UN's Ban: All cultures yearn for democracy

[News_Editor]

UN's Ban: All cultures yearn for democracy

2011-09-16 11:28:05 GMT+7 (ICT)

UNITED NATIONS (BNO NEWS) -- United Nations (UN) Secretary-General Ban Ki-moon on Thursday said this year's political revolutions in North Africa and the Middle East demonstrate that all cultures yearn for democracy.

"The world saw the truth of the saying that countries do not become fit for democracy - they become fit through democracy," Ban said, marking the International Day for Democracy.

"Young people, above all, brought home this message. They championed the democratic ideal and now face the challenge of working to realize the potential of the transitions they helped to set in motion," the UN chief added.

Ban called for increased efforts to support all people, particularly the new generations who have been the catalyst of this year's momentous events that brought political changes to Tunisia, Egypt and Libya, and engendered democratic movements in several countries in the Middle East.

However, Ban noted that democracy cannot be imposed from abroad, although he stressed that the UN plays a crucial role to develop and strengthen democratic institutions and practices around the world. The UN supports free and fair elections, encourages popular participation by civil society, and nurtures dialogue when parties are deadlocked after disputed polls, the Secretary-General pointed out.

Nonetheless, in all these endeavors, Ban stated, "the UN does not seek to export or promote any particular national or regional model of democracy."

He added: "It works on the understanding that the democratic ideal is rooted in philosophies and traditions from all parts of the world; that effective democratic governance enhances the quality of life for men and women everywhere; and that democracy provides the foundations for durable peace, security and development."

Regarding the 20th anniversary of the transformation of Eastern Europe, Ban stated that "they know the painstaking work involved in building the rule of law, fostering transparency and accountability, and overhauling political and economic systems."

"[Eastern Europeans] know the setbacks that can disappoint expectations, and the passion needed to keep moving forward. Their experiences provide important lessons," Ban said.

-- © BNO News All rights reserved 2011-09-16

[maidu]

We can include China and two of its neighbors (Burma and N.Korea) in the mix.

[Steely Dan]

Democracy is probably the best system of government, but the most difficult to build from scratch. I suspect the Arab spring will lead to theocracy rather than democracy unfortunately because when religion and culture are so closely intertwined there is no space for democracy to get a foothold until a gradual enlightenment loosens the noose religion holds over a society.

[zzaa09]

What sort of democracy?

As the illusion varies greatly?

[WeeGB]

Perhaps the UN should put it's own house in order, before discussing democracy. How can an organisation, where 5 countries have the power to veto motions put to it, claim to be democratic ?

An example is the forthcoming application for the recognition of Palestine as a state. The USA, apparently, is going to veto this motion, thus depriving the Palestinians of becoming recognised as a state, even if every other country were to vote in their favour.

Surely a more democratic method would be for each member state, to vote, and if the majority are in favour, then the motion is passed. That is democracy, each one having a vote, and the majority of votes wins the motion.

[koheesti]

Perhaps the UN should put it's own house in order, before discussing democracy. How can an organisation, where 5 countries have the power to veto motions put to it, claim to be democratic ?

An example is the forthcoming application for the recognition of Palestine as a state. The USA, apparently, is going to veto this motion, thus depriving the Palestinians of becoming recognised as a state, even if every other country were to vote in their favour.

Surely a more democratic method would be for each member state, to vote, and if the majority are in favour, then the motion is passed. That is democracy, each one having a vote, and the majority of votes wins the motion.

A straight majority rule in the UN would lead to World War in a matter of days. That might not be such a bad thing because I've a good idea which side would win.

Better to do away with the UN as a political entity all together and have it based off US soil and deal with humanitarian issues like disaster relief and health issues.

[WeeGB]

I disagree that a world war would follow if a true democracy was introduced in the UN, I also suspect that no one would really win, that's the nature of war, everyone loses. Perhaps if a large number of countries were to disassociate themselves from the UN, until full democracy was introduced, and the power to veto be abolished, many of the world's problems would then be solved.

The world has changed, and if the UN does not change with it, then it will become even more irrelevant than it is already.

Surely the Palestinian issue is a humanitarian one, so the problem would remain the same, no matter where the UN was situated, though I do agree, it should not be in the USA.

Certainly, if we take Israel and Palestine as an example, the same old arguments have being going on for sixty or more years without resolution, both within and outside of the UN, chiefly due to the USA's support for Israel seemingly no matter what they do.

The Palestinians are no different to any other nation, they should be able to have their own homeland, have the areas that Israel has stolen from them returned, and follow their own destiny. America simply does not help the situation, by turning a blind eye, when Israel builds more and more houses on occupied territory, while making seemingly endless conditions upon the Palestinians. The world needs change, and if the UN does not allow that change to happen, democratically, then it is a pointless entity.

[Steely Dan]

Perhaps the UN should put it's own house in order, before discussing democracy. How can an organisation, where 5 countries have the power to veto motions put to it, claim to be democratic ?

An example is the forthcoming application for the recognition of Palestine as a state. The USA, apparently, is going to veto this motion, thus depriving the Palestinians of becoming recognised as a state, even if every other country were to vote in their favour.

Surely a more democratic method would be for each member state, to vote, and if the majority are in favour, then the motion is passed. That is democracy, each one having a vote, and the majority of votes wins the motion.

Like it or not the veto stops the pathetic racist block voting of the OIC who control the UNHRC to such a degree that more motions condemning Israel come from that body than all other Countries put together. Meanwhile Saudi Arabia and Iran stone people to death for adultery and the likes of Sudan kill millions through genocide.

In other words it's an absurd situation where those who vote on other democracies are themselves undemocratic to the core.

[geriatrickid]

Perhaps the UN should put it's own house in order, before discussing democracy. How can an organisation, where 5 countries have the power to veto motions put to it, claim to be democratic ?

An example is the forthcoming application for the recognition of Palestine as a state. The USA, apparently, is going to veto this motion, thus depriving the Palestinians of becoming recognised as a state, even if every other country were to vote in their favour.

Surely a more democratic method would be for each member state, to vote, and if the majority are in favour, then the motion is passed. That is democracy, each one having a vote, and the majority of votes wins the motion.

Maybe those member nations should actually make a contribution to the UN. As of now the burden falls on the west and Japan. China and Russia have vetos and their contribution is far below their appropriate share. As well, It is the same countries that shoulder the worst peace keeping obligations.

[chuckd]

Heck, I agree with WeeGB.

Let's make it a real democracy, particularly when it comes to the funding. Let everybody pay 1/192nd of the total operating budget and peacekeeping costs.

The US currently pays 22% of the operating budget and 27% of peacekeeping costs. We would save Billions of dollars each year.

Let's standardize it and make it 'FAIR'.

[koheesti]

Heck, I agree with WeeGB.

Let's make it a real democracy, particularly when it comes to the funding. Let everybody pay 1/192nd of the total operating budget and peacekeeping costs.

The US currently pays 22% of the operating budget and 27% of peacekeeping costs. We would save Billions of dollars each year.

Let's standardize it and make it 'FAIR'.

+1

[koheesti]

I disagree that a world war would follow if a true democracy was introduced in the UN, I also suspect that no one would really win, that's the nature of war, everyone loses. Perhaps if a large number of countries were to disassociate themselves from the UN, until full democracy was introduced, and the power to veto be abolished, many of the world's problems would then be solved.

The world has changed, and if the UN does not change with it, then it will become even more irrelevant than it is already.

Surely the Palestinian issue is a humanitarian one, so the problem would remain the same, no matter where the UN was situated, though I do agree, it should not be in the USA.

Certainly, if we take Israel and Palestine as an example, the same old arguments have being going on for sixty or more years without resolution, both within and outside of the UN, chiefly due to the USA's support for Israel seemingly no matter what they do.

The Palestinians are no different to any other nation, they should be able to have their own homeland, have the areas that Israel has stolen from them returned, and follow their own destiny. America simply does not help the situation, by turning a blind eye, when Israel builds more and more houses on occupied territory, while making seemingly endless conditions upon the Palestinians. The world needs change, and if the UN does not allow that change to happen, democratically, then it is a pointless entity.

How is this different from those who support the Palestinians seemingly no what they do?

What conditions were put on the Palestinians after Israel left Gaza - forcibly removing Israelis from their homes - that caused the Palestinians to start launching rockets at Israel? The Palestinians were given a shot at democracy and they voted in a terrorist organization - Hamas - which isn't even supported by good friends like Egypt or Jordan.

At this stage, Palestinians with their own country and democracy is like a 5-yr old deciding for himself what he wants to eat for dinner.