special Coordinator. There may some deep psychology at play here. The French ambassador pointed out that the word "collaborate" has some pretty nasty connotations in French. It does in English as well. And so does the deed of collaboration... the U.S. has secured pretty much all that it wanted... The U.N. Special Collaborator, as some wags about the U.N. have taken to calling him, does have a little more power of initiative than before, if only the power to report back to the Security Council. But cynics cannot help but conclude that unless an extraordinary personality gets the job, then the real job description will be "U.N. Special Scapegoat," to carry the can when the Occupiers make a hash of reconstruction.'

This alternet report is negative in tone, but it could have contained more analysis of what is involved and what might have been hoped for. Of course, it is all too likely that the major players are motivated more by cynicism and self interest at the moment than anything else, and therefore one might be disappointed at the abdication of responsibility on the part of UNSC members. On the whole, the issue of this UN resolution has been very much underreported and undernoticed by the public. The UN, neither now nor in the past, cannot hope to forcibly stop superpower or hyperpower abuses. (In US-speak, 'the UN is irrelevant.') The significance of the UN in dealing with a superpower is not so much what it can achieve or what it can prevent but what it can expose for public view, as was so vividly demonstrated in the UNSC debate prior to the war. The UN could not hope to stop the US aggression against Iraq but it could and did mobilise the public to oppose US hegemonic ambition. In other words, the UN and its ideals of international law and human rights is largely a tool of mobilisation and public education and should be approached in that way. Another way of putting it is that contrary to appearances real power does not lie with the Security Council or even with the superpowers but with world public opinion, and the most serious players have an eye on this at all times.