Tuesday, October 17, 2006

Sometimes, to gain control, you must give up power

10/11/06

In an article in today’s washingtonpost.com entitled McCain Targets Both Clintons Charles Babington documents the recriminations of Senators McCain and Clinton about the degree to which policies of the Clinton or Bush administration could be considered causal to the current situation being played out with North Korea’s recent nuclear test and their belligerence on the world’s stage.

The political context of these accusations belies a larger, more ominous, origin for the current crisis, a deteriorating United Nations. The United Nations, formed after World War II to manage the brave new world ushered in by the use of nuclear weapons is in tatters. The United States, an uncontested superpower since the fall of the Soviet Union, was itself belligerent on the world stage as it marched toward Bagdad 3 years ago. Arguably, the audacity of the United States has been a model for North Korea. But a more cogent model for the actions of the government in Pyongyang is the very structure of power established and legitimatized by the current United Nations.

Russia, France, China, Britain and the US have permanent seats on the UN Security Council. Each country can ultimately veto any pronouncements of this world body. It is not trivial to note that all of the permanent members of this council are nuclear powers. Nor is it trivial to note how Pakistan and India, with their acquisition of nuclear weapons, have risen in stature with the United States. Nor is it trivial that Israel has nuclear weapons but some pretend otherwise.

Why shouldn’t countries seek to have nuclear weapons? Did Native Americans with bows and arrows shun European guns and ammunition? Has any society, any culture, any nation not sought out the latest technology in weaponry once it was released from Pandora’s box?

If there is a failure in US policy, it is in decimating and trivializing the one hope we have to control the spread and use of nuclear weapons, a strong and viable United Nations. There is blame to go around. It is not only the collective failure of several presidencies in the US, but the failure of every permanent member nation of the UN Security Counsel. Collectively, they have allowed the UN to devolve into little more than an instrument for manipulation or outright rejection.

Robert Oppenheimer, called by some the father of the nuclear age, was aghast at the destructive force he had helped to unleash. He advocated for an international body to control the production, distribution and use of nuclear resources. His words fell on deaf ears.

Providing privilege and power to those who have nuclear capabilities guarantees that all countries will seek the same privilege. Today it is North Korea, tomorrow, Iran. Who will it be next week, next year? What countries still arm their warriors with bows and arrows?

The United Nations must be an inclusive, fair body for the deliberation of relationships between countries. It won’t matter much whether the next president is a Republican or a Democrat if there is no unity among the nations of the world. We must support the UN, make it stronger and more effective and recognize that sometimes, to gain control, you must give up power.

No comments: