07/24/06 Citizens Should Stand Up For The U.N. Against Bush

I read a recent letter to the editor, "Disband the U.N.; its time and usefulness have passed" by Rick Giernoth (TCT, July 19), with great dismay.

Disbanding the United Nations, a 191-member organization, is not a simple thing to do -- especially since each member nation signed the U.N. Charter and then its government ratified the treaty. On July 28, 1945, the U.S. Senate ratified the treaty, making the U.N. Charter the law of the land (U.S. Constitution, Article VI, paragraph 2).

In 1945, after the terrible devastation of World War II, national leaders wanted a better way to resolve their differences, so they created the United Nations. Its central purpose was, and is, to "save succeeding generations from the scourge of war" by reaffirming human rights, respecting international law and promoting social progress. In fact, the United States, one of the 50 founding nations, played a leading role.

In the intervening years, the U.S. government has had a love/hate relationship with the United Nations. The United Nations and its specialized agencies have established international laws regulating trade, communications, aviation, passage on the high seas and diplomatic relations that are good for business. Nevertheless, the United States has occasionally withheld its dues (22 percent of the U.N. budget) to pressure the developing nations to reconsider some specific actions they were proposing in the U.N. General Assembly.

The Bush administration has made no secret of its impatience with the United Nations and many treaties. During its first seven months in office it "lost" five treaties.

The Bush administration military programs "Vision for 2020" and "National Security Strategy" are in excess of the standard set in the U.N. Charter -- i.e., only enough military for self-defense and for lending to the United Nations when the Security Council identifies a "breach of the peace."

The "Vision for 2020" program of January 2001, which would make possible the United States' dominating the space dimension of military operations and integrate space forces into war-fighting capabilities, is in violation of the U.N. Charter, which says: "All members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means and refrain in their international relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or political independence of any state."

And the "National Security Strategy" of September 2002, which promised that the United States would dominate the world with its military power, is also contrary to the U.N. Charter.

On March 19, 2003, the United States invaded Iraq without approval from the U.N. Security Council. This was a clear case of aggression, outside the standards of the U.N. Charter.

Since the August 2005 recess appointment of John Bolton to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, the Bush administration has displayed open hostility toward the organization: in September 2005 demanding 750 amendments to the World Summit document; in November 2005 putting a six-month cap on the U.N. budget unless the U.S.-approved U.N. management reform was adopted; in March 2006 voting against the new Human Rights Council approved 170 to 4 in the General Assembly; in June 2006 voting against reconciliation of the U.N. budget-cap crisis; in July 2006 Bush granting Israel one more week of bombing of Lebanon.

The United Nations refuses to disband in spite of all these anti-U.N. actions taken by the United States, the world's only superpower, which spends more on its military than all the other nations of the world combined, according to the March/April (Defense Monitor. After each Bush administration attack, the vast majority of U.N. member states become even more determined to stand together and uphold the rule of law in the world community.

* Where do we American citizens stand on this issue? Think about it. We should protest our president's defying the U.S. Constitution and the U.N. Charter or else we are equally culpable.