The UN’s Idiot Policy in the Congo

I had sworn not to discuss the Congo again, but under extreme provocation I’ll now have to break my oath. Numerous articles have appeared proposing that American policy in the Congo should be, and probably already is, to press Tshombe into 1) “broadening” his government to include some rebel leaders, 2) establishing a “truce” with the rebels, 3) negotiating with other African states so as to make his government acceptable to them, 4) disbanding the “mercenaries” and replacing them with “African troops.” A United Nations Security Council resolution along these lines has just been passed. The official line regards it as a “victory” for us, because the United States was not explicitly insulted for saving some people, held as hostages, from death.

These proposals are unbelievably stupid. It seems certain, therefore, that they embody State Department policy. This conclusion is supported by our conduct in the United Nations (defensive, as usual) and by the unanimity with which these proposals are supported in American newspapers and magazines. Moreover, the stupidity is of a kind that fits well with our previous Congo policies. Let me consider the policy proposals one after the other.

EH

About the Author

Ernest van den Haag

Featured Tags

I had sworn not to discuss the Congo again, but under extreme provocation I’ll now have to break my oath. Numerous articles have appeared proposing that American policy in the Congo should be, and probably already is, to press Tshombe into 1) “broadening” his government to include some rebel leaders, 2) establishing a “truce” with the rebels, 3) negotiating with other African states so as to make his government acceptable to them, 4) disbanding the “mercenaries” and replacing them with “African troops.” A United Nations Security Council resolution along these lines has just been passed. The official line regards it as a “victory” for us, because the United States was not explicitly insulted for saving some people, held as hostages, from death.

These proposals are unbelievably stupid. It seems certain, therefore, that they embody State Department policy. This conclusion is supported by our conduct in the United Nations (defensive, as usual) and by the unanimity with which these proposals are supported in American newspapers and magazines. Moreover, the stupidity is of a kind that fits well with our previous Congo policies. Let me consider the policy proposals one after the other.