Why Kerry’s U.N. can’t fight terror
Short answer: they have no means for discerning a viable definition of terrorism given the conflicting ideologies of their member states.
Wretchard at Belmont Club, one of the most respected blogs on matters of the war and its conduct, looks at the U.N.’s attempt to define terrorism as part of a resolution condemning all terrorist acts. He points out that the language they use could just as easily be used to condemn Israel or the United States as it could Hamas or the Chechen thugs responsible for Beslan.
An article that Wretchard cites, by Joshua Muravchik at the American Enterprise Institute points to the fact that fifty-six of the 191 member nations of the U.N. are members of the Organization of the Islamic Conference, which “defends terrorism as a right.”
I can see how that could make drafting meaningful anti-terrorism resolutions difficult.
