There was a perception of a time when there was considered a moral right that roughly aligned with what we term the West. And, axiomatically, we were obliged to fight any alternative — in particular, the perceived “axis of evil”.

I remember Margaret Thatcher delivering a strong speech 20-plus years ago about values taken for granted, and that we may lose. The rule of law and pursuit of justice, she would argue, are the foundation of Western civilisation.

In the mid-20th century, after two world wars, civilised nations agreed there needed to be a basic agreement among nations about what constitutes civility. Thus, the United Nations was born. Understandably, the nature of the international agreements is by consenting parties. Nevertheless, it is with full understanding that each entity has brought the founding values and principles to bear.

Although the UN is ratified and fully functional as an international body, its role and capacity to deliver on any of its resolutions and mandates is limited. As a result, when observing the UN and its mandates over its many years, they may appear schizophrenic.

The existing structure of the UN is inadequate for the times. The world of man and nations has become too evolved and intricate to operate off old, overarching imperial leaning. One solution is more democracy; there are many more needs, but democracy would be a good start. There needs to be an end to any preferred or special rank of national significance or importance.

For example, all members of the UN Security Council must agree for a security resolution to pass. The UN General Assembly, in its most recent vote, had 23 significant parties abstain. This happens often.

What is the point here when this is supposed to be a global body brought together to resolve global affairs? Does one monkey stop the show?

In 1947, the UN passed a resolution to recognise the state of Israel, and it seems obvious that this General Assembly is set to approve a Palestinian state. There is an abundance of resources available and ready to completely rebuild Gaza. This should be done with an agreed peace plan that is acceptable to the Palestinian people.

The new Palestine does not need an army and certainly has no need for a failed jihadist ideology that has no place in the modern world.

We began with the question of the moral right and whether the West can bear the burden of its title.

I think it is fair to conclude in so far as human morality is concerned, there is no moral East or West, North or South. We have to arrive at the true positions rationally.