What else would we expect Gareth Evans to say about an incompetent organisation he is part of?

Only the UN and NGO's can stop the war-mongers, through lawfully pursuing alternative peaceful methods of dispute resolution, and not simplistically adopting illegal force and violence. Gareth has done good service for a peaceful world. It is also the only way to succeed economically, as modern warfare bankrupts both nations and those who wage it.

Leigh, I concur with your sentiments about this matter.

In answer to the question that you posed, might I suggest it is "FIGJAM".

There is so much I'd like to say here to Mr Evans and even more about his beloved benefactor, the UN. However, with respect to all, I shall bite my tongue and hold my peace.

I'd really like to let loose now, but I'm not going to.

But by golly, I wish...

Does it really make any difference whether it's Gareth Evans or the Easter Bunny talking? The point is that peace is achievable and appears to be in the process of happening. There must be many more countries willing to stay their hands these days and that's good news regardless of who's telling the story. Isn't it?

I agree, "peace is achievable and appears to be in the process of happening." But I believe that this is happening in spite of the UN, not through some actions it is taking. I also believe that there are several branches of the UN - UNICEF, UNIFEM - who are actively causing social mayhem and conflict, destroying peace and creating violence where they do their work. Also, we are yet to get to the bottom of this "oil for food" scandal. And what corruption is going to surface next?

There is much mendacity within the UN and I believe it has outlived any usefulness it once served and is working against peace. I believe it is rife with corruption, has been infiltrated by ideologues and is now an instrument of lies, hate and political manipulation. Any credibility it once may have had is gone. I am not alone in this view.

The claims here of Evans, taking credit for world peace inflames my sensibilities. It is no coincidence that peace broke out globally about the time the great Marxist USSR collapsed. That was caused by an economic collapse, not a diplomatic knitting circle.

Want world peace? Trash the UN and start something new.

I noticed this article in a printed form for both a personal interest-related topic and a way the words its author plays.

DUALISM of the UN is a common feature a general public usually omits.

The UN is 1) an international forum for exchanging ideas and projects by national governments -a UN GA and the SC 2) a tool supposed to implement these ideas and projects into practice -a UN system of agencies.

Too often privileged bureaucrats employed at well paid no personal responsibility positions at the UN system try making history by them. It is understood, ANYONE pushes a NATIONAL agenda at the UN if even implementing the Security Council resolutions, because making these resolutions discredited or unworkable is a job itself.

Surely, inter-governments' cooperation is the most of a peaceful world, while mechanism has been in limbo to make implementing the international resolutions, an international staff being accountable for the operative deeds.

Recent oil-for-food program affairs are a clear example of. It is good, that the USA continuingly demonstrate such a strong position in the case, but the Balkans might be even more surprising as it is a playground of ALL major players - the MOST CIVILIZED and LAW-OBIDIENT DEMOCRACIES, ho-ho-ho