The remote, mist-wreathed Hindu temple of Preah Vihear is not an obvious place to start a war. Lost in the jungly Dangrek highlands of the Thai-Cambodian frontier, it hasn't seen much activity since its heyday in the 11^th century. Until recently the only visitors were intrepid, saffron-robed monks, or the occasional smuggler or refugee.

But now it is the epicentre of a military conflict which has seen a series of bloody skirmishes, and the killing of two Cambodian soldiers. The international fracas could, very easily, flare up until full-scale war between the two South-East Asian countries.

Why?

Contempt for the United Nations' professed values and institutions is no barrier to diplomatic grandeur at the organization's Turtle Bay headquarters.  Quite the opposite, in fact. An increasing number of UN member states scorn its founding documents - the Charter, Universal Declaration of Human Rights and the Genocide Convention. These states, dubbed the ‘The Abusers Club' by human rights activists, are drawn mainly from the developing, Arab, and Islamic worlds. They are co-ordinating their assault on human rights and political freedoms with increasing, and disturbing, success, say UN sources.

Adam LeBor is an author and journalist based in Budapest. His most recent book is Complicity with Evil: The United Nations in the Age of Modern Genocide.

When the Barack Obama World Tour arrived in Baghdad last month, the candidate, wearing shades and a cool suit, smiled and waved before descending the stairs from the plane. Later the Senator toured the city, and sat for interview with reporters. In shirt-sleeves, he gamely sunk a basketball shot from far out at the three-point line before grabbing a mike to address troops who assembled to cheer him on, and applauded wildly.  (His shot caught only the net, no rim or backboard. Truly the man has a light shining upon him.)

What we did NOT ever see was the candidate wearing a flak jacket, because during his time there he never needed to put one on.

Until a few days ago, the history of the European Union’s engagement with Serbia was a dispiriting one. The EU, having failed catastrophically over Bosnia in 1992-1995, sought a ‘second chance’ in the Balkans, by throwing itself into the reconstruction of Bosnia and bringing Serbia closer to Europe. It promptly failed again, or was in danger of doing so, because it had abandoned strict conditionality in permitting association talks with Serbia.

Dr Brendan Simms is Professor in the History of International Relations at the Centre of International Studies at the University of Cambridge and co-President of the Henry Jackson Society.

Last Wednesday's pageantry in Beirut celebrating the return of Samir Kuntar marked a black day for Lebanon. It is hardly the first time an Arab terror outfit has held a street party for murderers - sweets were handed out in plenty of Arab capitals on 9/11. Still, it was surprising to see the participation of many members of Lebanon's pro-democracy March 14 movement, like Prime Minister Fouad Siniora who has become a significant US ally over the last three years. Now, Lebanon's friends in the international community, especially in Washington, who backed March 14's struggle and looked to it as a model alternative to the bin Laden version of the Middle East, must re-evaluate their continued support.

Still, not all Lebanese took part in the festival for a child-murderer.

Lee Smith is a visiting fellow at the Hudson Institute where he specializes in Levant affairs

The presidential contest currently under way in the US has generated unprecedented interest in the UK and Europe. Were it left to us on this side of the pond, Barack Obama would win with a landslide. On account of his youth, his colour and his relatively liberal views, Obama is the darling of Europe's liberals, while not only they, but also European conservatives widely look forward to his presidency as a welcome departure from the hawkish, abrasive unilateralism of George W. Bush's administration. Yet while Obama as US president would be likely to go down well with the European and, indeed, the world public, this would above all be for the negative reason that - like Clinton before him - he probably would not do very much in the field of foreign affairs. By not rocking the boat or rapping knuckles, a President Obama would appease European liberals and conservatives alike. But by the same token, he may prove inadequate in meeting very real threats to peace and stability in Europe.

In West Africa they describe people who waste money as being “as stupid as a white man.” As if to prove their point, the so-called ‘donor’ nations of the affluent industrialised West are changing the way they give their aid to less developed countries. Instead of allocating money, with conditions attached, for specific projects, such as building roads or schools, we increasingly allow the recipients to decide how to spend it. This is because ‘conditionality’ is viewed as colonialist and ‘confrontational,’ to borrow the jargon of the aid industry. This new fashion for unconditional aid is led by Britain’s Department for International Development (DFID) and it comes in the form of “Budget Support”.

It is the most recent in a long line of initiatives, dating back to the 1950s, aimed at “building capacity,” ostensibly enabling developing countries to run themselves more efficiently and openly.

Rebecca Tinsley is director of Waging Peace