A QUESTION OF MORALITY

UN condemns N. Korean rights abuses
World Tribune

UNITED NATIONS — A United Nations committee has powerfully condemned North Korea’s human rights record. In a tough resolution before the General Assembly’s Social and Humanitarian committee, the document expressed serious concern about “widespread and grave” human rights abuses by the retro-Stalinist dictatorship.

Powerfully condemned, tough resolution, serious concern.... all well and good, but now what?

The vote on the European Union sponsored resolution in itself was quite telling—84 to 22 with 62 abstentions. In other words the European countries, the U.S., Canada and most of Latin America backed the human rights resolution. The most surprising supporters of the document—brace yourself—Syria and Serbia.

I don't know about anyone else..... but 62 abstensions? Isn't that a rather high number of abstensions?

Those voting "NO": North Korea, Belarus, Cuba, Islamic Iran, People’s China, Russia, Venezuela, Uzbekistan and Zimbabwe.

South Korea was one country that abstained. Appeasement and the lack of political will to condemn its hostile neighbor were most likely underlying factors in this non-vote.

The other 61 countries abstaining probably don't want to get involved in finger pointing. How does that saying go? "When you point a finger at someone, there are 4 fingers pointing back."

It's best to stick your head in the sand. That's what the UN is all about, is it not?

It has been reported that, “Satellite maps of North Korea show prison camps the size of whole cities, and a country that at night is clothed almost in complete darkness.” North Korea has no real exportable value, has countrywide food shortages because of its collective farms, widespread malnutrition, and prevalent infant mortality.

So shall such a resolution really change much in North Korea’s hermit Kingdom? Cynics will quickly say that such international pressures will harden the repression.

No. A UN resolution won't change anything. That's the problem with any "global" governing body under any name - United Nations - League of Nations - Nations of the Collective - or any other moniker you want to come up with. Just what kind of pressure can you apply that will be effective on a nation that knowingly, willingly, and ecstatically abuses its citizens?

.....but should the world community knowingly and willfully look the other way from this terror, what does that say about our own morality?

Good question indeed. What does that say about our morality or that of UN? Just what is the purpose of the UN?