Press Release of the Week: So What?
Really take this in. Yes, it's real.
DEMOCRATIC PEOPLE’S REPUBLIC OF KOREA ASSUMES PRESIDENCY OF THE CONFERENCE ON DISARMAMENT
The Conference on Disarmament held a plenary meeting this morning in which the Democratic People's Republic of Korea assumed the presidency of the Conference and members bid farewell to the departing ambassadors from Canada and the United Kingdom.
In his initial address to the Conference as president, So Se Pyong of the Democratic People's Republic of Korea said that he was very much committed to the Conference and during his presidency he welcomed any sort of constructive proposals that strengthened the work and credibility of the body. He was ready to work closely with all members to provide the grounds for strengthening their work. As president, he would be guided by the Rules of Procedure and take into account the position of each delegation to find common ground on substantive issues and procedural matters as well. With their support and cooperation, he would do everything in his capacity to move the Conference on Disarmament forward.
In departing comments, Ambassador Marius Grinius of Canada said it was easy to dismiss the current paralysis in the Conference on Disarmament as a lack of political will despite the fact that States demonstrated considerable political will at the Security Council Summit, the Nuclear Security Summit and at the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty Review Conference in May 2010. It was also easy to remind themselves of the Conference on Disarmament’s past disarmament glories, and perhaps they could do it again, but the way forward was not obvious. Mr. Grinius said he would argue that the Conference on Disarmament was on life support because it no longer was the sole multilateral negotiating forum for disarmament. Indeed, it was not negotiating anything and had not been for a very long time. He suggested they must do more, by looking at the entire United Nations disarmament machinery and deciding whether this machinery was part of the problem or the victim of political paralysis. The Conference on Disarmament was fast approaching an historic tipping point. They would need all of their collective wisdom, and perhaps some luck, at the General Assembly in the fall when it would decide what to do with the Conference on Disarmament. ...
All of the delegations who took the floor welcomed So Se Pyong as the president of the Conference on Disarmament and said that they looked forward to his stewardship and working with him to revitalize and strengthen the Conference.
Now, it should be said that the chair rotates in alphabetical order, so sooner or later it would be North Korea's turn. It's not as if they took a vote and decided North Korea would be the ideal candidate. That's about the most redeeming thing one can say about this.
So Se Pyong, by the way, used to be the North Korean ambassador to Iran. The interesting thing is that this fact aside--which I can document with a few photos of So yukking it up with Ahmadinejad on the website of the Presidency of the Islamic Republic of Iran--I can't find out a blessed thing about him. It's as if he never existed before this week. I know, I know, it's the hermit nation and we pretty much have no idea who any of them are, but this is extreme even for North Korea. For comparison purposes, do a Google search on Deputy Ambassador to the UN Pak Tok-hun. You'll see some evidence that the man didn't just spontaneously materialize.
So, I don't know what to make of him. I just point out how weird it is.
- Comment (9)
- · Quote
- · UnfollowFollow (0)
Comments :
Oct '10
Re: Press Release of the Week: So What?
How many times must it be noted that the UN is beyond parody? Let’s move its headquarters to Bujumbura and see how quickly the world’s Diplocrats lose interest in it. What purpose does the UN serve and how is that purpose helpful to US interests and national security? There’s a question I’d like very Presidential candidate to answer. l think the UN serves no purpose that can justify borrowing 42 cents of every dollar we spend on it. The fact we then repay the interest on those borrowed funds largely to other UN members just adds insult to injury.
Jun '11
Re: Press Release of the Week: So What?
If only there were another similar story pointing out the dangerous ironies that the UN not only tolerates, but actively supports. Oh. right. http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/06/28/un-backs-irans-anti-western-anti-terrorism-conference/
Edited on Jul 2, 2011 at 5:26amOct '10
Re: Press Release of the Week: So What?
Alex Metcalf: If only there were another similar story pointing out the dangerous ironies that the UN not only tolerates, but actively supports. Oh. right. http://news.nationalpost.com/2011/06/28/un-backs-irans-anti-western-anti-terrorism-conference/ · Jul 2 at 5:25am
Edited on Jul 02 at 05:26 am
More jaw-dropping parody!
I want now to amend the candidate's question I proposed:
"Why should the American people continue to fund UN meetings such as the recently held International Conference of the Global Fight Against Terrorism, which was conducted in Iran, a country their own government identifies as a state sponsor of terrorism? How is such funding contributing to US national security?
Jun '10
Re: Press Release of the Week: So What?
It seems that Ambassador Grinius was exercising his gifts of embellished polite diplomatic prose in his departing remarks because one could boil them down to a more essential meaning: "This conference once had a noble purpose and accomplished some good things that may have helped make the world a safer place but now the entire bloody Conference is bloody irrelevant, a bloody joke and probably ought to bloody well vote itself out of existence".
Edited on Jul 2, 2011 at 10:49amMar '11
Re: Press Release of the Week: So What?
Ms. Berlinski I have difficulty comprehending your position on the UN. Plainly you are aware of all its' failings which are truly beyond parody yet you seem to believe that the organization retains some value and is worth supporting. The primary purpose of the UN in this day and age appears to be to legitimize the various thugs and other jumped up bandits who tyrannize all the worst spots on Earth. What can you possibly point to of sufficient import that the US should continue supporting this monstrosity?
Edited on Jul 2, 2011 at 11:29amAug '10
Re: Press Release of the Week: So What?
I forget who pointed it out years ago, but the UN is essentially a cartel whose sole purpose is maintaining status quo in state power. Once that is understood, UN willingness to treat every country's leadership the same, regardless of their insane policies, becomes less mysterious.
It's why the UN can't support revolts against oppressive regimes, why borders of failed states can't be changed, why human rights can never be a true focus. As soon as sovereignty is in question, the UN has no frame of reference for diplomatic dealings, and can't deal with a problem. It's worse than saying they can only think in diplomatic terms: real world conflicts have no language the UN can comprehend, and can only be handled in useless forums after being translated to bureaucratic speech.
May '11
Re: Press Release of the Week: So What?
How dysfunctional is a group when the only ongoing member-state whose comment I agree with comes from Iran?
Edited on Jul 3, 2011 at 5:26amMar '11
Re: Press Release of the Week: So What?
Staggering.
Mar '11
Re: Press Release of the Week: So What?
Hardly. Inevitable would be the more accurate description.