Since the Russian invasion of Ukraine, Americans and Europeans have witnessed the relentless bombing of civilian communities. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky has pleaded with NATO for fighter jets or to create a no-fly zone. But NATO members and the entire world are being held hostage by the threat of a nuclear war.
What is needed now is a mediator capable of acting in the name of the world. In theory, the United Nations was designed to play that role. Trygve Lie, the first secretary-general of the U.N., saw the organization as a peacekeeper. Lie worked for the withdrawal of Soviet forces from Iran and created a ceasefire in Kashmir. In 1950, he helped to create a U.N. multinational peace-keeping mission to defend South Korea when the North Koreans crossed the 38th parallel, igniting the first major conflict following World War II. When the war ended, South Korea remained free.
Lie’s successor, Dag Hammarskjold, also viewed the U.N. as a peacekeeping body. Hammarskjold presided over peacekeeping forces in Egypt and the Congo and died in a plane crash en route to negotiate a ceasefire. Clearly, these men understood the importance of a union of nations committed to stopping or ending aggression, such as the situation the world now faces in Ukraine. More importantly, they had the courage to stand up to aggressor nations and leaders.
Apparently, the current U.N. leadership does not see peace-keeping as its role — a major shortcoming that also undermined the League of Nations and led to its downfall.
In 1973, I had the privilege of meeting the leader who identified the cause of the downfall of the League when it refused to intervene on behalf of Ethiopia in 1935. At that time, I was the director of ACTION, the federal agency that included the Peace Corps, and I had been selected by the White House to represent the United States at the decennial celebration of the founding of Kenya. In attendance were Jomo Kenyatta, President Idi Amin of Uganda, and Emperor Haile Selassie of Ethiopia.
At one of the many receptions during the 1973 Kenya celebrations, I told Emperor Selassie I had watched the film of him addressing the League of Nations in 1935 when his country was invaded by Italy. He said he remembered his message to the League on that day, but sadly the League never understood his message: “If one nation is not protected by the League, then no nation is safe and the organization is meaningless.” These were prophetic words spoken softly by this legendary man that echo through the ages.
The current U.N. leadership, along with all the member nations, should review the history of the League’s failure to help Ethiopia — an omission that Selassie believed rendered the League meaningless. Today, the U.N.’s unwillingness to take an active role in ending the invasion of Ukraine by Putin is reminiscent of the earlier failure of the League of Nations and highlights its irrelevance.
In his March 16 speech before a joint session of Congress, Zelensky insisted that “institutions should protect us from war, but they unfortunately do not work. We propose to create an association, united for peace, a union of responsible countries to stop conflict immediately.” He added we need “to keep the peace quickly to save the world.” His pleas today echo those made by Emperor Selassie before the League of Nations nearly 90 years ago.
The U.N. has an opportunity to do in Ukraine what the League failed to do in Ethiopia. But the failure to fulfill its original peacekeeping role foretells the U.N.’s downfall and emphasizes the need for a new “union of responsible countries.”
Michael P. Balzano, a former aide to Presidents Richard Nixon and Ronald Reagan, is the author of Building a New Majority.
