WEBCommentary Editor

Author: Bob Webster
Date:  March 2, 2006

Topic category:  Other/General

A League of Free Nations

The UN is a sorry spectacle of bumbling corruption and ineffectiveness. It's time to form a League of Free Nations that would exist to promote peace and harmony among free nations and bring change to countries where liberty and self-determination do not exist.

If nothing else has been learned from the events of the past few years, we now know with certainty that the United Nations is finished as a force for peace, stability, and human rights.

The UN has been completely ineffective in curtailing the dictatorships that dominate the Middle East. Terrorism and nations led by despots determined to destroy others flourish in that region and throughout most of the rest of the planet. The UN, when not running a scam to line the pockets of it's leaders, sits idly by and does nothing.

As a coalition of forces has worked tirelessly to bring elementary freedoms to the people of Afghanistan and Iraq, the UN twiddles its collective thumbs and does nothing ... except gripe at those who are doing the liberating.

As competing factions to control Iraq's future battle for supremacy in actions that could lead to civil war, the UN does nothing.

An examination of the UN's track record in preventing armed conflict shows one dismal failure after another. Throughout its nearly 60-year existence the UN has been totally ineffective in preventing well over 100 armed conflicts between nations. The only two uses of UN-sanctioned military force (Korean conflict in 1952-53 and the war to liberate Kuwait in 1992) both ended without defeat for the responsible culprit (North Korea and Iraq, respectively).

The sorry spectacle of the recent Franco-German-Russian blockage of UN-sanctioned military action to remove the regime of Saddam Hussein is evidence both of the economic stake each of those nations had in supporting the ill-fated regime and the anti-American sentiments of their leadership. A solid history of genocide and mounting evidence of atrocities not seen since Pol Pot or Adolf Hitler was insufficient to move the French, German, or Russian governments to support the only action that could put an end to the misery of the Iraqi people. Where economic gain was in the balance, liberty and decency weighed little in determining the direction the leaders of those nations pursued.

With such petty leadership of nations that presume to support democracy and liberty for their own people, how can those in other nations who yearn for freedom have any hope that the UN will aid their cause? Clearly, they can have no hope if the UN is their only chance for liberation.

The sad truth is, the UN isn't interested in promoting individual liberty or the values of the democratic process and government that constitutionally protects freedom. A UN that consists mostly of nations run by dictatorships where fundamental liberties are absent and which includes such nations as China, North Korea, Syria, Libya, the Sudan, Yemen, and Iran can hardly be expected to be a champion of freedom, individual liberty, and the democratic process.

How can the US continue to support a UN that shows so little regard for human rights that it puts nations like Cuba and Libya in the forefront of its Human Rights Commission and allows Saddam Hussein's Iraq to lead the Disarmament Commission? The UN's disregard for common sense and its lack of any sensitivity to fundamental human rights should no longer be tolerated.

There is little to be gained by continuing membership in the charade that has become the UN today. It's time to form a new organization composed of only those nations who actually value liberty, individual freedom, and self-determination in government.

It's time to form a League of Free Nations that would exist to promote peace and harmony among free nations through treaties, trade, and international cooperation to end all terrorism and support the process of change in countries where liberty and self-determination do not exist.

Unlike the UN, a League of Free Nations would not enter into international agreements that include nations controlled by despots and totalitarian regimes who have no intention of abiding by such agreements. Unlike the UN, a League of Free Nations would have an obligation to put an end to despotic regimes who hold their population captive and/or who support terrorism. In many cases, strictly enforced sanctions (unlike those of the UN) would be all that is necessary to bring about the desired change.

Wherever despots cling to power at the expense of the basic human rights of their population, the use of whatever means is necessary to bring freedom to a subjugated people is justified.

Slavery was wrong 140 years ago and it's just as wrong today when it appears in the form of despotic rule over a populace lacking any fundamental freedoms.

The time has come for the United States to leave the UN and the UN to leave the United States. The US should lead the process of forming and hosting a League of Free Nations.

Let the French host the remnants of the UN in Paris. A more fitting locale for such bumbling ineffectiveness is hard to imagine.

Bob Webster
WEBCommentary (Editor, Publisher)

Notes:  This commentary is adapted from one I originally wrote for OpinioNet.com in April of 2003. It's no less appropriate today.

Biography - Bob Webster

Bob Webster, a 12th-generation descendent of both the Darte family (Connecticut, 1630s) and the Webster family (Massachusetts, 1630s) is a descendant of Daniel Webster's father, Revolutionary War patriot Ebenezer Webster, who served with General Washington. Bob has always had a strong interest in early American history, our Constitution, U.S. politics, and law. Politically he is a constitutional republican with objectivist and libertarian roots. He has faith in the ultimate triumph of truth and reason over deception and emotion. He is a strong believer in our Constitution as written and views the abandonment of constitutional restraint by the regressive Progressive movement as a great danger to our Republic. His favorite novel is Atlas Shrugged by Ayn Rand and believes it should be required reading for all high school students so they can appreciate the cost of tolerating the growth of unconstitutional crushingly powerful central government. He strongly believes, as our Constitution enshrines, that the interests of the individual should be held superior to the interests of the state.

A lifelong interest in meteorology and climatology spurred his strong interest in science. Bob earned his degree in Mathematics at Virginia Tech, graduating in 1964.

Copyright 2006 by Bob Webster
All Rights Reserved.

© 2004-2006 by WEBCommentary(tm), All Rights Reserved