COLUMN: U.S., U.N. should join forces

Published: Thursday, April 24, 2003

Anecdotes about pride are plentiful. In the Book of Proverbs, the Bible tells us that, "Pride goeth before destruction, and an haughty spirit before a fall."

Founding forefather Thomas Jefferson said, "Pride costs more than hunger, thirst and cold." And, perhaps most pertinent, American Clergyman Fulton John Sheen said, "Pride is an admission of weakness; it secretly fears all competition and dreads all rivals."

Despite requests from the United Nations, the White House continues to hurdle international collaborative-effort plans in establishing a post-war Iraqi government. Yet in this time of political strife, when it would be surprisingly easy to make an even more flammable effigy of ourselves, the United States must use extreme caution so as not to let the rewarding smell of burning rubble and victory overpower the other senses.

Especially the most common of all senses.

The United States and the United Nations both agree that the prompt sovereign rule of Iraq by Iraqis and not a puppet government run by outsiders should be set as the ultimate and final goal in the Iraq liberation process. However, America stands to lose more than it will gain should it choose to assume sole responsibility without actively allowing the United Nations to play a major role.

While many Coalition flag-wavers are calling to mind the original oppositionary stance that U.N. Security Council members France, Germany and Russia maintained prior to the Coalition acts of vigilance as just cause for excluding these nations from post-war efforts, listening to these voices would be a pigheaded action. Now is not the time for America to let jingoistic pride stand in the way of global peace efforts, now is the time to embrace an international gregariousness.

In calming the narrowly patriotic voices that want the post-war resolution to reflect gloriously only on those nations that chose to run alongside America's war machine from time zero, it's important to remember that many members of the U.N. did not oppose a war targeting the annihilation of misanthropic Iraqi tyrants, they merely opposed a premature war based on speculation and decade-long grudges.

But in the aftermath of war, many nations are stepping forward, extending their generosity toward the Coalition Forces and offering assistance. And it would be damned foolish of the United States to sacrifice turning a questionable deed into a virtuous one only because we want to stand alone at the podium.

As of Tuesday, France was the first non-militaristically involved country that supported the indefinite lifting of U.N. sanctions placed on Iraq since the 1990 attack on Kuwait. The embargos have since crippled Iraq's economy, which would otherwise be strong due, obviously, to a plentitude of oil.

Germany and Russia remain hesitant, calling for the reimplementation of U.N. weapons inspections to verify Iraq's disarmament before raising sanctions. But rather than accepting Hans Blix's offer to return to Iraq with a party of U.N. weapons inspectors and hunt down the remaining weapons, the United States has a defiant attitude, radiating a bitter desire to act alone.

By raising sanctions, Iraq can begin to rapidly generate money, thus decreasing the amount of expenditures that will be endured by Coalition countries. In order to instill a sense of autonomy, and give the yet to be appointed/elected Iraqi leaders a firm enough sense of sovereignty to shrug off foreign allegiance, the Iraqi government should be funded primarily from moneys raised through domestic resources. And with Iraqi oil fields pumping oil again, programs like Oil For Food and others should contribute the vast majority of financial resources aimed at restructuring and egalitarianizing Iraq.

Chief U.N. Weapons Inspector Hans Blix recently proffered services toward the Coalition Forces, offering to return to Iraq and aid in the hunt for weapons of mass destruction. The United States declined, sending more than 1,000 American weapon inspectors in lieu of the U.N. delegates.

Not only would working with the U.N. garner global support in Iraqi peace efforts, but also strengthen the unstable relationship between the United States and many nations that opposed rash artillery deployment. Iran has renounced American presence in Iraq, stating that they will not recognize any form of legislative system founded by America.

In working with the U.N., the United States stands to gain a more generalized acceptance of the future Iraqi government from Arab states; a joint national effort will emanate philanthropy and potentially squelch faction rebellions. It will be much harder for Iraqi opposition groups to gain support in protesting a U.N. effort than just an American effort alone.

Working closely with the U.N. is the perfect opportunity for the United States to shrug off the world's perception of America as having a Superman complex, save billions of dollars that could be better invested in our own economy and demonstrates that our interests are in the right place. Instead of boasting independence, why not enforce foreign relations by assenting to cooperate, showing that we are not a country run by pride, arrogance and immature feuds.

Share the burden, America. Save some money. Do the right thing.