AS UNITED NATIONS' peacekeepers leave Somalia and prepare to enter Angola, many in Washington are threatening to scale back U.S. commitment to the international body.
Certainly the United Nations has not lived up to its potential since the end of the Cold War. But to say - as a host of American leaders and opinion-makers insist almost daily - that the United Nations is obsolete or unnecessary is absurd.Though it needs reform, the United Nations plays many critical roles in the fields of education, science, medicine and the environment. More importantly, it remains the world's principal instrument for dealing with global chaos and bloodshed.
It appears likely that the 21st century will be roiled by the same sort of ethnic and sectarian violence that is wreaking such havoc in the world today.
This prospect may not seem all that threatening to those living comfortably in Frankfurt, New York or Tokyo. From these privileged vantage points, the violence appears confined mostly to so-called marginal areas lacking the vital interest found in Persian Gulf oil.
But such thinking is dangerously myopic. Chaos in Africa or the Balkans can spread to areas the United States views as more vital, or it can unleash waves of migrations that generate potentially deadly instabilities elsewhere.
We need the United Nations and its peacekeeping capabilities. Faced with the threat of rising global chaos, we must work with other states to contain the violence and address the underlying causes of conflict - tasks that can only be performed effectively under U.N. auspices.
No other institution can mount a response to ethnic and religious warfare with the same degree of international support or bring to bear the same range of military, diplomatic and humanitarian capabilities.
It is true that the United States has the power and the resources to conduct military operations on its own - an option favored by some in Washington who seek to reduce U.S. support for the United Nations.
But without U.N. backing, the United States would be seen as the global policeman, provoking hostility abroad and discontent at home.
Saying that we need the United Nations is not the same as saying that the organization will perform faultlessly. The risk of periodic failure is great, if only because humankind has not yet learned how to cope with the inflamed passions generated by economic inequalities, extreme nationalism and religious fervor.
In this sense, the failures of recent years are just as important as the successes: They tell us what to avoid in the future and how to enhance U.N. peace-keep-ing capabilities.
It is essential that U.N. forces be endowed with additional skills and materials to ensure the success of future missions. The United States and the other major powers should provide the organization with the resources it needs to do its job well.
We must deal with the world as it is. And any honest assessment of that world would show that we face a continuing eruption of internal disputes of a sort that the United Nations, and the United Nations alone, is equipped to handle.