Going to War Without the United Nations

Newhouse News Service ^ | JAMES LILEKS

[John Lenin]

"How can we possibly go to war without the approval of the United Nations?"

This question would make sense if there was a big red button marked "START WAR" in a locked closet at the U.N. Secretariat, and we had to beg Kofi Annan for the keys. The United States can go to war whenever it likes for its own reasons, and all the United Nations can do is pass more worthless paper. The only way a resolution could stop a truly determined president would be if they wrapped it around a rock and threw it at George W. Bush's head.

The United States does not need additional resolutions; 1441 said that "false statements or omissions in the declarations submitted by Iraq ... and failure to comply with and cooperate fully in the implementation of this resolution shall constitute a further material breach of Iraq's obligations."

Well, Iraq has been in material breach since it dumped 12,000 pages of obfuscating gobbledegook on everyone's desks. Iraq was in material breach before the inspectors showed up. Every day the inspectors are not driven to a dump and shown the remains of warheads, or empty canisters, or bones of all the lab monkeys who perished in Saddam Hussein's quest to weaponize spoiled potato salad, Iraq is in material breach. It's a breach-o-rama. It's breacherrific. Cue the Madonna song: The U.N. is immaterial now, and this is a material breach.

"OK, fine, but how can we possibly go to war without the approval of the United Nations?"

You mean the French and the Germans, perhaps. Well, France is demonstrating its habitual reaction to glowering men with small mustaches; German leaders are pandering to their dovish cliques for short-term political gain. Politicians in both countries probably get hummingbird heart rates when they contemplate U.S. officials poring through the records in Baghdad and finding the extent to which our allies have been meeting Saddam at the back door.

In any case, who cares what France thinks? It's not as if France would be of any use in a war. France has one notoriously unreliable aircraft carrier, and its best troops are engaged in a unilateral operation in Ivory Coast.

"Granted. But how can we possibly go to war without the approval of the United Nations?"

Perhaps you mean that we need the moral imprimatur of this august and esteemed body. You'd have a better point if the United Nations was moral, august or esteemed. On the contrary: The United Nations is a dim hive of self-interested parties engaged in endless parliamentary mummery, united by a consensual delusion that all nations are equal.

So you have the bitterly risible sight of Libya chairing the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, which is akin to giving Kid Rock control over the New York Philharmonic. You have the 2003 disarmament conference rotating its presidency among a group of states that includes Iran and Iraq. (Perhaps next year the agricultural planning conference will be held in Pyongyang.) You have the shameful performance of the peacekeepers in Srebrenica, looking away while thousands were slaughtered. You have the sex-for-food scandal at U.N. refugee camps in Africa -- if it happened at an American frat house, it would be national news for a week.

And you have small, telling scenes like the one that transpired in Baghdad recently. A man thrust himself into a U.N. inspector's car and begged for sanctuary. The U.N. official pretended to study his papers while the poor man pleaded for his life. The Iraqi guards took the man away, and if what we know about Iraqi prisons is even half right, we can only hope they killed the man as soon as he was out of camera range.

Imagine you are running in fear from Iraqi thugs, and you see a U.N. car, and a U.S. convoy. To which would you run?

"Yes, yes, it's not perfect. But don't we need U.N. approval?"

No. But if it makes you feel better to know that China graciously allowed the United States to act in its own self-interest, pretend that they did. Picture an unelected communist bureaucrat giving Bush permission to move some carriers toward the Gulf. Feel better?

The word you're looking for is "oui."


(James Lileks can be contacted at james.lileks(at)newhouse.com)

[John Lenin]

And you have small, telling scenes like the one that transpired in Baghdad recently. A man thrust himself into a U.N. inspector's car and begged for sanctuary. The U.N. official pretended to study his papers while the poor man pleaded for his life.

One word sums up the current state of affairs at the UN, 'impotence.'

[Voice in your head]

Some may dismiss the administration declaring the UN to be “in danger of becoming irrelevant” as mere rhetoric. It is actually a very accurate description. And the qualification of the term with the clause, “in danger of becoming” is actually quite generous. It is normal for humans to enter into societies for their mutual benefit. When these societies form, one of the institutions that usually develops is a body in which they vest their powers of retaliatory power, to deter members from violating the rights of others. Those rights include freedom from force, fraud, or coercion against person or property. The institutions in which retaliatory powers are vested may be a government, a professional society’s committee, or, in this case, a council. The United Nations has various councils that govern a variety of issues. The problem is that the councils have no power, no objective rules by which they act, and they are too oriented on super-majority democratic decisions. It is because of the super-majority tendency as well as cultural and societal differences among member nations that no objective rules can be agreed upon. It is because of a lack of objective rules that member nations insist on super-majority decision and refuse to cede too much power to the councils. This is an ideal arrangement, in my opinion. When a council finally decides upon some objective rules by which actions will be guided, such as UN Resolution 1441, the council will not enforce its own resolution. What recourse does the United States have? It fought and won a just war with Iraq, to liberate Kuwait from an aggressive invasion and occupation launched by Iraq. An agreement was made between the US, UN, and Iraq. As a penalty for your aggression, disarm - or we will use force to make you disarm. Iraq reneged on that agreement and the related agreements that followed. The UN will not enforce the agreement or even condone the US enforcing the agreement. So, what is the US to do, when an objective body will not attempt to enforce an objective resolution? It must enforce the resolution, itself, because the UN will not. Hopefully, if we are forced to go without UN approval, we withdraw our membership from the UN. The UN, like many things, is nothing without the US. It is time that the other nations get slapped in the face with this harsh reality.

[Rocketboy_X]

I just like how the Anti-Bush croud thinks that there's some hidden reason (oil, personal grudge, etc...) why he believes that war is the only answer left, but nooo... Other countries that don't want to go to war are only doing so due to 'moral' reasons. It couldn't have ANYTHING to do with politics or money.. nope, no sirree bob.. just Bush and his 'cronies'...

[bybybill]

Ollie North said tonite on Fox that the War starts as soon as the last document connecting the French to Iraq is shedded. Could be months from now if they work 24/7

[Rome2000]

France should no longer be a permanent member f the Security Council.

The institution of the UN is fatally flawed.

[John Lenin]

It was Saddams powerplay to line up UN members against the US.

[smug]

i am for going to war against the UN--bet the French ambassador capitulates first.

[flutters]

The United States can go to war whenever it likes for its own reasons, and all the United Nations can do is pass more worthless paper.

AMEN!

[exhaustedmomma]

The present UN situation ought to be an "eye-opener" to all the stupid kumbya-ers: USA sovereignty over its people and policies presides over UN ideology and stupidity. Clean the building of the riff-raft--- send them packing, and get us out of the UN.