Tuesday, February 25, 2003
Today we start with the Washington Post's take on the new 2nd (or 18th!) U.N. resolution being tabled by the U.S., Britain and Spain. My take on this is that, essentially, the game is over for France. Their only real power is derived from their seat on the Security Council. If the Security Council continues to maintain this farce and not live up to the "serious consequences" alluded to in this and previous resolutions they will be rendered impotent (even more than they are) when the U.S. and the coalition of the willing wages a successful war against Iraq. The risks are there for Bush and, more significantly, for Tony Blair. However, for Bush, as soon as the U.S. goes in and wins, any negatives on the domestic front from not having the U.N. will be outweighed by victory and on the international front....well, couldn't get much worse, anyway, could it? It's a little tougher for Blair, but should the war on Iraq go successfully, and the predicted human rights violations are uncovered, not to mention all of the weapons "Made In France", then he will probably make out ok. Meanwhile, the last vestiges of France's power, a veto on the U.N. Security Council will have been erased. Bush will have shown, and set a precedent, that it is no longer necessary, and may indeed be harmful, to entangle the U.S.'s foreign policy and safety in the bureaucracy of the U.N. By going through the process of U.N. legitimization, he will have rendered that very process obsolete. It's in our own interest to do what our leaders, elected by us, think is best for our own sovereign nation. We are a country of action. We mean what we say. We strive for an outcome, not for procedure. The U.N. seems to savor the reverse.