The UN is mostly used, not as a facilitator of international diplomacy, but as a cover for international gangsterism. The organization’s attempts to rein in rogue regimes have a way of getting more toothless as they become more desperately needed. Today’s U.S.-Russia agreement on a new UN resolution against Iran is a case in point. The AP explains:
The United States, Britain and France have been pressing for a new round of sanctions to step up pressure against Iran for its continuing refusal to suspend uranium enrichment as a prelude to talks on its nuclear program. But Russia and China objected to new sanctions.
The proposed new resolution appears to be a compromise-no new sanctions but a tough statement to Iran that Security Council resolutions are legally binding and must be carried out.
Russia just bought its partner Iran some time by agreeing to sign on to a “tough statement.”
Despite the financial crisis, tonight’s debate should still cover some foreign policy. Barack Obama needs to be asked what exactly he means when he says he will “tighten the screws” on Iran through sanctions and international diplomacy. It’s an open secret that the screws to which he refers have no threads. They’re dummies employed during bouts of sham diplomacy.
He should also be asked another question. When the Iraq War was at its worst, the question put to its supporters was: “At what point will you acknowledge failure?” Why should diplomacy not be held to the same standard? When will Obama and others pushing for more diplomacy with Iran admit it’s time to change course?