by Lady Liberty
04/14/2003

Last month, I ran across an editorial cartoon  which I initially figured to be the work of the typical left-leaning cartoonist. After a moment's reflection, however, it struck me that the artist was actually saying something that was probably unintentional as well as right on the money.

The cartoon in question consists of two panels. On the top panel, captioned "Why we're going to war with Iraq", is a drawing of Saddam Hussein thumbing is nose at the UN Building. On the bottom panel, captioned "How we're going to war with Iraq", is a drawing of George W. Bush thumbing his nose at the UN Building. At first blush, The Denver Post's  Mike Keefe appears to be saying, "Look at the pot calling the kettle black! George W. Bush is really not a lot different from Saddam Hussein." At second blush, that's likely exactly what he meant to say. But that's not how I see it!

It is, of course, inarguable that Saddam Hussein is thumbing his nose at the UN. In fact, he's been doing it for years. After the first Gulf War, the UN told Iraq it would have to destroy its weapons of mass destruction and that there would be inspections to ensure that the destruction occurred. After engaging in what was essentially a shell game with UN inspectors - removing weapons from one facility until inspectors declared it clean, and then moving them back in so the next facility could get a passing grade in its turn - Iraq ceased even a pretense of cooperation and kicked the inspectors out of the country. The UN promptly imposed sanctions on Iraq as is outlined in Chapter VII, Article 41 of the UN Charter.

For sanctions to work, countries must suffer. It goes without saying that what that really means is that the people of a country against which sanctions are implemented will suffer. Following a logical progression, once the people have suffered enough we can suppose that they will rise in righteous indignation and replace or reform the bad leader. Unfortunately, while the UN was sanctioning Iraq, it was also responding to those who pleaded that the sanctions be lifted "for the children" or "for the innocent Iraqi people". The bottom line is that the people of Iraq got food and medicine, and Saddam Hussein snickered inside his palace walls because he knew the people were fed and healthy and not threatened nearly enough to brave his wrath by speaking or moving against him. Under the burden of guilt the UN was made to feel concerning the "children and innocent Iraqi people", Iraq was also permitted to sell oil as long as the proceeds were used for more food and medicine. It's a safe bet that some or all of that money was diverted elsewhere because...

...after a dozen years, little about Iraq has changed except that Saddam Hussein almost certainly retained and rebuilt all of the weapons of mass destruction he was supposed to be destroying, and has probably even developed and built a few new ones. He has even had enough money to spare to offer significant funds to the poor grieving familes of suicide bombers (something he generously publicizes just so anyone thinking about strapping a TNT belt to himself before he gets on a bus will know that his family will be wealthy if he dies) and to covertly (sometimes not so covertly) support terrorist groups such as the infamous al Qaeda.

It took awhile, but the terrorism connection and some serious threats from the United States got the UN to once again decide it would act under the UN Charter to peacefully settle the matter by sending inspectors back into Iraq. Under the threat of military action, Saddam Hussein welcomed the inspectors back into the country and swore they wouldn't find him to be in violation of any agreements. Well, except for some missiles he said he'd destroyed earlier. But he's destroying a few more as a gesture of good faith, so that's okay! And there's the newly developed cluster warhead capable of delivering biological or chemical agents to a target. But other than that, he cooperated this time. Well, and we could talk about the drone plane that's in violation of previous agreements. But he must have been good there, too, since Hans Blix (the chief UN inspector) reported the Iraqi government really was cooperating, and he only made mention of the drone plane some 700 pages deep in the report where it might not be noticed too quickly. As for the significant quantities of anthrax that are "missing", well, anybody could make a mistake on paperwork, so it's probably been destroyed just as we're told it was. Really, it has been!

Meanwhile, despite provisions in the UN Charter (Chapter VII, Article 40) that says decision-making by the UN Security Council should take into consideration failure to comply with earlier agreements, the Council still refused to move on to the next step as listed in the UN Charter, Chapter VII, Article 42 which includes a variety of actions that may be taken by armed forces. Some members of the Council wanted the inspectors to be given more time in Iraq before any kind of military step is taken. They favored telling Saddam Hussein - just as they have been for the last decade - to comply or else. Or else what? Perhaps if he didn't comply, they'd ask him to comply again. That is, after all, the sum total of the consequences Iraq has been dealing with up until recently, and there was little likelihood the Security Council would have changed its tack dramatically, especially given that France promised to veto anything other than a continuation of the previous plans.

Regardless of what France and Russia believe, President Bush thought the inspectors had had enough time and that Saddam Hussein had had more than enough time, so he lobbied the Security Council to authorize military action. His requests almost certainly fell under the UN Charter, Chapter VI, which is nobly titled "Pacific Settlement of Disputes" and which suggests a whole series of steps to be taken to ensure peaceful resolutions for international problems. The Security Council is, however, so hung up on the early Chapter VII Articles that it wasn't about to move on to the solutions outlined in Article 42 whether President Bush thought it was past time for that to happen or not.

Interestingly enough, the United States should be less concerned with Chapter VI or VII of the UN Charter and more so with the US Constitution, Section 8. That's the part where it says that Congress has the authority to declare war, not the president alone, and certainly not a loosely knit group of other nations who meet under a Charter alleged to be improperly signed (Congress has authorized military intervention in Iraq, but has stopped short of issuing a formal declaration of war).

In short, getting the UN to move forward, even under its own rules, is like pulling teeth. And that's a singularly ironic metaphor since, as Mike Keefe's cartoon clearly shows, both Saddam Hussein and George W. Bush know perfectly well that the UN is utterly toothless. One man has felt free to do as he will, whether it be violations of human rights or outright attempts at genocide, because he knows the UN will authorize little more than it's already done. And in a nutshell, that's been nothing, at least so far as Saddam Hussein's grip on absolute power and the threat to others who cross him is concerned. The other man would have liked to feel free to do as he will (in compliance with the Constitution and as Congress permits, one would hope), but he attempted to follow form under a Charter that is apparently serving merely to allow the very group it codified to be as impotent as it wants to be. And it wants to be.

Is a war with Iraq the right thing to do? Maybe. Or maybe not. Regardless, it's becoming clearer on almost a daily basis that the United Nations isn't the answer, either. In fact, the UN is rapidly becoming a problem all its own, not to mention a significant threat to national sovereignty. The decision was made to go into Iraq. Now it's time for serious consideration to be given to getting out of the UN.

Lady Liberty
March 11, 2003