United Nations proves futile for U.S. security

Like its predecessor, the League of Nations, the United Nations
seems on the verge of becoming irrelevant.

Dreams of peace, prosperity, humanity and civility among nations
have again been replaced by the specter of war and perpetual
conflict ““ the only human constant in our ever-changing
society. However, the thought of losing this international body to
the winds of change should not occupy our hearts for too long.

The United Nations has proven itself obsolete to meet the
security needs of the United States. Instead, it has only provided
a forum for the resistance of U.S. global hegemony irrespective of
the common threats such as terrorism and the proliferation of
weapons of mass destruction that affect all nations. The
controversy surrounding Iraq is indicative of this growing
trend.

Resolution 1441 was drafted in November and explicitly states
that if Iraq fails to disarm then there will be “serious
consequences.” After three months of inspections, Iraq has
not fully cooperated with the U.N. resolution. The laundry list of
violations, including recent verification of banned missile parts
by U.N. weapons inspectors, is convincing beyond a reasonable
doubt.

Members of the council, like France and Germany, have repeatedly
deceived the world into believing that it is up to the inspectors
to disarm Iraq. A team of eight men or, if France gets their way, a
team of two dozen inspectors, cannot find weapons of mass
destruction in a country the size of California. It was always up
to Iraq to cooperate and they have not done so. If non-cooperation
implies a “material breach,” and it does, then why
doesn’t the Security Council act?

The obvious answer is that they do not see Iraq as a threat and
they don’t want war. But if they did not think Iraq was a
threat why did they agree to Resolution 1441 in the first place?
Why do they see “some progress,” in the words of Hans
Blix, as evidence that Saddam Hussein is cooperating, when he has
put on the same charade for the past 12 years? And why
doesn’t the Security Council adopt a date by which Hussein
must fully cooperate?

Answers to these questions orbit around the central locus of
U.S. political, cultural and military supremacy. Without a threat
from the Soviet Union and with the “hyper power” of the
U.S. military, Europe and the world is extremely fearful of U.S.
aims. However, this cannot justify sacrificing U.S. security to the
opinion of other nations.

France and Germany are not going to harm us. Terrorist groups
and dictators with weapons of mass destruction will.

All France and Germany can do is talk and use the Security
Council as a bully pulpit for U.S. bashing. And there’s the
rub. If France, along with its group of appeasers, continue to
block U.S. action to guarantee world safety and instead, use the
United Nations for U.S. hating, then the United Nations
doesn’t serve our interests.

The French president and foreign minister, Chirac and de
Villepin, are sealing the fate of the United Nations.

The United States, the only country that can provide the morals
and the military to back up U.N. resolutions, has been alienated
from the very institution it created. And the old American virtue
of self-reliance will rear its determined head once again, to our
benefit and more importantly to the peace of the free world.