It is one thing to believe that you have a divine right to
police the world; it is another to believe that you can organize it anyway you
want. Worse still, you start a whole new ball game that will flash signs of
your insanity when you fantasize that you can tell other nations who they may
choose to speak for humanity in such forum as the United Nations, and who does
not deserve to have this honor bestowed on them.
This is how far the editors of the Wall Street Journal have
gone on the road to believing that America owns the world, that it has the
right to do what it wants with it, and that it can tell others who deserves to
be honored for what and who deserves to be dishonored. They express this
sentiment clearly in the piece they wrote under the title: “Caracas
181, Kerry 0” and the subtitle: “Venezuela
gets a U.N. Security Council seat with no U.S. resistance.” They published it
in the Journal on October 17, 2014.
The editors of the Wall Street Journal are unhappy that Venezuela has
managed to get itself elected to serve on the Security Council of the United
Nations for the next two years. They are even unhappy at their own government –
more specifically Secretary of State John Kerry – for not trying to frustrate Venezuela 's
effort. And they do not hide their disappointment at the fact that the people
of Venezuela
are experiencing “a moment of great pride and happiness” for being a country
that is admired and loved.
The inability of the editors to understand why the vote
turned out the way it did – overwhelmingly in favor of Venezuela to the tune of
181 votes out of 193 – is shown in the manner that their logic operates. They
speak of Venezuela
pulling a “diplomatic coup” despite the fact that “[its] economy may be
imploding, with a debt default looming.” They see this success as a
demonstration of the diminishing “political and moral influence of the Obama
Administration.” You must wonder what it is that makes them believe expressing
an attitude such as that could have impressed the voting members of the UN.
In any case, whether or not John Kerry did something behind
the scenes to frustrate Venezuela 's
effort is irrelevant at this point because, if he did, he would have failed.
The reason for that is simple to understand. He would have proceeded the way
that America
has been proceeding for a while; the way that the Journal editors had wished
him to. Doing that, he would have pitted his approach against that of Venezuela ; one
that is expressed by the six words uttered by its President: “The world has
given us support.” Thus, while America
could have exerted pressure using extraneous arguments, the Venezuelans would
have stuck with the simple notion that the world should support them regardless
of any superfluous consideration because their time had come.
As if to cement in the mind of future historians the
attitude that brought America
to live such moments in world forums, the Journal editors wrote about them as
if they were humiliating moments. This done, they went on to contrast the Venezuela moment with a happier time when America used to
be the one humiliating others. Look at the following and try to imagine the
kind of acid that must have been flowing in the cerebral veins of these people
as they wrote these words: “That's in contrast to the George W. Bush
Administration, which managed to block Venezuela when Caracas was last on the
ballot … This time Venezuela received 181 votes, and the U.S. wouldn't say how
it voted. Ten countries abstained.”
You weep for them for choosing to remain so savagely
backward at a time when the world is seeking to become enlightened. You watch
them struggle, unable to grasp the notion that a world forum is like a
courtroom where plaintiffs and defendants have the same rights till a verdict
is reached and one or the other is condemned.
You also remain puzzled by what the US Ambassador
to the UN has said after the vote. You wonder why it is that America
continues to subscribe to the idea that some are guilty before the trial, and
must be kept out of the process. “Venezuela 's conduct at the U.N. has
run counter to the spirit of the Charter, and its violations of human rights at
home are at odds with the Charter's letter,” said the Ambassador.