Since its inception, UN supporters have looked to the UN with unworkable idealism about what it represents and what it could achieve. Given that it is nothing more than a collection of despots, dictators and the odd democrat, it was never going to be more than its members allowed it to be. The oil-for-food program was corrupt because members allowed it to be.
This is not to say the UN is useless. It is a useful talking shop, and to jaw-jaw is, as Winston Churchill said, better than to war-war. Though, even here, don't expect stellar results. The UN hasn't yet agreed on a definition of terrorism, no doubt because some members dabble in terrorism. And therein lies the rub. While reform may at least reduce corruption in the administration of the UN, it can never make member countries less corrupt or more democratic. So, we should never take the UN too seriously. More to the point, we should never cede sovereignty to it. It is, inevitably, as deeply flawed as its members.
This sums up my thoughts pretty well. Don't put this collection of tools in charge of anything important without our oversight. But remember that the UN can be useful to us as long as we don't fool ourselves into believing the hype and idealized image some have about the vaunted "international community."
Never expect too much.
Never expect it to save us.
And never, ever cede American sovereignty to the UN.
I hope Bolton goes to work on this mess and inflicts a good old-fashioned decimation on the ranks of the UN. Were I a UN bureaucrat with an office on one of the top ten floors, I'd move.
