December 18, 1985: When the UN was able to Condemn Hostage-Taking
A genuine moment of global unity, or part of the UN’s propose of creating narratives for the masses?
On December 18, 1985, the United Nations Security Council unanimously adopted Resolution 579, condemning "acts of hostage-taking and abduction" as grave violations of international law. At the time, this resolution appeared to signal a rare moment of global unity, with the international community coming together to condemn terrorism. However, in hindsight, this resolution raises serious questions about the true motives and the real propose of the UN. Was this really a moment of global unity, or just another tool in the UN's ongoing narrative-shaping "diplomacy"?
Hostage-taking and plane hijackings was trending
Lets consider the context of the resolution and the 1980s. Hostage-taking and plane hijackings, primarily by Palestinian terrorists, was trending after the Iranian Hostage Crisis. One of such incidents, the hijacking of TWA Flight 847 in June 1985. Additionally, the 1980s were marked by a wave of kidnappings in Lebanon, where Western nationals, including journalists and diplomats, were kidnapped by terrorists aiming to leverage their captives for political gain, all this while at the United Nations Yasser Arafat, leader of a prescribed terrorist organization, was elevated and legitimized on the global stage. The hostage crisis and the constant hijackings fueled public pressure for a unified global response, which culminated in UNSC Resolution 579.
The Iran-Contra affair, was it really about hostages?
But the official narrative doesn’t match reality. The U.S., which strongly advocated for the resolution, was secretly transferring weapons to Iran, later revealed during the Iran-Contra Affair. The official narrative suggests that the transfer of weapons was part of a deal to secure the release of American hostages held in Lebanon. However, there is a critical flaw in this storyline.
The weapons transfers began months before a single hostage was even taken. While the official narrative claims that the transfer of weapons started in 1985, an investigation released by the New York Times in 1991 revealed that Reagan initiated the arms transfers in 1981. The decision had nothing to do with freeing hostages. No hostages had yet been taken in Lebanon, with the first hostages taken captive in 1982.
Is Iran really America's largest enemy, or simply America’s partner in crime?
Was the resolution merely a political maneuver to shape public opinion, giving the illusion of global action while political agendas advanced behind the scenes? Is Iran really America's enemy, or is America purposefully building a boogeyman while advancing its own global agendas and Iran is simply America’s partner in crime?
Fast forward to October 7, 2023, when Hamas launched a genocidal terror attack, murdering over 1,200 people and taking more than 250 hostages. The UN's response? Silence. Over 30 resolutions have been passed condemning Israel for defending itself since October 7th, 2023. Yet, the UN has issued no condemnation of Hamas’s barbaric actions. The UN is more focused in saving UNRWA, a terror infested agency, than saving its own UN employees from captivity in Yemen, taken hostage by the Houthis, more than six months ago.
A genuine moment of global unity, or part of the UN’s propose of creating narratives for the masses?
This stark contrast to its 1985 stance against hostage-taking exposes a deeper issue—either the UN has selectively outraged itself into moral bankruptcy, or it’s part of a much more dangerous game of shaping public perception. Is the UN truly a force for justice, or is it a tool for global terrorism? The UN is driven not by principles of justice, but by political maneuvering—colluding with enemies of peace to shape narratives and manipulating public opinion through endless resolutions and “reports”, specially against Israel, rather than reality. You should ask yourself, was the 1985 condemnation of hostage-taking a genuine moment of global unity, or was it simply another part of the UN’s ongoing efforts to create narratives for the masses? The answer for me is clear—the UN, then and now, has long been about shaping political narratives, not about upholding the principles of justice.
How much longer will countries like the U.S. continue to collude with its so-called “enemies”?
And just as troubling: How much longer will countries like the U.S. continue to collude with its so-called “enemies”, creating monsters in the process? Is Iran really America's enemy, or is America purposefully building for decades a boogeyman while advancing its own global agendas? This is further exemplified by the latest actions of the Biden administration, which, shortly after Trump’s election victory, secretly released another $10 billion dollars to Iran.
