Here is some analysis by John Ivison of the Post:
...But he [President Bush] was critical of the performance of the UN. “The success of multilateralism is measured not merely by following a process, but by achieving results. The objective of the UN and other institutions must be collective security, not endless debate,” he said. “America and Canada helped create the United Nations, and because we remain committed to that institution we want it to be more than a League of Nations.” The invocation of the impotent and ineffective League shows the disdain in which Mr. Bush holds the UN. But he is clearly keen to reform it, rather than ignore it, and he appeared receptive to the idea of a new “muscular multilateralism” that Mr. Martin has been propounding for months.
The Prime Minister’s own contribution to the debate goes beyond mere UN reform. Based on his experience of the G20 finance ministers, he is suggesting the L20, a meeting of leaders from 20 nations where politicians can break free from the “briefing book syndrome.” Mr. Martin is often long on windy rhetoric and short on performance, but in this case he can point to a minor triumph in the President’s tacit endorsement of concerted international action. “I think there is an understanding that there has to be a new multilateralism. You saw it reflected in his [Bush’s] speech, when he said, ‘Let’s be effective, let’s get results.’ That is very, very important. There is an enormous amount of process [at the UN] and there ought to be a lot more focus on getting results.”
Mr Ivison gages the success of the visit by this:
One only had to look at a glum Stephen Harper, standing at the back of the press conference, to realize how successful it had been, blunting one of the Conservative leader’s most effective lines of attack.
