Israel’s “Obligation” to the U.N.

by | Aug 5, 2006

Secretary of State Rice has stated that Israel has an “obligation” to respond to the U.N.’s demand for a cease-fire in Lebanon. Since when does any sovereign government have an obligation to reply or have anything at all to do with the U.N.? Keep in mind that Rice is not merely claiming that it would […]

Secretary of State Rice has stated that Israel has an “obligation” to respond to the U.N.’s demand for a cease-fire in Lebanon.

Since when does any sovereign government have an obligation to reply or have anything at all to do with the U.N.?

Keep in mind that Rice is not merely claiming that it would be wise for Israel to address the U.N. demand; she’s stating there is an actual obligation, thereby implying that the U.N. is sovereign over the government of Israel, when it comes to the actions of Israel.

No such thing is true. If it were, the U.S. would also have to surrender sovereignty to the U.N. In fact, the very same Bush Administration who now says Israel is obliged to answer to the U.N. would never have entered Iraq, because it had no permission from the U.N. to do so.

The U.N. is a body with membership that includes free nations; totalitarian nations; and terrorist-supporting states. No free country, such as Israel or the U.S., has any interest whatsoever in surrendering sovereignty to a body that attempts to split the difference between nations with Constitutions, individual rights, and free elections, on the one side; and countries run by ruthless dictatorships and violent gangs, on the other.

I know that Secretary Rice and President Bush would reply that they mean no such thing. But when you use the word “obligation” you had better mean what you’re saying; and you had better be right.

Dr. Michael Hurd is a psychotherapist, columnist and author of "Bad Therapy, Good Therapy (And How to Tell the Difference)" and "Grow Up America!" Visit his website at: www.DrHurd.com.

The views expressed above represent those of the author and do not necessarily represent the views of the editors and publishers of Capitalism Magazine. Capitalism Magazine sometimes publishes articles we disagree with because we think the article provides information, or a contrasting point of view, that may be of value to our readers.

Submit a Comment

Your email address will not be published.

Help Capitalism Magazine get the pro-capitalist message out.

With over 9,000 articles online Capitalism Magazine is completely free. We rely on the generosity of our readers to keep us going. So if you already donate to us, thank you! And if you don’t, please consider making a donation today. One-off donations – or better yet, monthly donations – are hugely appreciated. You can find out more here. Thank you!

Pin It on Pinterest