Security Council has the power
How imperialism has used the UN
By Fred Goldstein
This is the third and final article in a series by
Goldstein on the debate in the anti-war movement over the role
of the United Nations.
Another basis for the progressive image of the
United Nations is that it has served as a valuable forum for
many anti-colonial struggles and for condemnation of the great
powers. During the late 1950s and 1960s, during the tumultuous
period of decolonization, 80 formerly colonial countries joined
the United Nations, make it more difficult for the imperialists
to continue to use the organization for colonial and
counter-revolutionary intervention.
The UN General Assembly's prestige rose as it became an
important forum for many struggles and causes--including those
against South African apartheid; Portuguese colonialism in
Angola, Mozambique and Guinea Bissau; the U.S. colonization of
Puerto Rico; the U.S. embargo of Cuba, and many other
struggles.
In 1975 Yasser Arafat spoke at the podium of the General
Assembly, Zionism was officially condemned as racism, and the
Palestine Liberation Organization was recognized as the
representative of the Palestinian people.
U.S. and British imperialism had given open and covert
support to apartheid for decades. But once they decided to make
a strategic retreat in South Africa, under the relentlessly
growing national liberation struggle led by the African
National Congress, they consented to UN sanctions against the
apartheid regime. The same thing happened in the case of
southern Rhodesia, now Zimbabwe.
While the UN acquired an anti-colonial reputation based on
its use as a forum, on the ground it was only the liberation
struggles of the masses that forced colonialism to retreat. The
UN did nothing to end the Zionist occupation of Palestine.
Nothing was done to stop Portuguese colonialism. Nothing was
done to end the embargo on Cuba or to loosen U.S. colonialism's
grip on Puerto Rico. No material assistance was given to any
national liberation struggle, no material resistance to any
imperialist power.
During the 13 years of genocidal colonial war in
Vietnam--with carpet bombing, napalm and phosphorous bombing,
massacres of civilians and countless other war crimes--the UN
never initiated any action against Washington. When Washington,
Paris, London or Bonn wanted to pursue aggressive designs, they
either used NATO or carried out their intervention
unilaterally.
Security Council in charge
The Security Council, dominated by the imperialist powers,
held tight strings on any decisive military or economic
intervention under the aegis of the UN.
The organization's structure and rules carefully reserve the
ultimate authority for the imperialists. The General Assembly
has the right to "consider and make recommendations on the
principles of cooperation in the maintenance of international
peace and security." In many other spheres it "may discuss,"
"initiate studies" and "consider" various matters. (UN summary
of the functions of the General Assembly, www.un.org)
But the real authority lies with the Security Council, and
ultimately with the permanent powers holding the veto. "Under
the Charter, all Members of the United Nations agree to accept
and carry out the decisions of the Security Council ... the
Council alone has the power to take decisions which Member
States are obligated under the Charter to carry out." (UN
summary) And to make it explicit, the Security Council has
jurisdiction over the Military Staff Committee, Peacekeeping
Operations, Inspections, War Crimes Tribunals and other
decisive instruments of forceful and aggressive
intervention.
As for humanitarian intervention with food, medicine,
education and development aid, this of course is a wholly
progressive function. The countries that receive such aid are
totally entitled to it. But the truth is that this aid is
really recycled--a miniscule fraction of the wealth stolen from
these dependent countries, which have been impoverished by
corporate plunder under the protection of the very same
imperialist powers that dominate the UN.
For example, contributions to the entire World Health
Organization for the year 2002 came to about $400 million. Yet,
according to the UN Development Report itself, 1.3 billion
people live on $1 a day. A billion people have no access to
clean water. To cope with these problems, a thousand times the
WHO budget would be just a start, especially considering the
AIDS epidemic.
This disproportion is the same for UNICEF, the World Food
Project, the World Development Project and other agencies.
The fact that these progressive functions are attached to
the UN does not make it any less an instrument of imperialism.
This is precisely why these progressive functions are so
miniscule and strangulated, subject to the budgetary
limitations imposed by Washington and other big imperialist
powers that are the organization's principal donors.
The return of the UN as an instrument of aggression has
coincided with the collapse of the USSR and the decline of the
anti-colonial struggle.
Sam Marcy, the founder of Workers World Party, wrote before
the outbreak of the Gulf War, during the first George Bush's
administration:
"The truly progressive anti-war forces in this country have
to explain that the UN is a cover for an alliance of all the
imperialist countries, extending from Tokyo to Denmark. Their
aim is to redivide the world's resources, to deliver a death
blow to OPEC as an economic organization and even more to the
political independence of the Middle East. They seek to
reassert imperialist dominance, divide the booty derived from
the sweat and blood of the oppressed peoples everywhere, and
redistribute it in accordance to the new world relationships.
That's what the struggle is about.
"It would be all to the good if the problem of U.S.
imperialist aggression throughout the world could be solved
peacefully and justly through the United Nations. Indeed, it
would be a very easy and welcome solution. ...
"[But] it is only the progressive, widespread and relentless
intervention of the masses on a truly gigantic scale which can
stop the mad adventure of the Pentagon, the military-industrial
complex, the banks and the Bush administration. The latter is
nothing more than what Marx described: the executive committee
of the ruling class." (Workers World, Nov. 8, 1990)
Those words, written in anticipation of the first invasion
of Iraq and the role of the UN in imposing sanctions, apply as
much today as they did in 1990--except this time the European
imperialists are trying to use the UN, after Washington
discarded it.
Reprinted from the Oct. 23, 2003, issue of
Workers World newspaper
This article is copyright under a Creative
Commons License.
Workers World, 55 W. 17 St., NY, NY 10011
Email: ww@workers.org
Subscribe wwnews-subscribe@workersworld.net
Support independent news http://www.workers.org/orders/donate.php)
HOME
:: U.S. NEWS ::
WORLD NEWS ::
EDITORIALS ::
SUBSCRIBE ::
DONATE
Email
this article
Printable
page