Behind the Headlines the Un: Force or Albatross

The charade known as the General Assembly of the United Nations will begin its 28th regular session on Tuesday. Last year’s session proved that the world body has been reduced to little more than a talking shop concerning such vital issues as peace in the Middle East and ways of dealing with the proliferation of international terrorism. By now the UN Charter and the Universal Declaration of Human Rights of Man retain all the power of two pieces of soggy parchment clinging to each other as the tempest of international events continues to eradicate more and more sections of each document.

The UN’s ability to solve crises and chart new diplomatic routes is at its lowest ebb and as compromised as was the League of Nations by the time Hitler’s armed forces swept through Czechoslovakia. Yet–and this is the tragedy of current history–the UN is the only world body there is, the only world forum in which nations get together, or at least try to relate to each other directly or in proximity.

But even as delegates and ambassadors begin to arrive, the latest session begins in the context of a number of foreboding diplomatic tangles that indicate that principles will be diluted in the course of the proceedings and essentials will be ground to grist in the gears of intemperate and creaky propaganda mills driven by the Soviet Union, the Arab states and the non-aligned nations.

MIDEAST ISSUE ON FRONT BURNER

Undoubtedly the issue of the Middle East will be placed on the front burner as the Arab states will seek to deep the diplomatic pot boiling with efforts to isolate Israel from the community of nations and strive to seek sponsors among the non-aligned and some African nations to apply sanctions against the Jewish State. There is every likelihood that the Arab-Soviet-non-aligned bloc will launch even more vituperative assaults against Israel then ever before. The 76 non-aligned nations which met in Algiers form a majority in the UN. Fortunately, however, their disunity may prevent them from fashioning a solid anti-Israel front.

The U.S. for its part; under the gun of Arab oil-producing states and the Nixon Administration’s continuing efforts to develop detente with the Soviet Union, will be loathe to establish an effective countervailing force. It can be predicted that it will pursue a policy of quiet diplomacy to fend off and to attenuate one-sided anti-Israel resolutions.

The U.S. Ambassador, John Scali, hinted at this last Friday when he told a press conference that there may be possible new departures in the U.S. policy during scheduled meetings between Dr. Henry Kissinger and Israeli and Arab delegates at the Assembly. During the press conference, within 24 hours of the worst air clash between Israel and Syria since the Six-Day War, Scali recalled that President Nixon in his press conference Sept. 5 said that both Israel and the Arab states “are at fault.”

Scali also injected a term into the press conference that had been used by the Nixon Administration during 1969 and 1970 when the U.S. pressure on Israel to make concessions was at its apex. The term, “even-handed,” used by former Secretary of State William P. Rogers, was viewed by Israel as a slap at their increasing efforts to thaw the frozen peace negotiations. This term can be viewed as the policy line the Administration will take during the 28th session of the Assembly. Underlying this approach is, again, the pressure-exerted by the Arab oil-producing states despite Nixon’s insistence that oil will not determine the U.S. foreign policy in the Mideast.

DETENTE WILL LIMIT U.S. ACTIONS

On the issue of detente, a cornerstone of U.S. foreign policy, the Administration is even more reluctant to upset the diplomatic applecart with the Soviet Union. Dr. Kissinger time and again during his examination by the Senate Foreign Relations Committee affirmed and reaffirmed that detente is an imperative objective even to the point of extending most favored nation status to the USSR. Late last week there were moves on Capitol Hill to compromise the Jackson-Mills-Vanik measures by several Congressmen who had been briefed by the White House on the importance of U.S.-USSR trade relations.

Along with American caution, if not reluctance, to offend the Soviet Union and some Arab states, the West European nations represented in the Assembly are hardly in a better position to provide any kind of spark, let alone leadership, in the cause of a just and lasting Mideast peace. These countries, too, are under the gun of Arab oil-producing states and are also seeking closer trade ties with the Soviet Union.

As it stands now, moves to deal with international terrorism is point 94 on the 98-point Assembly agenda. While moves to combat international terrorism were urged by Secretary General Kurt Waldheim following the murder of 11 Israeli Olympians in Munich, the Ad Hoc Committee on International Terrorism met for several weeks earlier this year and failed to agree on any definition or means to combat this menace. Its low place on the agenda is a possible indication of what is in store for Israel and other forces seeking to deal with this continuing and unabated atrocity.

SPECIAL ACTIONS TO WATCH

Of special interest to watch will be Waldheim’s report to the Assembly on his trip to the Mideast. Observers here express skepticism that his efforts to keep options open for a peace settlement will find any overwhelming response in the Assembly. Some note that the continuing tensions, antagonisms and contradictions in the area along with the latest announcement that Jordan has once again been accepted into the Egyptian-Syrian fold will nullify any good that Waldheim may have done while visiting the four Arab countries and Israel.

Also to be watched is the almost certain admission to the UN of East Germany, a nation that has refused to pay reparations to the victims of Nazism and which is now permitting the Palestine Liberation Organization to open an office in East Berlin; the election of five non-permanent members of the Security Council; the issue of the Palestinian refugees; the report of the Special Committee to investigate Israeli practices in the administered territories, and the role of the Palestinian observers-delegation.

The 28th session takes place 40 years after Hitler assumed power in Germany. The question is whether or not the UN will be capable of learning any lessons from that event and from those in the mid-1930s when the League of Nations stood by helplessly as Japan grabbed Manchuria, Italy bombed Ethiopia, war erupted between Japan and China, Spain’s democratically elected government was overthrown by Franco’s forces, and Hitler began to devastate Europe. A less than tentative answer must be that the UN, rather than being a force for changing history and for assuring world peace, has become an albatross around the neck of history.