Most Americans have very little respect for the UN or other bureaucrats. In general, the UN is not seen as a force for world peace, but as a collection of international bureaucrats who use US money to criticize America and cause problems. The US pays approximately 22% of the entire UN budget.
The United States is a Democratic-Republic that exists under a written Constitution. The right to representation is very important to us. So why give power to representatives of dictatorships and banana republics? The very idea of allowing the UN to have power over the US is abhorrent to most Americans and this is a large reason why the US is very careful to protect its national sovereignty. However Americans used to support the UN when it was seen as a force for world peace. But are Americans justified in their current contempt for the UN? Let us look at some recent examples of the UN in action.
The UN appointed a representative from Libya - Libya! - to chair the U.N. Human Rights Commissions. This would be a sick joke if it were not true. That is not just the opinion of America, here are some articles from the UK and France. Even writers in Pakistan - hardly at the forefront of human rights - condemned this miscarriage of justice.
A fearful Iraqi approached the UN inspectors at one of the UN compounds in Iraq and asked for sanctuary. This was not an unreasonable request, UN compounds typically provide diplomatic protection to those in need. At least they used to help people. This time, the UN security thugs were called and they turned the frightened man over to Iraqi 'police' where he was no doubt taken away to be beaten - at best.
In July, 1995 a contingent of UN Peacekeepers - who had promised protection to thousands of refugees - did nothing while about 7,000 males were slaughtered by the Serb Army. The Global Policy Forum concluded:
What should be learnt from this? It is important not to heap blame on the Dutch. The Dutch government, army and Dutchbat itself do deserve a measure of blame, but culpability spreads wider. The UN was hampered by a disagreement at the highest level between participating governments. America was committed to a policy of "lift and strike." It wished to lift an embargo on supplying arms to the Muslims, whom it favoured, and was keen to use air power against the Serbs.
For reasons still understandable, other governments thought that feeding arms into the country would only intensify the conflict, while they would not support air strikes against the Serbs alone. In the end, by supplying arms and training to the Croats, the Americans got the better of the Serbs. Much later, by bombing Serbia during the Kosovo war, they broke Serbian power altogether.
The UN bureaucracy could not bring themselves to authorize force to resolve the issue. Even their armed Peacekeepers did little to protect those they had promised protection. It was only the 'unilateral' decision of the US Government to forcibly intervene that stopped the conflict. Is it any wonder that Americans do not trust the UN to protect human life? The question for Americans is why do so many Europeans respect the UN?
I think these examples should be enough for anyone. Glenn Reynolds, the author of InstaPundit, has written a very compelling article showing that nations only get involved in genocidal wars when they may spill over into their territory. While his intent was not to blast the UN, his examples clearly show that the UN has a poor track record of stopping genocide. As an American, I am both proud and disappointed in my country's record. I am proud that we have put a stop to more of these genocidal wars than any other country in modern (all) history. And we did not do this out of fear these wars would jump oceans and impact our backyard - we did this out of respect for human life. I am disappointed that we did not act to stop more of these genocidal attempts. When all is said and done, it is clear that the US record in this area is far superior to that of the UN.
The UN could still have a helpful role in world affairs, but they need to clean up their own house before being treated seriously by Americans. However, they had better hurry or America may just withdraw from it. We have more effective uses for our money than funding people to criticize the US. And it looks like Japan, the second-largest funder of the UN, will be reducing the size of their contribution. Unless the UN changes course, it will join the League of Nations as yet another failed idea.
