THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Volume V, Issue # 83, March 27, 2003
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Government Committed to & Acting in Accord with Conservative Principles
Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity
AMERICAN FRUSTRATION WITH THE UNITED NATIONS:
IS PRESIDENT BUSH PUTTING THE SKIDS TO THE UN?
By Alan Caruba
Here's a suggestion. Let's take the millions in dues we pay to the United Nations and reallocate it to help pay the cost of our war to liberate the Iraqis? We pay more than a quarter of the operating budget for that Epicenter of Bloviation.
I don't think we're getting our money's worth. For example, in September, 2002, Con- gress voted to fund the operations of the United States Department of State to the tune of $8.6 billion. Included was $244 million for socalled back dues for the United Nations, plus $78 million in current dues. Of the overall amount the State Department will dis- burse, $891 million is for assessed expenses to international organizations; UNESCO is one of those agencies. Also included was $726 million for international "peacekeeping" activities which we largely underwrite, but for which the UN gets all the credit.
I admit it is an odd thought, but I keep wondering if George W. Bush hasn't deliberately put the skids to the United Nations? That speech he gave in September, 2002, warning the General Assembly that it was on the brink of "irrelevancy" really got my attention. I don't recall any president ever saying anything like that. Ever.
Other presidents have expressed their frustration. Other presidents have withheld the dues. But only President George W. Bush went to the podium of the General Assembly ---where the vote of the United States of America is exactly equal to the vote of Tuvalu, Liechtenstein, and Barbados---and told them that they were on the brink of irrelevancy.
Then there was the drawn-out dance for the UN Security Council in which the U.S. Sec- retary of State, Colin Powell, clearly demonstrated that Iraq was, after twelve years and seventeen resolutions, still defying the Security Council. The Council has shown little ability to thwart wars and other conflicts from its inception. It did nothing in 1994 to stop the Rwandan Hutus from slaughtering 800,000 people in Rwanda. It remained incapable of stopping Serbia's "ethnic cleansing." A dozen years of on-again, off-again weapons in- spections in Iraq accomplished nothing. The U.S.A. still has troops in South Korea, more than a half-century after the 1950's "UN Police Action."
The propaganda surrounding the UN is such that most people are still blithely unaware that the United Nations wants to impose its own tax on all financial transactions, exercise total power over land use throughout the world, require everyone to carry a national or international identity card, require population control, and has even instituted its own court to prosecute anyone for whatever it deems to be crimes against humanity. In addi- tion, the UN wants its own independent military forces.
If this sounds like a totalitarian nightmare, you're right. And I didn't even mention its socalled environmental program that has banned some of the most effective pesticides needed to protect people against the many diseases spread by insects. Thanks to the UN, malaria has made a triumphant return, killing millions every year because of its ban on DDT. Then, of course, there was the UN ban on Freon, one of the most beneficial chemicals ever created. It no longer can be used in any air conditioner or refrigerator, nor as an effective fire-extinguishing agent. And it was cheap!
In sum, the United Nations has hardly been a benefactor to mankind. Why does the United States of America or any other nation bow to its baseless authority? What useful purpose does it serve that cannot be replicated by other international groups?
For example, the Bush administration has endorsed a "humanitarian role" in Iraq for the UN Security Council. It balked, however, at the thought of granting it a political role in the reconstruction of Iraq when the war ends. Instead, the UN administered "oil-for- food" program is to be kept in place to provide for the funding of humanitarian needs. May I ask the obvious question? Why can't a comparable program be administered independently of the UN? Answer: it can.
Which brings me full circle back to wondering if the Bush administration isn't actively putting in motion those actions and events that will render the United Nations unneces- sary in a few years. I even dare to wonder if, given any further excuse, Congress may decide it is time to withdraw entirely?
One thing is clear, however. Conservative columnists like George Will and Linda Chavez are now actually saying out loud what others have only hinted at. It is time for the U.S.A. to get out of the United Nations. This objective used to be ascribed solely to "John Birch Society members" and "Rightwing nuts." This is making a lot of Conservatives posi- tively giddy.
Time has allowed the true goals of the UN to be revealed. Time has demonstrated the inability of the UN to fulfill its original purpose. Time will ultimately put an end to the United Nations.
LINKS TO RELATED TOPICS:
The United Nations & Its Agencies
Alan Caruba is a veteran business and science writer, a Public Relations Counselor, Communications Director of the American Policy Center, and Founder of the National Anxiety Center, a clearinghouse for information about media-driven scare campaigns. Caruba writes a weekly column, "Warning Signs," posted on the Internet website of the National Anxiety Center (www.anxietycenter.com). He is the author of A POCKET GUIDE TO MILITANT ISLAM and THE UNITED NATIONS VS. THE UNITED STATES, both available from the National Anxiety Center, 9 Brookside Road, Maple- wood, New Jersey, 07040.
Copyright 2003 Alan Caruba
Published with Permission of Alan Caruba
ACaruba@AOL.Com
Return to Top of Page
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE,
Public Issues & Political Controversies
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE,
Volume V, 2003
Return to Beginning of
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE,
Subject Matter Highlights
Return to POLITICAL EDUCATION Homepage
This is not a commercial website. The sole purpose of the website is to share with interested persons information regarding civics,
civic and social education, political science, government, politics, law, constitutional law and history, public policy, and political
philosophy and history, as well as current and recent political developments, public issues, and political controversies.
POLITICAL EDUCATION, CONSERVATIVE ANALYSIS
POLITICS, SOCIETY, & THE SOVEREIGN STATE
Website of Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr.
Government, Politics, Public Policy, Legal Issues, Constitutional Law, Government & the Economy, Cultural Values, Foreign Affairs,
International Relations, Military Defense & National Security, Geopolitics, Terrorism & Homeland Security, American National Interests,
Political Systems & Processes, Political Institutions, Political Ideologies, & Political Philosophy
INDEX FOR THE ENTIRE WEBSITE
A
B
C
D
E
F
G
H
I
J
K
L
M
N
O
P
Q
R
S
T
U
V
W
X
Y
Z
THE PROGRESSIVE CONSERVATIVE, USA
An Online Journal of Political Commentary & Analysis
Dr. Almon Leroy Way, Jr., Editor
Conservative & Free-Market Analysis of Government, Politics & Public Policy, Covering Political, Legal, Constitutional, Economic,
Cultural, Military, International, Strategic, & Geopolitical Issues
Conservative Government Ensures a Nation's Strength, Progress, & Prosperity