05/18/2004: "Two for one!"

In a Harmonic Convergence of the inane, Kofi Annan of the UN and Samuel Kobia of the World Council of Churches got together Monday for some mutual admiration and some, well, inanity:

"On behalf of WCC member churches, I expressed admiration to Annan for his leadership role at a time when multilateralism is threatened and under attack," Kobia said after the meeting. The UN secretary-general acknowledged that both organizations' agendas are intertwined, and praised the partnership between them.

I wonder what UN agenda Kobia was talking about: the one where they try to force liberalized abortion on unwilling countries, or the one where they use peacekeeping operations to as cover for sex trade expansion, or perhaps the refugee camp administration program that allows such camps to be turned into military equipment collection points for terrorists, or mybe the one where Syria and Cuba become arbiters of human rights.

Regarding the Israel/Palestine conflict, Kobia shared the WCC assessment of the Road Map and Geneva Accords. While the first "does not comprise any original proposal that could help the two sides to overcome the bloody cycle of occupation, terrorism and retribution," the latter "stimulates the public opinions on both sides to overcome stereotypes and find a common understanding of respect for the other". Annan pointed out the need for cooperation between the WCC Ecumenical Accompaniment Programme in Palestine/Israel (EAPPI) and the UN Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East (UNRWA).

It is the latter agency that has allowed Palestinian terrorists to feel at home in the camps under their administration. As for the Geneva Accords, they were entered into by private parties and repudiated by both Israel and the Palestinian Authority, essentially called upon Israel to surrender to terror, and would guarantee the demise of the Jewish state through granting the right of return. I can tell why Kobia is so enthusiastic about them.

Annan encouraged a dialogue between civilizations, stressing that while Islam is isolated in Western countries Christian communities are in a difficult position in many Muslim countries.

In the West, Muslims are universally free to practice their religion without fear, are assiduously protected by governments, and at worst are exposed to the bigotry of a handful of nuts, all while in some places (for instance, Britain) Islamic fundamentalists openly recruit for jihad against their host nations. In the Muslim world, Christians are routinely denied the right to practice their religion, imprisoned, enslaved (in Sudan), or murdered (in Pakistan, Indonesia, Iran, Egypt, etc.). I can see why Annan thinks these are equivalent situations.

Kofi Annan and Samuel Kobia: separated at birth? You be the judge.