Black line
Up ITG home
Black line
Info centre
  Subscriptions
Email Responces
Feedback Form
Dawa Tips
Misconceptions
About Us
Black line
Comparitive RE
Solutions for Britian
Who is Racist?
Your Magazine
News
Contact



Email a page icon Email Us
Bookmark Icon Bookmark
newsletter Newsletter
Site map icon Site Map
If you feel ITG Website is useful and wish to donate toward future development, it would be very appreciated...
Muslims work for its revival and gain rewards from Allah(swt).  
     



The UN a tool of exploitation by the Colonialists
:
Muslims must realise how this organisation functions and how it is used against the Muslim Nation, i.e YOU!

The Reality on the Ground!

The UN a tool of exploitation by the Colonialists
Let us be in no doubt that the Capitalist world with the US and UK at its helm are colonialist countries; right from the very top colonialism runs through their veins and blinkers their relationship with all and sundry. Hence it came as not shock to the aware Muslim politicians when Tony Blair’s foreign policy adviser Robert Cooper said, ‘The challenge to the postmodern world is to get used to the idea of double standards...when dealing with more old-fashioned kinds of states outside the postmodern continent of Europe (Muslim world no-doubt included), we need to revert to the rougher methods of an earlier era - force, preemptive attack, deception, whatever is necessary to deal with those who still live in the nineteenth century world of every state for itself...when we are operating in the jungle, we must also use the laws of the jungle…What is needed then is a new kind of imperialism...’[Robert Cooper, ‘The New Liberal Imperialism’, 2002].

Indeed this view is hardly a recent development, even when Britain had lost most of her colonies, she still fanatically refused to denounce colonialism and, with dreams of a future resurrection of her colonialist empire, voted against a general assembly UN resolution 2326 (16/2/1967) which called for colonialism to be denounced as a ‘Crime against humanity’.

The Capitalist world has been legitimising her brutality by using the United Nations, therefore the astute Muslim politician should appreciate the reality of the United Nations and the subsequent Islamic verdict.

The United Nations is a colonialist tool, created by them, used by them and eventually will be discarded by them once it has outlived its use-by date. In this article we shall focus on the United Nations which is the contemporary bastion of the concept of international law. We shall elaborate with meticulous precision the mechanics of how the UN is a colonialist tool and present some pertinent case studies.


Structure of United Nations
There exists a spectrum of views on the colonialist nature of the UN, on one extreme the sycophants suggesting that the UN is a non-biased internationally represented institution boasting a membership of 191 members, whereas on the other extreme there is the view of the conspiracy theorists who suggest that the entire corpus of the UN comprises of spies and agents all subservient to the whims of the colonialist US. The UN is structured in a way, deliberately by it’s founders, such that it used as a tool which legitimises neo-colonialism.

By examining the various organs of the UN (http://www.un.org/aboutun/chart.html) the two bodies charged with adopting resolutions (ie laws/edicts) are the ‘General Assembly’ and the so-called ‘Security Council’.

As for the General Assembly the UN describes its remit as follows, “The General Assembly is the main deliberative organ of the United Nations. It is composed of representatives of all member states, each of which has one vote. Decisions on important questions, such as those on peace and security, admission of new members and budgetary matters, require a two-thirds majority. Decisions on other questions are reached by a simple majority. These decisions may be adopted without a vote, or with a vote, which may be recorded, non-recorded or by roll-call.” Then comes the sting in the tail, the text continues, “While the decisions of the Assembly have no legally binding force for Governments, they carry the weight of world opinion on major international issues, as well as the moral authority of the world community.”[source: [http://www.un.org/ga/57/about.htm] This poses a great problem for advocates of the UN route as a practical method for solving problems. The views of 176 out of 191 members of the United Nations who are part of the General assembly carry absolutely “no legal binding force for governments”.

As for the functions of the General Assembly, the aforementioned source mentions 9 bullet points, extracting the all-important initial verbs, the text reads as follows: “- to consider and make recommendations, - to discuss, - to discuss, - to initiate studies and make recommendations, - to make recommendations, -to receive and consider reports”. A more realistic (compound) noun for the ‘General Assembly’ would be ‘Talk-Shop’ since not a single function denotes any form of firm action! The most authoritative task of the ‘General Assembly’ is to approve the UN budget and elect the non-permanent members of the ‘Security Council’! Hence we can see how the views of 176 out of 191 (92%) of UN members are automatically irrelevant since all they can do is discuss and debate and even the conclusions of their perpetual discussions have “no legal binding force for governments”. A good example of this was how the UK treated UN General Assembly resolution 1810 adopted on 17/12/1962 setting up the ‘UN committee on Decolonisation’ which consisted of 24 primarily third world countries. Britain withdrew from the committee on 11/01/1971 stating, “In the case of resolution 1810, the UK did not accept the right of the United Nations to interfere in the administration of territories [ie colonies] for which the UK was responsible”. Britain hence refused to co-operate with this UN resolution and blocked all attempts of the committee to visit British colonies in Seychelles and St. Helena. The justification for the effective snub? “...the UK did not accept the right of the United Nations to interfere in the administration of territories [ie colonies] for which the UK was responsible”. A good example of what the Colonialist UN means by the phrase “the decisions of the Assembly [92% of members] have no legally binding force for Governments”!

As for the second body charged with the responsibility of adopting resolutions, it is the ‘Security Council’. “The Council has 15 members-- five permanent members and 10 elected by the General Assembly for two-year terms”. Unlike the ‘General Assembly’, the Security Council is where real power is vested since its resolutions are binding on all member states. Furthermore amongst the powers of the security council are, “ - to take military action against an aggressor” and “- to call on Members to apply economic sanctions and other measures not involving the use of force to prevent or stop aggression” [http://www.un.org/Docs/scinfo.htm].

Thus, as with the current case with Iraq, the Security Council can authorise military action. Clearly, therefore, power lies within this Security Council so what is the nature of this Body? 15 members, 5 of whom are ‘Permanent Members’. The five Permanent Members hold an exclusive veto allowing them veto absolutely any resolution even if every other member votes for it! Who are the permanent five? US, UK, France, Russia, and China.

Hence it is manifestly apparent from the inherent structure of this institution that it legitimises whole scale abuse by the 5 exclusive-club ‘Permanent Members’. Given this, what is to stop the US from invading another sovereign country and then using its veto to block any resolution forwarded containing denouncement for her belligerence? Hyper-convoluted fiction? No. Reality. In 1989 The US vetoed a Security Council resolution condemning her own belligerence! How convenient, indeed the US has exclusively vetoed no fewer than 20 resolutions since 1983. Robin Theurkauf, Visiting Fellow at Yale University and wife of one of the September 11 victims, was correct when she stated that, ‘We in the US like international law, specifically we like other nations to obey. However it is the height of hypocrisy to demand that others live up to their obligations while we aggressively reject the notion that we should submit to a legitimate international system of laws as part of a community of nations’ [Milan Rai, ‘War Plan Iraq’ p.205]. And the UN is what legitimises this shameful neo-colonialism.


Attempts to Ratify Charter Thwarted by Colonialists
The exclusive five, at its helm the US and UK, actively work to sabotage any attempts to ratify the UN charter which would threaten their colonialist ambitions.

In 1972, the Secretary General (incidentally, approved by the ‘Security Council’) requested all members of the UN to submit ideas for updating the charter. Suggestions forwarded included increasing the permanent members of the Security Council (who wield the all-important veto), potential candidates being India and Japan, and limiting the scope of the veto. The British worked to sabotage this plan to limit the ability of the colonialists and were prepared to veto any resolution calling for ratification of the UN charter. On this occasion, it was the USSR (Russia) who led the charge for the exclusive five with British secret documents from 1972 stating, “This effective...Soviet Veto has suited us very well. While the last thing [we want] is any general review which would call into question our own and the French status as permanent members, we have been able to appear less flatly negative...” With breathtaking impertinence in a letter to the Secretary General on 30/6/1972 the British stated “Our real reason for opposing the charter review is a fear that it may threaten our position as permanent members of the security council” [source: Public Records Office (PRO): FCO 58/677]. The Muslims are correct when they state that the UN was created and maintained by the Kuffar to subjugate the Ummah and the third world. With an open heart we request the sincere in the Ummah to take heed of these glaring realities and desist from aiding the colonialist by calling for UN resolutions.


Case Study: UN in Palestine
The UN being the colonialists’ tool as highlighted has caused millions of Muslims to die and presides over the massacres of the innocent. It was the UN who created Israel with UN General Assembly Resolution 181 (Partition Plan) 29/11/1947.

Furthermore it is the UN who sat by as a spectator when men and women, young and old, weak and strong were being massacred by their creation – Israel. Indeed the UN has failed to act and is inherently biased and favours the United States’ interests. Amongst incidents that the UN has refused to pass as resolutions are those that:

  1. Condemn Israeli action in southern Lebanon. S/16732
  2. Deplore ‘repressive measures’ by Israel against Arab population. S/19459.
  3. Condemn Israeli practices against civilians in southern Lebanon. S/17000.
  4. Calls upon Israel to respect Muslim holy places. S/17769/Rev. 1
  5. Draft strongly deplored repeated Israeli attacks against Lebanese territory and other measures and practices against the civilian population; [S/19434]
  6. Strongly deplored Israeli policies and practices in the occupied territories, and strongly deplored also Israel's continued disregard of relevant Security Council decisions.
  7. Call for UN Observers Force in West Bank, Gaza [27/3/2001]
  8. Condemned acts of terror, demanded an end to violence and the establishment of a monitoring mechanism to bring in observers. [15/12/2001]

Not only did the UN create Israel but it refuses to condemn its barbaric activities. It cannot even agree to send non-military observers to merely observe the situation! Compare this scenario to Iraq, and how they swiftly the UN mobilised to attack.


Case study: UN in Bosnia
Let us reacquaint ourselves with the events in Bosnia during the 90s.
The UN placed an arms embargo over Bosnia leaving the aggressor Serbs (backed by Serbia) with tanks, heavy artillery, mortars and ammunition and the Muslims with mere machineguns thus denying them the basic right to defend themselves.

During the natural subsequent massacres and gang-rapes of Muslims, the UN set up “safe havens” in an attempt to appease world opinion demanding the lifting of sanctions to allow the Muslims to defend themselves. In one such UN “safe haven” the UN French general famously reassured “You are now under the protection of the UN forces”, the few guns the Muslims did have, were taken away from the Muslims by the UN. The result:

Serbs came and bombed, shelled, overran the enclave, “peace keepers” did nothing, mass gang rape ensued, at least 8,000 Muslims massacred and mutilated.

Serb “captors at one point complained that they were not getting a good choice of the Muslim women from Srebrenica” [David Rohde]

Worse still, the UN not only created circumstances which facilitated the gang-rape of Muslim women but actually directly facilitated the Serbs, a summary of the UN “peace keepers”’ actions is presented in outlines:

A secret deal was made between General Janvier [head of UN forces] and General Mladic [Serb] in Zvornik on June 4, 1995, prior to the massacre;
The intrigue and collaboration among Akashi [UN], Mladic, and Milosevic as the massacre was occurring;

The handing over by the Dutch Battalion [UN] of unarmed Muslims to Mladic as Dutch commanders drank champagne with General Mladic;

“General Van der Wind's [UN] debriefing specifies that on the second day of the handover of the Muslims, 13 July , ‘Dutchbat transferred 30,000 litres of fuel to the BSA [Bosnian Serb Army] in accordance with Mladic's demands’"

“Professor Mark Almond wrote: ‘At the same time, the Dutch ministry of defence was busy shredding evidence of its dealings with the Serb general to get its men away, vital video evidence went 'missing' -- thought Serb television showed enough pictures of Dutch officers drinking champagne with Mladic to make one despair at their subsequent promotion in the Nato hierarchy’."

[http://www.haverford.edu/relg/sells/srebrenica/srebrenica.html (B.Jagger’s report)]

With such overwhelming evidence proving the United Nation’s accessory to murder and gang-rape, the Secretary General Kofi Annan, in a cheap PR stunt, was forced to ‘apologise’ for the behaviour of the UN stating that the UN ''gave the Security Council the impression that the situation was under control. ... The day before Srebrenica fell, we reported that the Serbs were not attacking, when they were. We reported that the Bosnians had fired on Unprofor blocking positions, when it was the Serbs. We failed to mention urgent requests for airpower.''

So the colonialists disarm the Muslims guaranteeing protection their security, sip champagne with the Gang-rapists and murderers, hand over Muslim women and children for execution, supply fuel to the Serbs to drive the trucks which shipped the Muslims to their mass-graves, write letters advising against the use of air strikes against the Serbs and then offer apologies later on as if it were a moments rash decision!


The Ummah must desist from calling for UN resolutions
With such a shocking expose of the reality of this tool, it is bamboozling to still hear some fringe elements calling for its application! ‘Maslaha’ (Benefit) they cry, where there is nothing even remotely resembling benefit. From its charter to its structure to its policies it smacks of colonialism, hegemony, domination and humiliation. Furthermore the concept of acting on the basis of benefit is from the Sunnah of Nicolo Machiavelli who expounded in his treatise on statecraft, ‘The Prince’ that expediency should be the basis of actions:

“In the actions of all men…we must look to the end. Let a prince, therefore win victories and uphold his state; his methods will always be considered worthy”, hence the dictum, ‘the ends justifies the means’.

The ‘Ulema of the past were very strong in rebuking the ignorant who called for benefit in place of the revealed sources. One of the great Islamic Jurists of the past, Imam Shatibi (ra), stated in his treatise, “Al-Muwaffaqat fee Al-Usul al-akham” on page 25 that, “The objective behind the Shari’ah is to liberate the individuals from his desires in order to be a true slave of Allah and that is the legitimate maslaha (benefit)…Violating the Shari’ah under the pretext of following the basic objectives/values (maqaasid) of the Shari’ah is like the one who cares about the spirit without the body, and since the body without the spirit is useless, therefore the spirit without the body is useless too”.

Furthermore Rafi’ bin Khadij nartated that,

The Messenger of Allah forbade us from something which was beneficial (naafi’) for us but Obedience to Allah and his Messenger is more beneficial (anfa’)” [Sahih al-Muslim].

Even the few scholars who did except that maslaha is a legitimate source of law were fervent in shackling the principle lest it be used as a carte-blanche to justify absolutely anything (as is happening today). They laid down conditions, 1) It must not contradict anything in the Qur’an, Sunnah, Ijmaa as Sahaba or Qiyas and 2) The benefit must be Haqiqi (real). Therefore from its basis Maslaha is invalid, even those scholars in the past who did accept maslaha, would reject the UN because definitely it is not in the interest of the Muslims (!) and it definitely contradicts established texts. (For further evidences refer to Khilafah Magazine Jan 2003, article “The astute Comprehension of International law”)


Our Conduct vis-à-vis the UN
The United Nations is a weak institution which would easily collapse in the face of an intellectual exposé by a determined state. The British themselves fully appreciate this when they acknowledged that, “The UN is such a fragile organisation that any contentious dispute over its structure might weaken it further”.(PRO: FCO 58/677)

We Muslims should have the courage to declare the Truth and not be intimidated or acquiesce at the scoff of the sycophants. Indeed anything else would be cowardice and a severe negligence of our duty since Allah (swt) states:

Then We have put you (O Muhammad SAW) on a plain way of (Our) commandment (Shari’ah). So follow you that, and follow not the desires of those who know not” [TMQ Al-Jathiya:18]

It should not come as a surprise to us when we see some, even amongst the Muslims, rushing to the colonialists urging Muslims to support them since the Qur’an has warned mankind of the occurrence of such wretched people who appear deaf to reality and Guidance (al-Hudaa):

Say: ‘I warn you only by the revelation. But the deaf will not hear the call, (even) when they are warned” [TMQ Al-Anbiya:45]


Conduct of those able to destroy the colonialist UN
As for those who have the ability to destroy this “fragile organisation” and return the Glory to Al-Islam, they are the commanders of the Muslim armies ie the rulers. We read that they cannot even agree to convene a summit, yet alone expel US bases from Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Bahrain amongst others - such is their slavish compliance! Writing in the NY times (19/2/2003), Stephen Myers notes that, “Saudi Arabia's foreign minister, Saud al-Faisal, said in remarks published today that he saw no need for an emergency summit meeting, expressing concern that the divisions among Arab states might not be surmountable. Officials in Lebanon, which currently holds the league's rotating chairmanship, were also reported to oppose the summit meeting.”

These coward rulers have no intention of marching out and defending the honour of the Muslims, they have afforded the colonialists every last service, they only mobilise their armies to spread sedition amongst the Ummah, imprisoning them and intimidating them:

“And if they had intended to march out, certainly, they would have made some preparation for it, but Allah was averse to their being sent forth, so He made them lag behind, and it was said (to them), ‘Sit you among those who sit (at home). Had they marched out with you, they would have added to you nothing except disorder, and they would have hurried about in your midst (spreading corruption) and sowing sedition among you, and there are some among you who would have listened to them…” [TMQ at-Taubah:46-47]

Let us not be those who listen to them, and let us not be the idle spectators who silently witness the massacre of our Brothers in Iraq. We Muslims in the UK, can take a lead in exposing the fallacy of the UN, and showing how it is a tool for the colonialists. In conclusion, the fact that the UN is a colonialist tool is well-known, but we have elucidated the detailed mechanics of the process by which it enforces hegemony, humiliation and oppression. From its structuring to its charter to its policies, all are geared to furthering the cause of colonialism. Let us, therefore, discharge our Islamic duty and renounce the UN, expose it, and rally the Ummah together to create an alternative – the Shari’ah law – the Khilafah!

Source: Sabure Malik, Khilafah Magazine March 2003 Edition

 
We Welcome your
   
Comments & Suggestions
If you have any comments or suggestions with regard to any content found on this site, or wish to subscribe to our mailing list. Fill in the for and raise your points of view. We thank you for your participation and will respond to your suggestions and comments in due course.
 
Type of Responce
 
 

Your E-mail Address:

 

 

Your Name:

 

 

 Please send  us your comments:

  

  Want to make a donation?
 

 

   

Khilafah II

This sequal will dominate world politics for all mankind, forever.



and more...

 
Website Change Control
Adobe Acrobat Reader
Macromedia Shockwave
Macromedia Flash
Macromedia Flash
 UK Newspapers
   Times Newspaper
   Guardian Unlimited
   Daily Telegraph
   Financial Times
   The Independent
   Tihe Observer
 
 Press Agencies
   Associated Press (AP)
   Associated FreePress
   ABC News
   BBC News Site 1 2 3 4
   Carlton TV
   CNN Site 1 2 3
   Fox News Network
   Times Newspaper
   Times Newspaper
   Times Newspaper
   Times Newspaper
 
 
 
 



UK2NET www.Islamic-truth.co.uk (domain)
Moved or broken link ? Email webmaster@islamic-truth.co.uk

Home | Feedback | Links | Discussion | Help | News | Audio Library | Resources | Mailing List | Magazine | Full Search
About ITG | Contact ITG | Privacy Statement | Legal Notices
NOTE: The views expressed in the content are those of the author and should not be interpreted as those of the Islamic Truth Group
.
2002 Islamic Truth Group | Acceptable Use Policy | Online Privacy | Data Protection