COLUMN: Dispelling the myths surrounding the U.N.
This is a critical time for the United Nations. Many Americans have lost faith in the efficacy of the U.N. and doubt its relevance in the 21st century. The American public has been deceived, however, by shrill right-wing misinformation.
Myth: The U.N. is ineffective.
Reality: It’s ironic that the people who most complain about the U.N.’s ineffectiveness are the very ones who would rather it not even exist, but I digress.
Any bureaucratic behemoth is going to suffer some ineffectiveness. The U.S. government certainly reflects this fact. But on balance, the U.N. has an impressive track record.
In 2005, the Human Security Centre at the University of British Columbia documented a dramatic decline in the number of wars, genocides and human rights abuses since the inception of the U.N.
Another report, published by Oxford University, found that in recent years the U.N. has significantly increased peacekeeping operations and stepped up sanctions against despotic regimes. Not only were these efforts more numerous, they were larger and more complex than those of the Cold War era.
Concerning U.N. peacekeeping operations specifically, the U.S. Government Accountability Office concluded they are eight times less expensive than funding a U.S. force. And a 2005 RAND Corp study found the U.N. to be successful in two-thirds peacekeeping efforts, whereas only half of the U.S.’ unilateral efforts succeeded.
The U.N., moreover, is only as ineffective as its member states make it. For instance, the failure to intervene in Rwanda was largely the Clinton administration’s fault, not the U.N.’s. They feared that such an intervention would be a political liability, like Somalia was. Most U.N. member states wanted to prevent the genocide, but the U.S. vetoed their resolutions.
Lastly, critics have a fixation with the U.N. Security Council’s inaction, but they forget other U.N. bodies like UNICEF, the World Health Organization, U.N. Environment Program, the U.N. Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, etc. These organizations don’t get their due credit. And on balance, they have been extremely effective, saving millions of lives and improving many more.
Myth: The U.N. is corrupt.
Reality: Well … this one is true. But there is nothing uniquely corrupt about the U.N. What governmental body is without corruption? The answer isn’t to withdraw from the U.N., but rather to lobby for its reform. The Security Council needs to be more democratic. The Human Rights Council shouldn’t admit states guilty of gross human rights violations. And the U.N.’s administration needs to be more transparent, accountable and efficient.
Myth: The U.N. threatens U.S. sovereignty.
Reality: Our veto power and diplomatic leverage are powerful protections of U.S. sovereignty. What few concessions of sovereignty the U.S. has made have generally been reasonable. It makes sense for nations, like individuals, to be held accountable to the rule of law.
The U.S. has committed itself to international laws of war, for example. Who is honestly upset that the U.S. is not permitted to wage wars of aggression? The U.S. still retains the right to act without U.N. approval in cases of self-defense or in response to an imminent threat or dire humanitarian crisis.
So let’s abandon the critics’ antiquated and isolationist definition of sovereignty. Today’s world is increasingly interconnected. So while we are first and foremost American citizens, we, too, are citizens of the world.
Myth: U.S. involvement in the U.N. is expensive.
Reality: Our U.N. obligations are, in fact, a bargain. While the U.S. accounts for 34 percent of the world economy, we only finance 22 percent of the U.N. regular budget.
Each year, the U.S. spends a mere $1 billion (one-tenth of 1 percent of the federal budget) to finance the U.N. and its agencies. Contrast this with the $10 billion we spend in Iraq each month!
The U.S. also enjoys a valuable relationship with the U.N. which directly benefits our economy. American firms are the primary sellers of goods and services to the organization and, in 2004, received $637 million through their business with the U.N.
Myth: The U.S. doesn’t need the U.N.
Reality: Now more than ever, the U.S. can’t afford to “go it alone.” Nowhere is this more evident than in Iraq. Instead of working with the U.N. (as we had with Korea, the First Gulf War and Kosovo), the Bush administration gave the U.N. and international law the proverbial finger and invaded Iraq. And consequently, the U.S. shoulders the costs of the war alone.
Multilateralism, then, is a means to get others to share the burden of providing public goods. The U.S. State Department makes a similar point: “The U.S. alone cannot do all things for all people, nor should we try. Even though as a nation we enjoy great wealth compared to a large part of the world, our resources are not limitless.”
U.S. involvement in the U.N. is also vital to the international community. We, humankind, face global problems which require global solutions. Nuclear proliferation, the spread of HIV/AIDS, climate change and transnational terrorism are among the greatest problems. These threats know no borders and absent global cooperation, they cannot be addressed.