The UN Is Irrelevant
by Charlie Rease
It's typical of the Bush team's polemical tactics to try to dismiss the
United Nations as irrelevant if it doesn't buckle to President Bush's
demands for an instant war against Iraq. It's also nonsense.
As for the hoopla about vetoes, the United States is second only to
the Soviet Union in exercising the U.N. veto. The score card,
compiled by the BBC News, is: the Soviet Union/Russia, 120 vetoes
(only two of those since the Soviet Union collapsed); the United
States, 76 vetoes — 35 used to block criticism of Israel (that old
double standard has the United States in its grip); the United
Kingdom, 32 vetoes, of which 23 were votes cast with the United
States; France, 18 vetoes, 13 of which were in support of the United
States' position; and China, 5 vetoes.
You should know that the United Nations, established at the end of
World War II, was designed to allow the victorious Allies to rule the
world. In the U.N. charter, the only power lies in the Security
Council. Only it can levy sanctions and wage war. The General
Assembly has no means of enforcing any resolutions it might pass.
So the builders of the United Nations, which were the five World War
II Allies, reserved all the power for the Security Council and
awarded themselves five permanent seats and the veto. A "no"
vote by any of the five permanent members is a veto. As that old
saying about plans, mice and men goes, the five Allies soon had a
falling out before they could run the world to suit themselves.
The Soviet Union and the United States started the Cold War and
used their vetoes often to frustrate each other. France and the
United Kingdom, originally considered among the great powers,
were so weakened by the war and the loss of their respective
empires that they had to more or less take a back seat, though it
was still a permanent seat with a veto. Originally, the Nationalists
held the China seat, but after they were driven off the mainland,
communist China eventually evicted them from the United Nations
and took their place.
So that's the background. The pseudo-outrage over a French or
Russian veto is just that — phony outrage. The United States has
always adopted a cynical attitude toward the United Nations. When
it suited the United States' purposes, it used the United Nations as
political cover; when it didn't, the United States ignored the United
Nations and has often prevented the organization from acting (the
35 vetoes of resolutions critical of Israel are an example). In fact,
the United States has kept the United Nations from playing any role
at all in trying to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that,
ironically, was created by the United Kingdom, the United States
and the Soviet Union, using the United Nations as a mechanism.
Don't worry that the United Nations will become irrelevant. Since it
lacks any power except that granted by the five permanent
members, it has always been irrelevant. It cannot prevent any of
the five major powers from doing anything it chooses to do, nor can
it coerce any of them. It is not, as some imagine, a world
government. In that sense, the United Nations is a fraud, and at
best, assuming the five members could agree, it would be just a
dictatorial oligarchy.
What is afoot today has nothing to do with Iraq. It has to do with
whether the world will be run by the United States or by a consensus
of nations. The collapse of the Soviet Union created a power
imbalance. No nation is so powerful, militarily or economically, as
the United States. The United States has the power and, since the
election of George Bush, the intention of running the world to suit
itself. The United Kingdom has decided to tag along, but this has
brought China, Russia, France, Germany and other countries
together in an effort to find a way to thwart U.S. hegemony.
Unless we wish to follow the foolish path, we will remember that our
power is relative and therefore temporary. We can tell the rest of
the world to go to hell today, but if we do, one day we will find
ourselves overpowered by a coalition of enemies we will have
created. That will not be pleasant. |
