It takes one bold act to transform the unthinkable into the thinkable, and a second or third to make it a normal course.¹

The United Nations and to a certain extent international humanitarian law are embarking on a rapid decline to irrelevance. To be sure, this trend is not a novel phenomenon, for nearly as long as the United Nations has existed, it has failed to live by its purpose(s).²

The events of the past year, including the September 11th attacks with the subsequent “war on terror” and an impending war of aggression against Iraq, have certainly exacerbated this decline. President George W. Bush offered a memoriam to this decline and degradation of the current state of the United Nations and international law, in his September 12th speech before the United Nations General Assembly.

President Bush began with a discussion of the tragedy of September 11th, and the need to eradicate terrorism. The President asserted that the world’s greatest propagator of terrorism was Saddam Hussein and Iraq. He cited Security Council resolution after Security Council Resolution that had been ignored by Iraq. He placed emphasis on the nuclear and biological weapons capabilities of Iraq, and the impending danger to the entire world. He championed the role of the Security Council and said: “We want the resolutions of the world's most important multilateral body to be enforced. And right now those resolutions are being unilaterally subverted by the Iraqi regime.” The speech concluded with the following: 

We must choose between a world of fear and a world of progress. We cannot stand by and do nothing while dangers gather. We must stand up for our security, and for the permanent rights and the hopes of mankind. By heritage and by choice, the United States of America will make that stand. And, delegates to the United Nations, you have the power to make that stand, as well. 

The President made it known that the United States would act with or without a multilateral force or the United Nations. What became abundantly clear to those who were not already aware was that the United States controls its own destiny, without a harness. The President did not speak as a representative of the United States to the United Nations; he spoke paternalistically with an admonishing tone. To many Americans this was an effective and impassioned speech, with a just and moral objective. To many outside the United States, however, President Bush demonstrated the consummate hypocrisy and arrogance of the United States.

Willful Blindness

While calling for enforcement of Security Council resolutions and action against Iraq, a prong of the “Axis of Evil,” the United States has proffered minimal empirical evidence of Iraqi capabilities and/or intentions. And at the same time, to the utter dismay of Arab and Muslim states, the United States has strategically ignored the case of Israel, a nation that has been engaged in an illegal and belligerent occupation since 1967, and has served as one of the world’s most brutally oppressive regimes. 

Since 1948, the United Nations has rendered countless Security Council and General Assembly resolutions, aimed at Israel and its treatment and occupation of Palestine and the Palestinian peoples. To this moment, these resolutions have been ignored, and the mechanisms to enforce these resolutions have been stifled, in most cases by the United States and its power on the Security Council. 

Furthermore, it is widely known that Israel has nuclear technologies and an arsenal of nuclear weapons. The United States has not insisted upon weapons inspectors, or monitors, despite the fact that Israel is a significant threat to bordering Arab populations (i.e. the victims of Sabra and Shatila).

In his speech, President Bush trivialized the plight of Palestinians when he noted: “Palestinians deserve a government that serves their interests and listens to their voices.” He did not address the massive number of civilian casualties, destruction of homes, property and the daily humiliation faced by Palestinians. What President Bush failed to mention during his speech was that the United States has exercised Security Council veto power on numerous occasions, specifically on resolutions dealing with the protection of Palestinian people.³

On March 16, 2001, the United States vetoed a Security Council resolution that proposed an international observer force in the Palestinian territories.⁴ The resolution also called for a cessation of all violence, including what it named “terrorist” attacks on civilians. James Cunningham, the United States representative to the UN, considered the draft resolution flawed because the resolution was “unbalanced” and because there was not any agreement from either of the parties. The United States vetoed another important Security Council resolution on December 15, 2001,⁵ that called for a cessation of violence and demanded that Israel abide by its obligations under the Fourth Geneva Convention. 

The United Nations has lost significant credibility from Arab and Muslim nations who believe that there is not an equal application of United Nations mandates. President Bush’s speech only exacerbated the gap between the United Nations and the Arab and Muslim world. 

Puppet Strings

It is a common belief that the United States will act unilaterally if forced to. Weeks ago, global opposition to an impending war on Iraq soared. However, as of late, such opposition has waned. The Security Council appears to be desperate to avoid unilateral action on behalf of the United States. Why? Because such unilateral intervention would diminish the validity of the United Nations and dilute the mandate of the United States Charter, and the Articles of that Charter that outline steps for the proper and limited use of force.

If the United States, once again, ignores the United Nations and international law, it could set dangerous precedent for other nations to ignore United Nations mandates. This is one reason why the permanent members of the Security Council (and non-permanent) may acquiesce to the will of the United States. 

The other reason is a pecuniary one. States will benefit, financially and politically, from United States conditional aid. Russia, France and China, who once expressed strong opposition to an impending attack, have now softened their stance. For these reasons the United Nations could once again serve as the “rubber stamp” for the United States. Just as the Security Council validated NATO’s unlawful, though morally justifiable, unilateral intervention in Yugoslavia in 1999, should they accede to Bush’s requests this time, the same would ultimately be said about unilateral intervention in Iraq.

Blaming the United Nations as an abstract entity for failing to act is effectively disregarding the fact that all acts taken by the United Nations are a direct expression of the will of all members of the international community itself. Therefore, the blame lies squarely on the shoulders of an international community that is unwilling to give power to the United Nations as envisioned by the founders of the United Nations Charter in 1946. Primarily, that blame rests on the shoulders of the United States and, to a certain extent, the other four permanent members who have attempted to use the United Nations as a tool. This has resulted in international disenchantment, which could lead to the demise of the United Nations.

Thomas J. Haidon is an American attorney and activist residing in Wellington, New Zealand. He received a Jurisdoctorate (J.D.) with a certificate of international law from the University at Buffalo School of Law and a Bachelor of Arts in Political Science from Niagara University. He has studied at the American University in Cairo and Birzeit University, Palestine. He is currently pursuing an L.L.M. in international law. You can reach him at thaidon@justice.com

1- Cited in Georg Schwarzenberger, International Law as Applied by International Courts and Tribunals, Vol. IV, p. 21.

2- Charter of the United Nations, Article 2. 

3- U.S. Vetoes in the UN Security Council Concerning Middle East Issues” on www.salam.org. This website gives a comprehensive list of United Nations Security Council resolutions that have been vetoed by the United States for criticism of Israel.

4- Security Council. SC/4272 4438th Meeting “Security Council Fails to Adopt Resolution on Middle East Situation, To Condemn Use of Force, Encourage Monitoring Mechanism.” March 26, 2001.

5- Security Council. SC/7242 4438th Meeting “Security Council Fails to Adopt Resolution on Middle East Situation, To Condemn Use of Force, Encourage Monitoring Mechanism.” December 14, 2001.

The articles posted on this page reflect solely the opinions of the authors. Views Archive Advanced Search Views & Analyses