Calling the Shots: How Washington Dominates Today's U.N.

by Phyllis Bennis

Book Overview

New revised & updated edition with a new preface by Denis Halliday. The United Nations remains a favorite scapegoat for U.S. and allied failures in places like Rwanda, Iraq, Kosovo, and East Timor.... This description may be from another edition of this product.

• Format: Hardcover
• Language: English
• ISBN: 1566562074
• ISBN13: 9781566562072
• Release Date: January 1996
• Publisher: Interlink Publishing Group
• Length: 341 Pages
• Weight: 1.45 lbs.

Customer Reviews

The United States of Nations - Washington's hold on the UN

The Cold War ended more than a decade ago, crowning the US as the world's sole superpower. Nowhere is this raw reality more apparent than at the United Nations, dominated by a single country since the decline and fall of the Soviet Union. Who call the shots at the UN? And how is it done? Phyllis Bennis has written a readable, gripping and masterful, if ultimately flawed account of the world body's domination by the US. Carefully tracing how American power dressed as principle strategically hobbled the UN from its inception, she reveals concrete instances of how the US coerces or subdues countries into toeing its line, and how it quashes dissent. Whether she is examining US manipulation of the UN Security Council to secure multilateral cover for conducting a unilateral campaign against Iraq, or its conscious policy of apathy in the Security Council in the face of the Rwanda genocide, Bennis is excellent at teasing out US double-standards and hypocrisy. However, her judgements are perhaps too broad and sweeping, failing to take into account the realities of power. No country operates on assumptions of altruism. Any freshman realist will tell you this is the way the world works, has worked, and will always work. Can any country afford to suspend its national interest for the sake of fuzzy moral principles, even if these principles lie at the heart of international law, the UN Charter? Bennis believes that the US has a moral duty to do so, and must provide responsible and enlightened leadership to revitalise the UN. In unveiling the contradictions, ambiguities and doublespeak in US policy at the UN, Bennis compels the reader to confront a hard question: can the US get away with mobilising the world's most important international organisation for its own interests? Is it answerable to no-one but itself? Embedded in her book is a lesson in ethics - calling the shots entails responsibility and accountability. But any freshman ethical philosopher may tell you that. Some readers may expect such a lucid, well-written account of US domination at the UN to deliver more, instead of serving as a jeremiad on unbridled US power. In concluding her book, what appears to pique Bennis most is what she terms the "self-righteous know it all ism" of US officials and politicians. Here one feels that Bennis has taken it all a bit too personally, and the book loses its punch. Arrogance and pride is a prerogative of unchallenged supremacy. Can we draw any hard lessons from such an attitude? Can we construct a programme for change from what Bennis herself admits has been the agenda of the US and its allies all along - strategically hobbling the UN to serve its interests? In the final analysis, realists may conclude that Bennis has paradoxically legitimated the crude prerogatives of raw power, while idealists may declare that by unveiling, naming and shaming, she has contributed some hard punches in a crucial international debate on reforming the US attitu

Fascinating inside look at US domination of UN

The Cold War ended more than a decade ago, crowning the US as the world's sole superpower. Nowhere is this raw reality more apparent than at the United Nations, dominated by a single country since the decline and fall of the Soviet Union. Who call the shots at the UN? And how is it done? Phyllis Bennis has written a readable, gripping and masterful, if ultimately flawed account of the world body's domination by the US. Carefully tracing how American power dressed as principle strategically hobbled the UN from its inception, she reveals concrete instances of how the US coerces or subdues countries into toeing its line, and how it quashes dissent. Whether she is examining US manipulation of the UN Security Council to secure multilateral cover for conducting a unilateral campaign against Iraq, or its conscious policy of apathy in the Security Council in the face of the Rwanda genocide, Bennis is excellent at teasing out US double-standards and hypocrisy. However, her judgements are perhaps too broad and sweeping, failing to take into account the realities of power. No country operates on assumptions of altruism. Any freshman realist will tell you this is the way the world works, has worked, and will always work. Can any country afford to suspend its national interest for the sake of fuzzy moral principles, even if these principles lie at the heart of international law, the UN Charter? Bennis believes that the US has a moral duty to do so, and must provide responsible and enlightened leadership to revitalise the UN. In unveiling the contradictions, ambiguities and doublespeak in US policy at the UN, Bennis compels the reader to confront a hard question: can the US get away with mobilising the world's most important international organisation for its own interests? Is it answerable to no-one but itself? Embedded in her book is a lesson in ethics - calling the shots entails responsibility and accountability. But any freshman ethical philosopher may tell you that. Some readers may expect such a lucid, well-written account of US domination at the UN to deliver more, instead of serving as a jeremiad on unbridled US power. And in concluding her book, what piques Bennis most is what she terms the "self-righteous know it all ism" of US officials and politicians. Here I felt that Bennis has taken it all a bit too personally, and the book loses its punch. Arrogance and pride is a prerogative of unchallenged supremacy. Can we draw any hard lessons from such an attitude? Can we construct a programme for change from what Bennis herself admits has been the agenda of the US and its allies all along - strategically hobbling the UN to serve its interests? In the final analysis, realists may conclude that Bennis has paradoxically legitimated the crude prerogatives of raw power, while idealists may declare that by unveiling, naming and shaming, she has contributed some hard punches in a crucial international debate on reforming the US attitude towards the UN. But