What are the UN and International Law any good for?

Elio Delgado Legon

Cuban Foreign Minister Bruno Rodriguez addresses the United Nations.

HAVANA TIMES – I’ve asked myself this question many a time and I can’t seem to find the answer. The UN General Assembly, which is made up of 193 Member States, can’t form binding agreements, or force its members to comply with them.

One of the most notorious examples of this is the fact that the Assembly has almost unanimously approved the resolution presented by Cuba: “Necessity of ending the economic, commercial and financial embargo imposed by the United States of America against Cuba”; yet, the US continues to tighten down on its application even further, to the point of turning it into a real war which not only affects Cuba, but every country that has trade relations with Cuba, which is not only a violation of the UN Charter, but also of International Law.

Hasn’t the UN already established what happens to countries that systematically violate the Charter? Why isn’t this being applied to the US?

According to International law, no country can make laws to apply their own laws in another country; however, the US has lifted the waiver on Title III of the Helms-Burton Act, which flagrantly violates International law and they got away with it. Who’s responsible for ensuring these international laws are respected?

There is not a single international law which stipulates that a country can become the supreme judge of the world and sanction every other country, without these countries having a body they can appeal to; or fining banks and companies in other countries because they don’t comply with the Empire’s law. These are legal outrages that nobody understands, and nobody has approved, but there’s no way of stopping them. For how long?

Believing it is the supreme judge of the world, the US dedicates itself to writing up lists of countries which (in its own opinion) violate human rights, and countries who support terrorism, so they have an excuse to sanction them. However, they aren’t taking a good look in the mirror when doing this and putting themselves down on both lists, as it is the greatest offender of human right violations, in its own country and in others where it applies criminal sanctions, such as Cuba, which has suffered a blockade for almost 60 years, which is a huge violation of the human rights of a sovereign people.

When it comes to countries who support terrorism, the US has no moral grounding to accuse anyone because they have systematically used terrorism in other countries to bring about changes of government just because they didn’t get on with them; they have used every possible form of terrorism against Cuba and have harbored and protected terrorists such as Posada Carriles and all of his accomplices.

In Syria, they intervened without this country asking for help or even approving it, but not to fight against terrorism, to support it instead, like they have and still shamefully do.

Going back to human rights, the US withdrew itself from the UN Human Rights Council so it didn’t have to account for its actions like other countries do. A country that has morals doesn’t do this.

Withdrawing itself from all the treaties signed by former administrations, the US government’s attitude today stirs great mistrust with this country, because while it has signed important conventions, if it doesn’t want to abide by them it just pulls out and that’s that. It withdrew itself from the nuclear missile accord (the Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces Treaty) it signed with Russia, and then immediately began to carry out exercises that were banned in this treaty; it also pulled out of the Paris Agreement on climate change so it didn’t have to take action to help reduce environmental pollution and climate change, when it is the second most polluting country in the world, only beaten by China, which has adopted fitting measures.

Another agreement the US irresponsibly pulled out of was the agreement with Iran, taking months of sitting at the negotiation table to draw up, and which the EU still abides by because it values its importance.

I have mentioned only some of the US’ violations of International law and the UN Charter, without either body taking action. So, I wonder: What are they really good for?

Elio Delgado Legon

Elio Delgado-Legon: I am a Cuban who has lived for 80 years, therefore I know full well how life was before the revolution, having experienced it directly and indirectly. As a result, it hurts me to read so many aspersions cast upon a government that fights tooth and nail to provide us a better life. If it hasn’t fully been able to do so, this is because of the many obstacles that have been put in its way.

7 thoughts on “What are the UN and International Law any good for?

  • What Good is The U.N. The World Health Organization & there Battle against the Spread of S. T. D.s OR as The World Now understands in the Case of Cuba, Socialist. Transmitted. Doctrine,s. Known as Communism, A Man Created Health epidemic in Cuba that has & will take more innocent lives then any other illness in the History of Cuba. The simple truth is that Cuba has been Quarantine & Only the ones that are Not Termagant ill have been given there Pass To the Lands of Promise. I Think we should all Thank The Canadians again for there Creation of The U.N. back in 1957.

  • Balancing the historical books is no easy task. The British say Man’s History is bloody. I accept that assessment as the truth in the development of human civilization. There has not been any human grouping of consequence without the experience of bloodshed. As for the future ‘ quien sabe.’

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *