Thoughts on the UN

The United Nations was founded on the paving stones to perdition...good intentions. The problem I have with the UN has to do with moral authority. The UN lacks moral authority, not because of moral relativism, nor because of immorality. The problem with the UN, is it is amoral, it does not recognize morality in any form. Well, that is not strictly true...it holds certain things to be immoral, at least in theory. Activities such as slavery, torture, and nuclear proliferation rank high on the UN's list of no-no's. Unfortunately, the UN does not, and will not, take action to censure member nations that openly practice these activities. In fact, in the attempt to seem fair, the UN allows nations that act this way to chair its own commissions that investigate those activities! The UN is hampered by its own success. In response to the failures of its predecessor, the League of Nations, the UN is permanently staffed, and openly inclusive. This means that there are always delegates at the UN conferring on practically any matter, and that the member nations share no ideal or goal beyond being members of the UN. Once your government (regardless of its origins or methods of staying in power) is recognized by the UN, you are "legitimate". You can now pretty much act in any way you choose; pillage, rape, torture and loot your subjects in any manner you wish; bully, oppress, and threaten your neighbors through every method (short of outright invasion) and you will be left alone. Oh sure, individual nations may withdraw recognition or impose sanctions, but no one is likely to attack or overthrow you. Wait a minute, you might say. The US was founded in revolution and warfare. Yes it was. What of it? When the revolutionaries threw off British rule, they did not set themselves up as despots, nor did a junta of military commanders seize absolute power. No, the revolutionaries took their time and their own fortunes, to create a system of government where the power rested, not with themselves, nor the upper classes (although some did want power to be vested there) but with the individual citizens of the entire country. Compare that with...Liberia, Syria, Libya, Cuba, Côte d'Ivoire, Nigeria, Sudan, Iran, Belarus, etc., etc., ad nauseum. Compare that, even, with the contemporary revolutionaries in France, in 1789. The difference between all those examples and the revolutionaries that broke the American Colonies from British rule were the ideals of altruism and selfless service. The UN, however, grants equal status to all of the above, just as it would have given equal status to the government of France under Louis XVI or under the Committee for Public Safety under Robespierre. This is not an ideal system for world governance. In an article for Townhall.com, Jonah Goldberg puts forth an alternative multinational body, the League of Democracies. This would limit membership to only those governments that vest power in the people and operate under the rule of law.

This American Century, Pt V: The Rise of the United Nations

The United Nations was conceived as a replacement body for the Post-World War I era League of Nations. Like the League of Nations, the UN came into existence in the aftermath of a World War. Its purpose was to be a deliberative body for the reconciliation of differences between countries, and to promote a sense of collective security. All internationally recognized nations are members of the UN, without regard to the nature of their governments. While the UN sponsors numerous committees and commissions, its two main components are the General Assembly and the Security Council.

The idea behind the General Assembly is egalitarianism on a national level. All nations are equal, regardless of population, economy, or the freedom of their populations. In the GA all nations receive one vote, but declarations by the GA are advisory in nature.

The most powerful component of the UN is the Security Council (UNSC). It is composed of 5 permanent members [the US, France, Great Britain, Russian (succeeding to the seat formerly held by the Soviet Union), and the People's Republic of China (who replaced the Republic of China on the UNSC in 1971); these reflect the five main members of the allied powers in WW2]. Each of the Permanent members have veto power over any resolutions voted on by the UNSC. In addition to the 5 permanent members, there are 10 elected members of the UNSC. They are chosen by geographic region. Two members each for Africa, the Americas, Asia, and Western Europe. Eastern Europe gets one member, and the final member rotates every two years between Africa and Asia.

Resolutions passed by the UNSC do not carry weight in and of themselves, as the UN has no power to enforce them by itself. What does carry weight, is that any resolution passed by the UNSC has the support of some of the most powerful nations in the world.

Through most of the Cold War, the UN was at the mercy of the veto powers of the US and the Soviet Union. With the latter's collapse, the UN has sought to take over a leadership position in guiding international affairs.

By the 1990s, the US was yielding more and more moral authority to the UN. In the Kuwait Crisis of 1990-91, the US-led coalition sought, and received, UN authorization for military action against Iraq, which had invaded and occupied Kuwait. The UN also provided the lead for actions in the Former Republic of Yugoslavia and in several African countries, by providing peace-keepers, humanitarian assistance and attempt to broker diplomatic solutions.

With the election of George W. Bush as President of the United States, the US has chartered a more independent course of action than that of the UN. In 2003, the US led a coalition of several nations in an invasion of Iraq, to unseat Saddam Hussein and to prevent Iraq from developing and proliferating weapons of mass destruction. Unlike the US-led coalition in 1991, this coalition did not have the support of the UN.

Recently, multiple scandals have rocked the UN. Among these are accusations of rape and looting by UN peacekeeping forces in Africa, and revelations that millions of dollars earmarked for the Iraqi Oil-For-Food program were embezzled by UN official and millions more misused by the Iraqi government under Saddam Hussein.