The Telegraph reports that the UN has, as usual, failed to decide whether their "peacekeeping" force in the Democratic Republic of Congo (why is it that any country with the word "democratic" in it never is?) needs more troops.
The head of UN Peacekeeping operations Alain Le Roy said it was unlikely the council would arrive at a decision on the UN mission, known as MONUC, before the end of the month.
Wow - that quick, eh? Only another couple of weeks to go before they actually get round to deciding whether or not something needs to be done. It's not as if much can happen in that time is it?
Surely the whole point of a "peacekeeping force" is to keep peace? If it is not managing to do that then surely the force either needs to be increased or, failing that, be a little more aggressive in enforcing the warring factions to withdraw a bit until that peace can be assured. Mr Le Roy doesn't think so.
"The priority is (defending) Goma," he said.
Why? Is it the job of the UN to support a government against a rebel force? I thought they weren't supposed to get involved in internecine disputes? I thought the purpose of the UN in cases like this was to protect the civilian population, not the seat of government.
The UN is now nothing more than a useless nuisance. Useless because it doesn't actually manage to achieve what it sets out to achieve and a nuisance because it frequently prevents the forces of good taking action against the forces of evil.
It is bureaucratic, undemocratic and sclerotic. As such it has outlived its usefulness and should be dissolved.