UN vs. NATO Power

By CDR. Boyd Nethercott USN (Ret.)

It is time for the United Nations to clean-up their act and improve the desperately poor member states. Let the United States be free to deal with nations of our choosing - one on one; with help from our own allies. We now have direct supporting coalitions.

Some of the UN nations can help by encouraging the destruction of the extreme Islamic cells within their own boundaries. We know that there are numerous highly organized cells all over the world. The hard-core of all these deadly organizations world-wide may number 40,000. There are, however, those who support the fundamentalists and others who are intimidated, and others who are “fellow travelers,” so to speak. The total of supporters could be enormous.

The Muslim Brotherhood, based in Egypt is perhaps the most powerful world wide Islamic fundamentalist group today. Separate extremist groups work within its universe. Some of the virulent groups are: The Al Jihad, the Hamas, the Hizballah (Iranian Shiite) vhe Taliban. All have terrorist cells among theo. The Muslim Brotherhood membership could be over a million. The Al Qaeda of Bin Laden is a virulent and widespread network of extreme groups. All of the groups above have cells in the United States!

In the future, we may be able to use the UN for something like a world-wide network of communications and warning systems. But, we cannot let the UN now use the United States by taking over any of our extensive potential offensive operations.

The UN relies, in the European Atlantic-Mediterranean area, upon some members of the NATO forces to provide all its military power. The UN is planning for its own deployable “standing army” to replace that inconvenience of having NATO “competition.”
NATO nations have provided small military forces for “peacekeeping” and observation. These are the blue-helmeted forces. Most people, world-wide, do not know, or remember, that all military forces used in Bosnia-Herzegovina, Kosovo and Macedonia, etc., were NATO multinational forces under NATO command!

NATO has now pledged total military and intelligence support to the United States. The attack on the U.S. is now considered an attack on each NATO member. I do not know what this does to the UN Charter.

NATO was established 24 August 1949. There are now nineteen (19) member-nations. Twenty four (24) other nations have joined NATO in the “Partnership For Peace” (PFP) program allowing observation and participation in certain exercises.

The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) in terms of staffing and military forces and in total numbers of people (land, sea, air) far exceeds the numbers of staff and workers (70,000) of the UN. NATO is exceedingly more powerful and cohesive than the UN. NATO has integrity, no in-fighting, no insidious agenda. NATO has armed forces.
On the other hand, the UN breeds controversy, has no united forum, has no “righteous fire in the belly,” no troops (yet), no forceful power. The UN could generate useful intelligence on terrorism if it were challenged to do so. The UN could provide humanitarian services.