I suspect the reason that the UN Security Council hasn't passed a resolution
demanding a halt to the bombing is the veto power of the US/UK/France
-----Original Message-----
From: Martin William Smith <[log in to unmask]>
To: [log in to unmask] <[log in to unmask]>
Date: Tuesday, June 08, 1999 1:58 PM
Subject: Re: [CHOMSKY] Bombs and the ad campaign


>Brett Murphy writes:
>> I am saying what is the good of supporting NATO when it is by
>> definition an organisation set up during the period of
>> anti-communist paranoia? That is why there is no point in supporting
>> NATO.
>
>The reason to support NATO (not the bombing but the NATO structure) is
>that the UN structure will never work as long as a subset of the
>members each has the veto power.  The veto power cripples the decision
>making authority of the organization.  In this case it would be China
>and Russia that would veto the action, and maybe it should be vetoed,
>but in the majority of cases it would be the US vetoing the action, in
>recent times on behalf of Israel or, of course, itself.  How many
>years ago would Palestine have become an independent state were it not
>for the US veto?  I think that problem would have been worked out long
>ago, but it would probably have required some kind of military threat
>or economic thread against Israel to do it, and that calls for a
>decision making structure that can't be derailed by one nation.  The
>NATO structure is a better structure for such problems.
>
>martin
>
>Martin Smith                    Email: [log in to unmask]
>P.O. Box 1034 Bekkajordet       Tel. : +47 330 35700
>N-3194 HORTEN, Norway           Fax. : +47 330 35701
>