Basic HTML Version
December
1971
dicative of both the goals and character
of its govermnent.
In the past, the Security CounciJ has
suffered from two dangerous tendencies.
First, a matter is generally not brought
to the attention of the council until
ttfter
therc has been a breach of the
peace. Thus the Council Jinds itself
immediately dealing with the
effectJ
of the problem and is unable to get at
and eliminate the root cause.
Second, in dea ling with the breach of
peace, the tendency is to rcstore the
status quo as it was prior to the fight–
ing; the
ca11se
of the trouble, therefore,
tends to continue, looming as large as
ever.
The nations must take upon them–
selves the responsibility of settling dif–
ferences
bef ore
they break out into
armed conAict. This does not mean
ma intaining the status c¡uo. But it
means righting what is wrong - get–
ting at the
ca11se
of the potential
conAict.
History Looks at the
U nited Nations
History will judge the world on what
it makes of its opportunities at the U.N.
Whether the U.N.'s role will be con–
structive or disruptive wi ll have an im–
portant effect on the immediate future
of the world. The League of Nations
failed because it was
NOT
really a
LEAGUE.
The United Nations will fail
if its members are not
tmited.
The United Nations is not a world
government. It has no authority over
the nations of the world, but rather is
nothing more than a composite of its
members. Lord Caradon has said,
"There is nothing wrong with the
United Nations except the members.'' It
seems it is too much to ask suspicious
members of the World Community to
act like bosom friends when there is no
mutual outs ide threat. In fact, any sem–
blance of unity has been evident
only
in
times of crisis.
The U.N. was born in the fires of
World War
JI.
The name "United
Nations" was in fact originally used to
denote those nat ions that were com–
bining their efforts to defeat the Axis
tyranny.
Al
that time
the thoughts of
peace and security based on world order
were uppermost in the mi nds of aU. In
The
PLAIN TRUTH
fact, it took fifty ditferent nations only
two months to come up with an accept–
able Charter.
*
The United Nations began life as an
ttlliance
of nations with a common goal
and a common purpose. But the ink of
the sig natures on the charter had barely
dried when sorne nations began to put
what they considered their own
natíonal
interests ahead of the lofty principies of
United Nations
Charter
•rhe preamble to the UN Char–
ter reads as follows: WE THE
PEOPLE OF THE UNITED NA–
TIONS DETERMINED: to save
succeeding ge nerations from the
scourge of war, which twice in
our lifet ime has brought untold
sorrow lo mankind, and to re–
affirm faith in fundamental hu–
ma n righls, in the dignily and
worth of lhe human person, in
lhe equal rights of men and
women and of nations large
and small, and to establish con–
ditions under which justice and
respect for lhe obligations aris–
ing from treaties and other
sources of internalional law can
be maintained, and to promote
social progress and better stan–
dards of life in larger freedom.
And for these ends, to pracl ice
tolerance and live togelher in
peace wilh one anolher a s good
neighbors, and to unite our
strenglh lo maintain inlernation–
al peace and securily, and to
ensure, by the acceptance of
principies and institutions of
melhods, tha l armed fo rce shall
not be used, save in lhe com–
mon interesl, and to employ
internat ional machinery for the
promotion of economic and
social advancement of a ll pea–
pies, WE HAVE RESOLVED TO
COMBINE OUR EFFORTS TO
ACCOMPLISH THESE AIMS.
the Charter. And thus the United
Nations was united no more.
The Insurmountable Problem
Of al! the problems that hamper and
limit the peace keeping etforts of the
United Nations, one stands out as a
seemingly insurmountable obstacle.
Unquestionably, the financia! prob–
lems are significant. And the intrin-
45
sic st ructure of the organization empha–
s izcs the format ion of power blocs and
encourages debates rather than genuine
negotiations.
Much more difficult - and seemingly
impossible to resolve - is the task of
empowering the United Nations with
the authority it would have to have to
be truJy effective in maintaining world
peace.
Nations are said to be sovereign.
That is, they recognize no higher power
as being in authority over them. To lose
sovereignty is to lose control over one's
national destiny. Yet, this is the very
antithesis of the kind of attitude needed
for world union, cooperation and peace.
In the words of General Assembly
President Adam Malik of Indonesia,
what is needed is, "a new global aware–
ness, rooted in a heightened sense of
human solida rity and going beyond the
self-centered precepts of nation-states
and the ideological refiexes that have
guided our nations duriog the past
decades."
Unt il the nations accept a
s11pra–
nationa/
sovereignty that has the power
to arbitrate disputes, we shall not have
this needed solidarity. T he U.N. has not
been granted such power by its member
states. It can be only as powerful and
just as its members allow it to be.
But as Lord Caradon said, "There is
nothing wrong with the United Nations
except its members." The U.N. is a
noble inst itution. Its members, unfortu–
nately, are not yet noble.
Until the nations are able to have a
global awareness, to go beyond the self–
ish aims of nationalism, to think of
themselves as their brother's keepers
rather than their brother's enemy -
only then wiJI condit ions be ripe for
fulfillment of the ancíent prophecy:
"And they (the nations] shall beat
their swords into plowshares, and their
spears into pruninghooks : nation shall
not lift up a sword against nation,
neither shall they Iearn war any
more.'' O
For understanding of HOW peace
will become a reali ty
in
the near
future, write f<1r our FREE, illu–
st rated bo<>kJ et
T he W onderful
World T omo" ort•- W hat lt Wi/1
Be Líke.
See Staff Box, Jnside Fm nt
Cover for address nearest you .