A new book critically looks at the UN, and in particular the role of Mr. Annan during the genocides in Rwanda, Srebrenica and Darfur.
An extensive 3 page review and article on the book can be found here:
The book certainly looks interesting, and I hope to read it one of these days.
I've been very critical, and I believe with justification, of the role the UN played in Rwanda and Srebrenica. (Or, I guess "lack of role" might be a much more apt phrase). However, I'm not sure if the problem can be layed strictly at Annan's feet; or if it is a problem with the UN in general.
And I'm a person who is very supportive of the idea of the UN and of the principles of the UN.
I don't know if perhaps the problem is something as simple as the fact that when you have such a large organization with so many different interests, it is difficult to have results and achieve the goals set by the UN?
Perhaps that is an over simpliciation.