Samantha Power is the Obama administrations U.N. Envoy, and said to be one of its foremost champions of promoting human rights and militarised ‘humanitarian intervention’ – except when it comes to the human rights of oppressed Palestinians of course, given she has pledged to ‘defend Israel tirelessly’ as part of her role.
And also when it comes to the rights of Pakistanis, Afghans and Yemenis, I suppose, given that we won’t be hearing her speak out against Obama’s drone campaign that is murdering and terrorizing them any time soon either.
Her remarks at a recent press conference, on ‘the security council that the world needs’, merit some brief attention:
‘Even in the wake of the flagrant shattering of the international norm against chemical weapons use, Russia continues to hold the council hostage and shirk its international responsibilities.
What we have learned, what the Syrian people have learned, is that the Security Council the world needs to deal with this crisis is not the Security Council we have’.
Yet we learn further down the article that ‘correspondents in St Petersburg say opponents of US military intervention appear to far outnumber supporters within the G20’.
Opinion polling also suggests widespread opposition to any U.S. lead military intervention among the general populations in north America, Europe and the Middle East. My hunch is that people probably aren’t falling over themselves to see it happen in south America, swathes of Africa or Asia either.
What Power likely means, then, when she says ‘the world’, is ‘the United States and anyone who agrees with us at a given time’. And maybe it’s a sign that she’s aware of just how isolated the U.S. is on this issue, that she has to dishonestly employ terms like ‘the world’ to try and give the Obama administrations deeply unpopular war mongering policies in regards to Syria the internationalist legitimacy that they so clearly lack.
Or to put it more briefly, Power may as well have said ‘Waah! Waah! Give us or own way or else!’.