Well, how to begin? Actually, the words of JA Scobie could mean something at this point, but I am afraid that finking them, or something pun-ish (sorry couldn’t resist), is not the answer. It would be nice to tell the UN scum to blow it out their collective ears. However what then what would such a cathartic instruction accomplish?
The United Nations was a noble thought, but like most liberal thoughts, it was nobler in concept than execution. The credit, or blame (perspective counts, here) for the UN has be incorrectly attributed to FDR. In reality, the UN was just a re-establishment of Woodrow Wilson’s crippled League of Nations. That misbegotten body died an ignominious death shortly before the outbreak of World War II. It was powerless to do much but suck money from its participants and bandy about platitudes, paper, and ink. The United States Senate never ratified its charter and never joined its peculiar clique.
There are those who argue that the US’s failure to participate in the League doomed it to failure. I submit that no matter whether or not the US would have participated, this miscarriage would have failed. The reasons were simple. The body had no power. Yes, I said power. It had no army, no sovereignty, or authority. It was in reality a big gripe session with hordes of corrupt bureaucrats running about bilking each other’s government out of dues. It had lofty goals and high toned modern offices in Switzerland. Not only was it basically impotent, it was dangerous. The lack of any ability to back up its treaties and rules placed nations of good will at the mercy of those who would willingly sign an unenforceable treaty to provide cover for its systematic violation of that instrument. Weakness always invites attack.
So, if the League of Nations failed so miserably, why try it again under a different guise and housed in a different place (San Francisco, then New York)? I suppose that gut check needs to be done for most of liberalism’s chronic black hole failures; the war on poverty, the war on discrimination, the war on drugs, the Cold War (a topic of another paper…). The reason is as stated before. Liberals believe that noble goals are the ends and means. Demonstration of interest, concern, or care is directly tied to the amount of money one is willing to pay their bureaucrats to work on the problem.
The United Nations was doomed to fail before the ink on the charter dried.
Once, I thought that the UN served a purpose, if a little muddled, but now I am convinced that it is detrimental to international peace and governance. There are three major problems with the UN. First, the General Assembly is a sham loaded with corrupt and venal representatives of like nations whose only interest is in sucking money from the pockets of the West and in particular the US. Second, the Security Council no longer represents the world power structure. The charter treats all nations equally, even if they openly violate their treaties, abuse human rights, and make war on their neighbors. The third problem is still power. Although the UN has some limited ability to generate military force, its focus is diffuse and confusing. It still depends too heavily on police type activity and lacks the sovereignty to conduct a real war.
In its current condition, the United Nations is a disaster snowballing down the mountain growing faster as it gains speed. Therefore, until the Charter can be re-written to make it a rapid open diplomatic mission with only limited functions and based upon proportional economic, military, and population based representation, the United States should leave the General Assembly of the UN. It should then use its Security Council veto to block all of the latest and future anti-American actions.
In order to maintain some semblance of diplomatic order, the US should toss the entire mission out of New York. Geneva would do nicely. It could take up residence in the League of Nations buildings. Once the UN building is closed and its corrupt apparachiks moved to other environs, then the US could call for a new treaty to build a better more just and capable UN… Better yet, the US might just want to drop the whole thing. But that would take a stiff dose of reality and most government types, whether Conservative or Liberal, just have difficulty avoiding spurious feel good causes no matter how badly they always fail.