Keep the United Nations out of Iraq – and America
Rep. Ron Paul (R-TX)
April 29, 2003

As the heaviest fighting in Iraq comes to a close, questions about what kind of government will be established dominate the news. Looting and lawlessness are the order of the day in the inevitable vacuum created by the removal of Saddam Hussein. Not surprisingly, the United Nations – at the urging of France, Germany, and Russia – wants to fill that vacuum and play the central role in postwar Iraq. If the Iraqi people ever hope to enjoy any measure of self-determination, UN occupation must be resisted.

Is the UN demand to oversee postwar Iraq remotely justified? An increasing number of Americans say “No.” In fact, more and more Americans are rejecting the very legitimacy of the UN, openly calling for the US to withdraw from the organization. Even mainstream Washington pundits on the right have begun to question the wisdom of continued US participation in the UN.

I happen to agree with these new critics of the UN, having advocated getting out of the organization for twenty years. Obviously many Americans now want out of the UN because they resent its refusal to sanction our war in Iraq, and certainly America should never let its national security become a matter of UN consensus. But this growing anti-UN sentiment provides an opportunity to make a larger point, namely that participation in the UN is fundamentally incompatible with American sovereignty and the Constitution.

Our current approach of alternately using and ignoring the UN results in the worst of all worlds. When we play along and cite UN resolutions as justification for our actions, we give credibility to the concepts of international law and global government. We give up precious sovereignty not only to the UN, but also through trade agreements and organizations like the WTO and NAFTA. Yet while we cede more and more of our national identity to the globalists, we gain little in exchange. Other nations see us as willing to ignore the global rules when it suits our purposes, and we remain hated and mistrusted by much of the envious world. America would be far better off simply rejecting global government as a concept, and openly embracing true sovereignty.

Americans should seize the chance to expose the myth of so-called “international law.” Neither the UN nor any other international body has authority to make laws that bind the American people. Simply stated, just laws are derived from the consent of the governed, and Americans have not consented to be governed by foreign individuals or bodies. Constitutionally speaking, only Congress can craft our federal laws. While constitutionally-ratified treaties can be legitimate, no treaty can usurp the basic function of Congress by transferring legislative authority to an international body. When the UN attempts to dictate our domestic labor, environmental, trade, tax, and gun laws – as it already has – we need to remember that only the representative US Congress has authority to make our national laws

I recently reintroduced the American Sovereignty Restoration Act, H.R. 1146, in the House of Representatives. This bill will end US participation in the UN, stop the terrible waste of $300 million tax dollars in annual UN dues, and ensure that American soldiers never serve under a UN command. I have asked the House leadership for its help in bringing the bill to a quick vote, so Americans can see where their representatives stand on the issue.

Although I strongly believe our foreign policy should be based on the philosophy of our Founding Fathers – open relations with all nations that seek the same, and entangling alliances with none – I certainly don't believe the UN should be involved in our policy decisions at all. Our foreign policy and our domestic laws can be crafted only by the American people and their elected representatives.

comments on this article?

Ron Paul, M.D., represents the 14th Congressional District of Texas in the United States House of Representatives.

Previous articles by Rep. Ron Paul

Keep the United Nations out of Iraq – and America

War Profiteers

Don't Antagonize Our Trading Partners

The Myth of War Prosperity

Another United Nations War?

Buying War Allies and 'Friends' with Foreign Aid

Conscription Is Slavery

Waning Prospects for Peace in 2003?

What Does Regime Change in Iraq Really Mean?

Our Incoherent Foreign Policy Fuels Middle East Turmoil

Homeland Security Is the Largest Federal Expansion in 50 Years

Unintended Consequences

The Homeland Security Monstrosity

Oppose The New Homeland Security Bureaucracy!

Honoring Our Military Veterans

Opposing the Use of Military Force Against Iraq

Congress Must Say Yes or No to War

Is Congress Relevant with Regards to War?

Can We Afford This War?

War is a Political Mistake

Entangling Alliances Distort our Foreign Policy

Questions that Won't Be Asked About Iraq

A Foreign Policy for Peace, Prosperity, and Liberty

Arguments Against a War in Iraq

Important Questions About War in Iraq

War in Iraq, War on the Rule of Law

Will Congress Debate War with Iraq?

The Homeland Security Non-Debate

Department of Homeland Security – Who Needs It?

Monitor Thy Neighbor

Opening Cuban Markets Good for Cubans and Americans

Is America a Police State?

Inspection or Invasion in Iraq?

Don't Force Taxpayers to Fund Nation-Building in Afghanistan

Say No to Conscription

Statement in Support of a Balanced Approach to the Middle East Peace Process

The Founding Fathers Were Right About Foreign Affairs

America's Entangling Alliances in the Middle East

Back to Home Page | Contact Us