Aside from that, this very slanted and partial attempt at global governance and global policing is going to further isolate the UN. I recall how almost as soon as the cologne & Campari technocrats of the UN moved in to set up their management HQ in Baghdad, soon after the invasion, their place was totally leveled and they lost many people in that bombing, including one of their most illustrious technocrat, Sergio Vieira de Mello. What amazed me is how the UN assumed that locals would not want harsh revenge after the UN’s awful record in its sanctions regime against Iraq. Multiply that history a few more times, and pretty soon the UN will be seen by many more people as a body for the rich and powerful, with some Third World spectators and occasional performers to add some colour to the proceedings.

I apologize if my English is not clear enough.

Max, you note how we have shifted away from the Peacekeeping role, and you’re quite right, we have. But, I would suggest that the Peacekeeping role itself was a post-WW II artifact of Cold War politics and, once the environment changed, so to did the role of various national militaries.

What concerns me and, I think, you too, is how R2P will be used as an excuse to carve up the globe in a manner similar to how it was done in the 19th century. While it bothers me in too many ways to go into right now, one of those is that it could easily, IMO, fail in the short run and, through the process of failing, destroy the societies that are involved in it.