Welcome to European Tribune. It's gone a bit quiet around here these days, but it's still going.
It's 2.00am in Canberra, so I'm off to bed.

Anyone want to bet that the White House would like to have a fight at the UN this week to distract attention from Katrina?

by canberra boy (canberraboy1 at gmail dot com) on Mon Sep 12th, 2005 at 11:57:48 AM EST
Posting about Bolton and then going to bed...hope you don't have bad dreams.

This is a very significant meeting, and I wonder if there will be a rebellion against Bolton on this? I don't know UN protocol at all, but can the other nations just reject the motions he has made? I suppose the threat is that Bush will just not pay the UN fees (which is the barrel the UN has always been over with the US...money).

"Once in awhile we get shown the light, in the strangest of places, if we look at it right" - Hunter/Garcia

by whataboutbob on Mon Sep 12th, 2005 at 12:29:52 PM EST
[ Parent ]
But hasn't the US been withholding the money anyway? I seem to remember something in that direction. What if the world would ignore and maybe even exclude the US. I know, I know... not very realistic, but it really could or should be an option. It would be interesting to see what the Bush would do. I mean the US depends just as much, or even more on the world, as the world does on the US. Well, I guess a girl might dream as sometimes dreams come true. :-)
by Fran on Mon Sep 12th, 2005 at 12:40:37 PM EST
[ Parent ]
Yes, US has been withholding money.  The way these meetings work is that the negotiation occurs over an acceptable text for a communiqué.  Because it has to be agreed by every country, you get a lowest-common-denominator outcome.  As Bob pointed out, the threat is that the US would walk away if the rest of the world ganged up on them.  Most countries wouldn't want that.
by canberra boy (canberraboy1 at gmail dot com) on Mon Sep 12th, 2005 at 05:31:34 PM EST
[ Parent ]


Top Diaries

Occasional Series