From: gary@isis.cgd.ucar.edu (Gary Strand)
Subject: Re: More UN (was Re: Iraq renews threats against Kuwait)
Organization: Climate and Global Dynamics Division/NCAR, Boulder, CO
Date: Tue, 18 Aug 1992 05:39:42 GMT

f > "Frank" (Robin Collins)
gs> Gary Strand

f > Please explain how are "individual rights" defended by one country (the US)
f > or a handful of countries (the security council) dictating what the rest of
f > the world can do?

gs> Actually, you ought to defend the notion that a group of countries has the
gs> right to push one country around. 

f > I will if you will answer my question too.

  Let me back up and point out that since the UN has severely limited power
  of enforcement, what the US, the Security Council or the General Assembly
  dictates can be ignored. Saddam Hussein has done a fine job so far. So, it
  really doesn't matter if the UN says to country X "Do this or else!". The
  Gulf War was the exception, and that was due in large part to the shift in
  the global political balance from the dissolution of the USSR.

f > I support the concept of sovereignty of states. Thus if any state invades
f > another, I support the reversal of that invasion by the means necessary.
f > I support the concept of an international body applying that principle.

  Would you support an invasion designed to end human rights abuses in the
  invaded country? That was the rationale applied by the Vietnamese when they
  invaded Cambodia, to try to end the genocide being practiced by the Khmer
  Rouge.

f > I do not support the concept of an international body interfering in
f > the internal affairs of states.

  Isn't that what the UN is doing now vis-a-vis Iraq and ex-Yugoslavia?

f > Thus I support the UN interfering in the invasion of Kuwait by Iraq (but
f > not the US running the show or massacreing 200,000 people).

  You forget that the US is the only country capable of supplying the kind of
  force used in the Gulf War (ergo, it gets to "run the show") and that the
  number of casualties you quote is highly debatable. The blood of those sol-
  diers and Iraqi civilians is on Hussein's hands, not the hands of the UN
  forces that fought him. Remember, he did start the whole mess.

f > Thus I support the UN imposing sanctions against the US for invading Pan-
f > ama, Grenada, etc etc.

  Yeah, right, and when push comes to shove, the UN (which is situated in New
  York) gets quarantined by the US. You've got to remember that the US is the
  biggest bully on the block, and as such it is wise to avoid antagonizing
  it too much. Besides, who really cares about Grenada or Noriega? It wasn't
  like the US invaded Cuba or anything. On a scale of 1 to 100, I'd rate the
  above two actions as less than 10.

f > I'm sure you would rather have an international forum disappear than have
f > the rule of one country or an elite group of them get away with anything
f > they want without criticism.

gs> Who said that the UN was the only possible forum for criticism? Besides, 
gs> the UN is becoming more than just a forum for criticism. Too many people 
gs> want to see it expanded to become a sort of world government. No thanks! 

f > Perhaps you would suggest the other forum you have in mind.

  There's lots of alliances and so on that can be used. NATO has done a good
  job of keeping the US and Western Europe on track. Anyway, what you want
  is much more than a forum for criticism. You want some set of rules and
  the means to enforce them. What is that besides a government?

f > Who said world government is implied (not me?) 

  Indeed, you did.

f > I only said that an international body is not a bad idea in terms of
f > resolving international conflicts, if it is democratic.

  What exactly are to be the mechanics of this democratic system?

f > There are measures within the UN charter which recommend the solution of
f > conflicts regionally and voluntarily by diplomacy first and then by UN
f > means only after the former fail.

  Of course, in places like ex-Yugoslavia, the diplomats are doing a fine
  job of resolving the conflict, and thousands die while the UN vacillates.
  There are advantages to having one country take on the job by itself.


--
Gary Strand                      Opinions stated herein are mine alone and are
strandwg@ncar.ucar.edu            not representative of NCAR, UCAR, or the NSF
Newsgroups: misc.headlines