the u.n. dogma

The U.N. Dogma
September 15, 2004

One of the great mysteries of our time is why so many seemingly intelligent people in the West believe that when delegates from 191 nations, many of them despicable tyrannies, convene in a particular building on 46th St. in New York, their pronouncements (mostly in support of inaction) suddenly become holy writ in international relations.

Multilateralists, prominent in Europe and in the campaign entourage of John Kerry, seem to have a quasi-religious belief in the healing powers of the U.N., as if diplomats can purify the regimes they represent by simply walking into the U.N. headquarters. Thus even ambassadors from countries with badly stained human rights records, like China, can pontificate on that subject and get a hearing because the U.N. bestows on them an aura of authority. The simple fact that they are on the Security Council lends their statements still further credibility in some circles -- even as the Security Council dithers, for example, over the genocide in Darfur, Sudan's latest killing field.

Working against this inertia, the U.S. is trying to rally support for a U.N. resolution threatening Sudan with sanctions if it doesn't end the massive crimes of regime-backed Arab Muslims against black African Muslims. But we fear there is little hope for the Darfurians if any serious action awaits the U.N.'s blessing.

And how can the U.N. claim any legitimacy if it still allows Sudan to sit on its Human Rights Commission? Only last May, when the atrocities in Darfur were in full swing, Khartoum was reappointed for further tenure until 2007. But then again, if the "oil for food scandal" or the complacency in the Rwandan genocide didn't shatter the U.N.'s image, maybe nothing will. For multilateralists, it remains an article of faith that the U.N. is bigger than the sum of its parts.