11 come in'
;y have be« ,",'
mbers of tl
of the mei<
t members «
t this COUDM
rich in ma*
a two warrin
rich that W
lish the ma*
Js mere actors in some kind of colossal theatrical pageant.
They believe that in the end this organization will probably wither as did the League of Nations, or else bring
some mysterious advantage - it matters little which, so
wig as one escapes the trouble of serious and laborious
■Unking, and while bread and shelter remain presently
Mailable. This bloc indulges the philosophy, if any, of
^joying peace with lassitude. On the contrary, peace will
,(' the achievement of indefatigable effort. This group cus-
omarily fails to exercise the franchise, normally lives near
e margin of its resources, and gives little thought to
e latent perils of given situations. When agitated by
"'S|gning false prophets, it can readily be attracted to
^wblish a majority thwarting constructive effort. The
omans of the Empire's decadence fully recognized a
jmilar group in the periodic passage of the undermining
^ 'le growing complexities of the world pattern must be
Wight home to this group of the indifferent, whose help,
rough a thoroughly aroused sense of our imminent
"anger, is direly needed.
• The Secessionists
as hoped, «J The secessionists would scrap the UN as a bit of worth-
vc, camps, nj ess machinery. Anti-UN sentiment is fomenting all over
es from ea e nation, even in Congress, from citizens who feel that
V"'V were trapped in a Communist-spawned United
'"""is through a fervent desire for peace.
Just how- withdrawal might be accomplished without
(| '"'-,' loss of essential allies, or provoking war, is not
sj'ar' The charter contains no express withdrawal provi-
• the intent of its architects was to give it permanency.
full" adroitly was the charter drafted that there is not now
^ accord among experts in law and government even as
^hat the charter of the UN reallv is — whether it be a
•uric but si*
>re the Boi
really is. 1*
into the c"'
r a world constitution. Most legal experts regard
® charter as a treaty.
"at a monstrous situation — the possibility of this
^"'"s being committed by action of a President and the
\n. '" 1^45 to a legal instrument "overriding our Con-
j "u°n," without the consent of the governed — the
'lo""'"1 People! If such a construction should be en-
„ :s<,('- 'lien the entire charter is a nullity as far as this
4 aUf!°n is concerned, being ultra vires — transcending the
Poo 7'ty ~ '°dged '" the President and Senate' We' tll('
r» P'e, retain the residual powers beyond those granted.
r elected officials, who obviouslv cannot amend the
using a ,
t to our li^
ht have th*j
i secure Wp
;e upon WT
ct their f
Constitution without ratification by three-fourths
h.,,."' states, could hardly abrogate it in favor of an inter-
;,( le UN Charter is an international treaty, indetermin-
p . as to time, among sixty sovereign nations. A treaty is
'■irily a contract, not a legislative act.
i|r "' UN Charter contains no express escape or with-
■|/\"1 provision, as does, for example, the Inter-American
'iii I, ol Reciprocal Assistance, commonly known as the
tfeo ' subscribed by nineteen American republics, set-
5."P the western hemispheric regional arrangement.
\l(j ''' United Nations does not presently constitute a
tC) '' government. We, as a nation, may have the "power"
(.,. ^'o'draw. because of our national strength. But do we
JUj) the "right" to secede, through abrogation of our
,(.(,."l'l,"iii.il contract? Russia would probably rejoice in
'" Us do so. It would render the Soviet task of assuin
l!'i, u" s NOTE: See Of Bread and Circuses, urticle by Admiral
'"''<< II, Facts Forum News, February, 1956.
United Nations Building, New York City
V's Forum News, August, 1956
ing control much easier.
Were Congress to withhold required appropriations to
support our share in the UN', that organization would
probably collapse, with precisely the same unfavorable
results as an out-and-out abrogation of the charter. The
grave danger arises through the militant desire of international communism to conquer the world — us included;
and our withdrawal would leave the freedom-loving
nationals weakened and further exposed to Soviet infiltration. This nation would thereby suffer in its foreign relations. It would lose its role of world leadership together
with its allies.
Confronted with this situation, secessionists would ex-
elude Russia from the UN. But how? The charter's text
affords no answer. From a practical point of view it seems
advantageous that the Soviet remain — if for no better reason than to afford some slight information as to what goes
on behind the iron curtain, and to supply samples of its
activity among us.
3. The Laissez-Faire Group
The laissez-faire [or hands-off] group favors a continuation of the Status quo of the IN as now implemented,
with intelligent support by the strong nations. Such action