Thursday, March 22nd | 6 Nisan 5778


Be in the know!

Get our exclusive daily news briefing.

January 23, 2017 8:19 am

Has the Time Come for Amexit From the UN?

avatar by Kenneth L Marcus

Email a copy of "Has the Time Come for Amexit From the UN?" to a friend
The United Nations Human Rights Council, in the Palace of Nations (Geneva). Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

The United Nations Human Rights Council, in the Palace of Nations (Geneva). Photo: Wikimedia Commons.

As British Prime Minister Theresa May plans a Brexit from the EU, Americans may soon ask what kind of exit we want from another international institution.

In our case, the organization is not the European Union, but the United Nations. Earlier this month, Senators Lindsey Graham (R-SC) and Ted Cruz (R-TX) introduced a bill to block taxpayer dollars from going to the UN. These senators, like many Americans, are incensed by a recent anti-Israel resolution adopted by the world body. But the US’ problems with the UN run deeper than one bad resolution. They are endemic to the institution. At some point, our elected leaders will ask whether the time has come not just to defund, but also to depart — and then replace the UN with something better.

That point may come sooner rather than later.

Today — Monday, January 23 — journalist Edwin Black is launching a national conversation about United Nations reform. At a major noon-time event in the Rayburn House Office Building on Capitol Hill, I will be pleased to join Black, US Representative Trent Franks and other concerned leaders in the launch of a new project called “The Covenant of Democratic Nations” (CDN). The event coincides with the first full workday of a new presidential administration. Additional events are planned for New York, Los Angeles, San Francisco, Berlin, London, Ottawa and many other cities.

More of a conversation than an institution or a treaty, the CDN asks us to consider whether the time has arrived to fundamentally rethink our involvement with international institutions.

The United Nations was established seven decades ago, in the aftermath of the Nazi horrors, to free the world from the scourge of war, to promote social progress, to encourage treaty compliance and, in the language of the United Nations Charter, “to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small.”  

Yet, in the ensuing years, this corrupt, ineffective and biased body has failed at all of these goals  — but none more sadly than its pursuit of fundamental human rights.

In retrospect, the UN’s basic problems were probably unavoidable from the start, given that the institution is by design primarily a congress of undemocratic, corrupt and ineffective nations. Consider that the 2017 elected membership of the UN Human Rights Council includes Burundi, China, Cuba, Iraq, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Venezuela and the United Arab Emirates.

In its one-sided obsession with Israel, the United Nations has largely disregarded serious human rights violations the world over. The UN, founded with such high hopes, has responded year after year with silence and indifference to persecution, torture and violence. It has done little to nothing to respond to global brutalities and genocides. From the Cambodian genocide to the bloodbath in Syria, the United Nations has proven peculiarly unfit to the task for which it was founded.

The problem with the United Nations is not just its abject failure to accomplish its mission, but also its affirmative wrongdoing. It has condemned one single state in resolution upon resolution. That state is democratic Israel. And through it all, tyrants throughout the rest of the world continue to go ignored.

To paraphrase Hillel Neuer, the UN has become the forum at which those who condone rape lament the rights of Palestinian women; the occupiers of Tibet bemoan the disputed territories West of the Jordan River; the bombers of Yemen castigate the treatment of Gaza; and the murderers of Muslims in Syria claim to care about Muslims in little Israel.

The UN’s failings were on display last month with passage of Security Council Resolution 2334, just as those failings were previously on display when the UN passed the infamous 1975 resolution equating Zionism with racism. As then-US Ambassador to the UN Daniel Patrick Moynihan said at the time, “If there were no General Assembly, this could never have happened.”

Even the UN’s boldest critics agree that the UN does some important work. The question is whether other institutions could do it better. In Black’s vision, the CDN will review all of the United Nations’ treaties and actions. Some could be repealed, others continued and still others strengthened. The result could be a long-overdue rethinking of international law.

This doesn’t need to happen all at once. In England, Prime Minister May has chosen a “hard Brexit.” When it comes to the UN, we may have other options, and we may be well-advised to put strong new institutions in place before we withdraw from the old ones. The key however is that we should permit ourselves to think boldly and not feel imprisoned by the international status quo. 

Governor Nikki Haley, the US Ambassador-nominee, recently observed, “The United States is the indispensable voice of freedom. It is time that we once again find that voice.” When we do find that voice, we may need to find a better venue in which it should be heard.

The opinions presented by Algemeiner bloggers are solely theirs and do not represent those of The Algemeiner, its publishers or editors. If you would like to share your views with a blog post on The Algemeiner, please be in touch through our Contact page.

Share this Story: Share On Facebook Share On Twitter Email This Article

Let your voice be heard!

Join the Algemeiner
  • Ayatollah Ghilmeini DD

    I think the better suggestion is to take a comedian, appoint them to the very low level sub-consular role, and have them use the open mike to mock and humiliate the criminal low-lifes every day. Pay $1 million in dues, and have at them.

    The mistake is giving the UN any credence. The further mistake is tolerating their BS. Instead, make Turtle Bay the League of Democracies, with India on the new Security council. If you don’t have free elections and a free press (no Turkey), you cannot be a member.

  • Guest

    The United States should definitely not leave the UN, but just stop financing this anti-US and anti-Israeli institution, because as a permanent veto power, it protects its own interests and Israeli interests as well (the anti-Israeli Obama administration was just a sad interlude which fortunately has ended) by blocking binding anti-US and anti-Israeli resolutions and sanctions. If the United States ceased to be a member, Israel would have been subject to countless of anti-Semitic measures and sanctions by the other anti-Semitic pro-Arab permanent veto members, and the Unites States is a bulwark against them.

  • Dave Sanders

    The UN is way past its shelf-life. I am all for a CDN as long as the baby is not thrown out with the bathwater. It was the Council of the League of Nations that confirmed the Class A, B and C Mandatories in July 1922 i.e. included the British Mandate for Palestine and the Balfour Declaration.

  • stannadel

    Oh things will be so much better when the US abandons its Security Council veto rights–NOT!

  • Lia

    Time and past time for the UN to be defunded and their tower used for freedom-inspiring purposes. (To my mind, the inflexible and freedom-destroying EU should go too.)

  • ReformSchool

    DIPLOMACY: “When all is said and done, more is said than done.” Nikita
    Khrushchev’s 1956 “Khrush Democracy” speech showed need to DEPART. State-sponsored Terrorism since 9/11 sealed our need to DEPORT the UN. Eight years’ National Surrender by ineffective leaders leaves US no choice!

  • Rachel

    As a New Yorker I would be so happy if they were thrown out of the city. They take up valuable real estate. Much of this could go for housing for lower income families. When they r in session they tie up traffic. Even worse the diplomats are pigs. Recently a UN diplomat from the Sudan was arrested for rubbing up against a young woman in the subway. They had to let him go because of diplomatic immunity. They also frequent escort agencies and do drugs and yet because of diplomatic immunity get away with murder. Please!!!!!! If only the UN would get out of NY and better yet dissolve. They do nothing constructive.

  • aussiegooner

    Either the west can abandon the dictators’ club, or it will fail in the event of major conflict, which it promotes rater than prevents (as happened to its predecessor).

    The UN is a megaphone for bad people running bad governments, and whose main common cause is Jew hatred. Stop paying it, stop being members of it, and kick it out of Manhattan.

  • Yes, the time has come for an Amexit from the UN. The UN violated its prime directive, and it should be replaced. Sadly, the world is more dangerous, and anti-Israel UN Security Council resolutions are obstacles to peace.

  • Jerri

    Get out! “I will bless those who bless Israel and I will curse those tho curse Israel” I would rather tick off the UN than God! A step closer to redeeming our nation. It is God who made America great. not UN!

  • Robert

    Finally, let’s get out of the UN!!!

  • fiveredapples

    Yes. The UN does much more harm than good. It gives credibility to anti-Semites. It sucks money from the USA to attack Israeli and American causes, if not Israeli and American people. Time to cut our losses and de-legitimize this Liberal entity, this anti-Semitic entity, this anti-Israel entity, this anti-America entity.

  • ScienceABC123

    It’s long past time for the United Nations to go the way of the League of Nations.