Top 10 Worst UN Actions of 2018

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
4,306
3,792
410
Top 10 Worst UN Actions of 2018

10. Maduro Regime Glorified by First UN Rights Official to Visit Venezuela
9. UN Elects Erdogan’s Turkey to Oversee Human Rights Activists
8. Cuba Allowed to Cheat on UN Rights Review, With Hundreds of Fake Submissions
7. UN Elects Saudi Arabia to Three Different UN Women Rights Bodies
6. UN Rights Officials Silent on Iran’s Assault on Protesters
5. UN Elects Regime of Eritrea, Somalia, Cameroon to Human Rights Council
4. UN General Assembly Condemns Israel 21 Times, But Fails to Condemn Hamas Once
3. Lavish Praise for China & Saudi Human Rights Records in UN Reviews
2. UN Protests That Iran and North Korea Can’t Study Nuclear Physics in Europe
1. Syria’s Assad Regime Chairs UN Disarmament Forum
In September 2018, Venezuela’s Maduro regime was legitimized in an official expert report by Alfred de Zayas, the UN Human Rights Council’s “Independent Expert on the promotion of a democratic and equitable international order.” As UN Watch warned during Zayas’ visit to Venezuela — when he posted propaganda photos pretending that starving Venezuelans actually had an abundance of food — his outcome report was a complete whitewash of Maduro’s crimes, where the term “political prisoner” appears nowhere, and where dissident heroes like Leopoldo Lopez and Antonio Ledezma are condemned as warmongers.

In January 2018, the UN elected Turkey’s Erdogan regime — which arrests, jails & persecutes human rights activists, journalists, and dissidents — as Vice-Chair of the UN Committee on Non-Governmental Organizations, which accredits and supervises the activity of human rights groups at the UN.

In May 2018, Cuba mocked the mandatory UN review of its human rights record by submitting hundreds of fake NGO submissions hailing the repressive regime’s human rights record, including from the “Cuban Federation of Canine Sports.” Cuba lashed out at UN Watch for exposing the fraud

In 2018, Saudi Arabia, considered by many to be the most misogynistic regime in the world, secured key positions on the UN’s three principal women’s rights bodies. First, in March 2018, Saudi Arabia took its seat on the UN Commission on the Status of Women—made possible by the votes of Belgium, Ireland and Sweden—thanks to an election the year prior, as exposed by UN Watch. Second, in April 2018, Saudi Arabia was elected to the Executive Board of UN Women, also known as the UN Entity for Gender Equality and the Empowerment of Women. Third, in June 2018, Saudi Arabia’s candidate won a seat on the UN Committee on Elimination of Discrimination Against Women,

As 2018 opened in January, UN officials continued to ignore Iran’s violent crackdown against mass protests that had begun days earlier

In October 2018, the UN broke its own rules by electing notorious human rights abusers to the 47-nation Human Rights Council.

In 2018, the UN General Assembly condemned Israel more times than it did all of the rest of the world put together. There were 21 one-sided resolutions on Israel, and six on on the other 192 countries of the world, with one resolution each to criticize Iran, Syria, North Korea, Russian actions in Crimea, Myanmar, and the U.S. for its embargo on Cuba. Efforts by the U.S. to have the GA pass resolutions condemning Hamas, or amendments to hold Cuba accountable for its human rights abuses, both failed.

When the UN reviewed the human rights record of Saudi Arabia and China — which Human Rights Watch’s Ken Roth promised would be “tough probing” — the supposed audit in fact consisted of widespread praise for their human rights record. Saudi Arabia won praise from 75% of the delegations, while China topped that by winning praise from 86% of the speakers during its review.

In October 2018, UN Human Rights Council “expert” Idriss Jazairy — a former Algerian ambassador to the UN — presented a report to the General Assembly in which he protested a “knowledge embargo” barring Iran and North Korea from sending their people to study nuclear physics in Europe. He didn’t seem to mind that both countries, which have threatened annihilation toward others, have been condemned for illegal actions to build a nuclear bomb.

In April, Assad’s Syria — a regime with a well-known propensity for using chemical weapons against its own people — assumed the presidency of the UN-backed Conference on Disarmament. which deals with the nuclear nonproliferation treaty, global conventions to ban biological and chemical weapons, and the comprehensive test ban treaty.
What a glorious year for the Useless Nations.
 

infinitys_7th

Member
Oct 1, 2006
3,666
3,268
1,090
UN is like welfare for diplomats
And a sex tourism agency, with all the Peacerapers terrorizing impoverished areas.

I wish the US had the balls to seize the UN building in NY and turn it into a homeless shelter. It'd do loads more good that way than it ever has.
 

Madonis

Member
Oct 21, 2018
556
280
190
A lot of this is either misleading, questionably sourced or lacking context, both historical and current.

Here's the main thing: if the U.S. and the other Great Powers (tm) want the UN to kick out or refuse to interact with a particular country or leader, then they would either take such matters to the security council, which is the only part of the UN with any real power to make decisions, or they would have designed the entity with stricter rules that would specify as much.

It wasn't created that way, because the U.S. and said Great Powers (tm) didn't want that to happen. Stricter rules aren't really convenient for the U.S. government, which has been friendly towards several of the countries named.
 
Last edited:

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
4,306
3,792
410
A lot of this is either misleading or lacking context, both historical and current.

Here's the main thing: if the U.S. and the other Great Powers (tm) want the UN to kick out or refuse to interact with a particular country or leader, then they would either take such matters to the security council or would have designed the entity with rules that would specify as much.
can you expand?

If you don't agree with any of the 10, or are misleading/out of context I would love to hear your opinon/thoughts.
 

Madonis

Member
Oct 21, 2018
556
280
190
can you expand?

If you don't agree with any of the 10, or are misleading/out of context I would love to hear your opinon/thoughts.
I've already addressed the single biggest issue. We can talk about different countries and the specific claims, no doubt, but it comes back to that.
 
Last edited:
Sep 16, 2012
6,824
10
440
24
The Israel one is such disingenuous bullshit. The only reason that they get so many resolutions is because when the issue is taken to the security council, every single time, no matter how mild the condemnation is, it is ultimately vetoed. No other country receives a similar treatment.

Iran should probably be allowed to build nuclear power plants as well. If we stopped every nation which threatened others with nukes from having access to global knowledge on nuclear power we'd be using a lot of coal in a lot of countries. Those ones actually have nukes too so there really isn't a leg to stand on imo.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
4,306
3,792
410
The Israel one is such disingenuous bullshit. The only reason that they get so many resolutions is because when the issue is taken to the security council, every single time, no matter how mild the condemnation is, it is ultimately vetoed. No other country receives a similar treatment.

Iran should probably be allowed to build nuclear power plants as well. If we stopped every nation which threatened others with nukes from having access to global knowledge on nuclear power we'd be using a lot of coal in a lot of countries. Those ones actually have nukes too so there really isn't a leg to stand on imo.
You don't find it odd that the UN has passed more resolutions against Israel than all other countries combined? China is interening a million muslims in concentration camps, 303 people died in 2018 in the Israel/Palestine conflict but 35K have been killed in Syria. 25K in Yemen where Saudi Arabia dropped a bomb on a bus killing 35 children. And that little genocide going on in Mynmar to the Rhoyngi muslims. But its Israel needs 21 resolutions against it, while the rest of the world total has 6. Yup that makes total sense. And like China or Russia never use their veto to save their own asses amrite?

And the 2 cherry's on top? The UN changed its voting rule and used the 2/3rd majority (which is really only in special or technical cases) so they could block a resolution condemning Hamas because the OIC and other dictators knew it would pass with simple majority. Yup UN changing its rules to save a terrorist organization. And then we can add in the fact that Hizbulla has been caught red handed building tunnels in violation of 1701 and UN has done nothing and can't even be arsed to mention the name Hizbulla.

The only reason why Israel has so many resolutions against it is because the OIC bullies the rest of the UN into making Israel a permanent focus of almost every UN body and session.
 

danielberg

Member
Jun 20, 2018
2,019
2,170
240
The UN at this point is controlled by dictatorships and majority Islamic countries which explains a lot of their bullshit actions including trying to flood Europe with more islam or directly attacking israel and anything "western" for "human rights violations" which is laughable coming from the worst dictatorships and majority Islamic countries, they can fuck off an i am glad that they lose more and more influence (what little they had left) by the day.
 
Last edited:

Madonis

Member
Oct 21, 2018
556
280
190
The UN at this point is controlled by dictatorships and majority Islamic countries which explains a lot of their bullshit actions including trying to flood Europe with more islam or directly attacking israel and anything "western" for "human rights violations" which is laughable coming from the worst dictatorships and majority Islamic countries, they can fuck off an i am glad that they lose more and more influence (what little they had left) by the day.
a) That's not how any of this works.

b) The UN has also criticized "non-western" or Islamic countries for human rights violations.

c) Israeli press sources have reported on cases where their government has also violated those rights.

d) Ultimately, the UN has exactly as much influence as its designers (including the U.S.) wanted it to have.
 

danielberg

Member
Jun 20, 2018
2,019
2,170
240
a) That's not how any of this works.

b) The UN has also criticized "non-western" or Islamic countries for human rights violations.

c) Israeli press sources have reported on cases where their government has also violated those rights.

d) Ultimately, the UN has exactly as much influence as its designers (including the U.S.) wanted it to have.
Dude stop it, they only criticize Islamic nations in the most surface level even possible in single digits just for the sake of a borderline joke of a appearance in impartiality all while they write up hundreds of declarations against Israel by far the most against anyone or anything on the entire globe.
So sorry the cat is out of the bag and nothing about this is subtle or smart anymore.
 
Last edited:

Madonis

Member
Oct 21, 2018
556
280
190
So sorry the cat is out of the bag and nothing about this is subtle or smart anymore.
I could say the same, but obviously not in the same direction as what you meant.

A lot of countries are concerned, or at least pretend to be, about Israel's behavior. This includes, but isn't limited to, several countries with their own human rights violations and authoritarian governments. By design, there isn't anything preventing them from participating in the UN. If the U.S. had demanded otherwise, way back in the day, things would be different. But no, that's not how the system was developed and it wasn't due to "islamists" or whatever you've blaming for it.

In the end, outside of the security council, all of these UN votes or resolutions regarding Israel in the General Assembly have exactly zero binding power. For better or for worse, that has no real effect on the situation. It's simply a political gesture. I'd like the UN to work differently and actually have real power, but that's not what the U.S wanted out of the UN. Only the security council has any power and the permanent members of said council, including the United States, are actually content with that.

I do feel that for you it seems to all come down to the implication that "anything pro-Israel is good, anything anti-Israel is bad" thus absolutely no other piece of information or statement of fact will change your underlying position.
 
Last edited:

Boss Mog

Member
Dec 12, 2013
4,043
2,531
440
Turkey oversing human rights is the very definition of the fox guarding the hen house.
 

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
4,306
3,792
410
I could say the same, but obviously not in the same direction as what you meant.

A lot of countries are concerned, or at least pretend to be, about Israel's behavior. This includes, but isn't limited to, several countries with their own human rights violations and authoritarian governments. By design, there isn't anything preventing them from participating in the UN. If the U.S. had demanded otherwise, way back in the day, things would be different. But no, that's not how the system was developed and it wasn't due to "islamists" or whatever you've blaming for it.

In the end, outside of the security council, all of these UN votes or resolutions regarding Israel in the General Assembly have exactly zero binding power. For better or for worse, that has no real effect on the situation. It's simply a political gesture. I'd like the UN to work differently and actually have real power, but that's not what the U.S wanted out of the UN. Only the security council has any power and the permanent members of said council, including the United States, are actually content with that.

I do feel that for you it seems to all come down to the implication that "anything pro-Israel is good, anything anti-Israel is bad" thus absolutely no other piece of information or statement of fact will change your underlying position.
I think you are missing the point, its not about what the US wants, its about how 3rd world dictators and human rights abusers the worst in the world twist the UN to push their agenda.

I mean come on its insanity that Saudi can chair a womens comitte, that Syria can chair a disarmament comitte. Erdogan oversees human rights? Saudi and China get glowing reviews for their human rights record. This is some 1984 level newsspeak here.

Think about it, is Israel so bad that it deserves 21 resolutions agianst it and the rest of the world 6 combined? Even if you think Israel is doing bad things to the Palestinians, 21 resolutions while we have a genocide in Mynmar, 35k and 25k people dying in Yemen and Syria and a million muslims being sent to concentration camps.

Just look at the anti-Hamas resolution and you can see the abuse of the UNGA to push through a specific agenda. Just before the resolution was voted on the UNGA changed its rules out of the blue and all of a sudden to require a 2/3rds majority rather than a simple majority. Then the vote passed by majority but a simple one so the resolution failed. Then look at all the countries that voted against it, OIC and 3rd world countries, basically the worst human rights and undemocratic countries.

Since most of the worlds countries are undemocratic, unfree, and don't believe in western values they can abuse the UN's democratic nature to abuse and push through whatever agenda they want. Look no further then the latest UN orwellian document the migrant pact.

Either way Israel was only 1 of the items, so remove that and you can still see how much of a joke the UN is. Thats not even taking into account oil for food, rapes by blue helmets, the rwanda genocide and all the other corruption that goes on at the UN. How anyone can have any faith in the UN with those 9 items listed above(lets leave off Israel since its so contentious) is beyond me.
 

Madonis

Member
Oct 21, 2018
556
280
190
I think you are missing the point, its not about what the US wants, its about how 3rd world dictators and human rights abusers the worst in the world twist the UN to push their agenda.
If they controlled the security council and everything the UN did was limited to that, I'd agree.

But as matter of fact....I can't, because that's not accurate.

I mean come on its insanity that Saudi can chair a womens comitte, that Syria can chair a disarmament comitte. Erdogan oversees human rights? Saudi and China get glowing reviews for their human rights record. This is some 1984 level newsspeak here.
You realize those positions are not permanent? They are meant to rotate between countries. Furthermore, you also have other members participating in the same committees who are more democratic. I'd also wonder if you've actually read any of those reviews directly and looked over documents from a period of time or are just repeating what you've heard.

Think about it, is Israel so bad that it deserves 21 resolutions agianst it and the rest of the world 6 combined? Even if you think Israel is doing bad things to the Palestinians, 21 resolutions while we have a genocide in Mynmar, 35k and 25k people dying in Yemen and Syria and a million muslims being sent to concentration camps.
Rather than thinking they deserve less condemnation, I think other countries and parties deserve to get more of it. But once again, General Assembly resolutions are mostly symbolic. They have little or no weight in practice. Israel has ignored all those resolutions, even in cases where they are fully justified.

Since most of the worlds countries are undemocratic, unfree, and don't believe in western values they can abuse the UN's democratic nature to abuse and push through whatever agenda they want. Look no further then the latest UN orwellian document the migrant pact.
This is a matter of opinion and perception, especially since "western values" have not prevented many historical abuses such as discrimination and imperialism. This includes countries that have treated their own citizens back home better than their foreign "subjects" abroad over the past 40, 50 or 60 years. In turn, even countries which are less democratic than the U.S. are not automatically some sort of authoritarian nightmare. There are degrees, signs of progress and of backsliding.

Either way Israel was only 1 of the items, so remove that and you can still see how much of a joke the UN is. Thats not even taking into account oil for food, rapes by blue helmets, the rwanda genocide and all the other corruption that goes on at the UN. How anyone can have any faith in the UN with those 9 items listed above(lets leave off Israel since its so contentious) is beyond me.
Same reason why people can still have a certain amount of faith in the U.S. even when members of American military forces have carried out torture, rape and murder at various points of worldwide geography throughout modern history, to say nothing about the corruption angle involved in recent Middle East adventures.
 
Last edited:

cryptoadam

... and he cannot lie
Feb 21, 2018
4,306
3,792
410
If they controlled the security council and everything the UN did was limited to that, I'd agree.

But as matter of fact....I can't, because that's not accurate.
Outside the security council it is, thats why these countries can get elected to chair these comittes. And of course electing to the UNHRC is done by secret ballot I wonder why?

And the SC is where the power is, but since all the major powers have veto's it basically cancels itself out and is one of the main reasons the UN is always dead locked. But the SC essentially comes down to USA vs Russia (and now somewhat China). China will never be addressed for its internment of a million muslims.



You realize those positions are not permanent? They are meant to rotate between countries. Furthermore, you also have other members participating in the same committees who are more democratic. I'd also wonder if you've actually read any of those reviews directly and looked over documents from a period of time or are just repeating what you've heard.
Yes I know they rotate and aren't permanent. Basically the argument is to bring them in because this will moderate them? Well it isn't working. The UNHRC the second version of that comitte isn't any better than the other one, the abusers aren't being reformed it instead just gives these abusers cover to attack others, legitimacy, and a shield.

Its like saying the little league coach is rotating so the child molester won't be there permantly.



Rather than thinking they deserve less condemnation, I think other countries and parties deserve to get more of it. But once again, General Assembly resolutions are mostly symbolic. They have little or no weight in practice. Israel has ignored all those resolutions, even in cases where they are fully justified.
Well duh other countries deserve more and Israel less. Its clearly showing the UN's bias how much they attack Israel. And UNGA resolutions may be non-binding but they become part of the lexicon of international law. How many people quote 194 and 181 as international law? The Palestinians themselves do it all the time. Non-binding resolutions by the UN eventually make their way into customary law and most people do not know or care the difference and just assume anything from the UN is "international law".




This is a matter of opinion and perception, especially since "western values" have not prevented many historical abuses such as discrimination and imperialism. This includes countries that have treated their own citizens back home better than their foreign "subjects" abroad over the past 40, 50 or 60 years. In turn, even countries which are less democratic than the U.S. are not automatically some sort of authoritarian nightmare. There are degrees, signs of progress and of backsliding.





Same reason why people can still have a certain amount of faith in the U.S. even when members of American military forces have carried out torture, rape and murder at various points of worldwide geography throughout modern history, to say nothing about the corruption angle involved in recent Middle East adventures.
Strawman on the USA. Maybe they are the worst and so is Russia and China and Germany and UK etc... Doesn't make the UN any less corrupt.

UN can have a place but it needs some serious review and cleaning. The fact that some of the worst countries in the world are given these various privilages and clean records should speak for itself.