By VIRGINIA JASMIN PASALO
UN resuscitation: condemns
After not being consulted in the decisions for world peace and human rights, the United Nations (UN) is now being resorted to as relevant, by the member-countries in the UN Security Council who have huge stakes in Iran.
The United Nations Security Council Resolution 2817 (2026) condemned Iran’s “egregious attacks” against the Gulf states (Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, UAE) and Jordan during the 2026 Iran war. The resolution was sponsored by Bahrain, and received approval from 13 members, while China and Russia abstained from voting (adopted 11 March 2026). It did not condemn the United States (US) and Israel for the unprovoked attack on Iran and the killing of approximately 168 girls, mostly aged 7 to 12, when a school was bombed while classes were in session.
The resolution invoked Article 51 self-defense rights, “which is notable framing that legitimizes the US-Israeli strikes in the preamble while focusing all condemnation solely on Iran’s retaliatory attacks”.
The first title I thought of for this article was “UN resurrection: condemns Iran” but resurrection has some theological dimension to it, a transition to a new, eternal, incorruptible and transformed life beyond the laws of nature, which the UN was not intended to be. Then I recapitulated and found a more appropriate term, resuscitation. Resuscitation is the “temporary revival of a person who has fainted, nearly died, or died, returning them to their previous, mortal life” which the UN seems to be.
The UN can resuscitate and die again by the will of the superpowers and their allies. It was clear that it was going to be supplanted with the creation of US President Trump’s Board of Peace, which puts him as chairman-for-life in the charter, independent of his presidency. For these very reasons, other countries declined their invitation to join. Vatican’s refusal was announced by Cardinal Pietro Parolin citing the following reasons:
2. The organizational structure puts Trump at the helm of the Board of Peace in perpetuity;
3. The joining fee of $1billion dollars is not the task of the church;
4. Colonialist operation in Palestine, others deciding for Palestinians;
5. Vatican’s unique diplomatic identity takes a moral stand and pursues independent mediation over institutional alignment with any single government. Membership is contrary to Vatican’s long-standing practice that distances itself from alignment with the foreign policy of any single nation-state.
The irony of the situation is not lost to observers: Pope Leo XIV, the first US-born pope who has made peacemaking a central part of his papacy, declining a US President’s invitation to his peace board.
In the unprovoked war that the US and Israel had started, where the war could extend beyond its intended timeline and could not be sustained in the long-term, it is in the best interest of the aggressors to resuscitate a globally-recognized institution for a diplomatic exit. Until it is expedient to “bury” it again.