More of the same
There were few surprises in The Socialist League presented the March parliamentary four candidates as independents on election. Juhani Lohikoski the CP list. They gained about. 500 votes, which the SL considers reports. "satisfactory" for its first electoral The Social democrats are still the One reason for the poor results of largest party, though down 5% to the left was the low turnout-68%, 23% of the vote. The conservative the lowest since the 1930s. Since Coalition party got one of the best the Left League maintained its results of its history by gaining 21% score, it seems that protest voters of the vote, and winning several either stayed home or voted for new seats in the capital, Helsinki. those Left League candidates who The opposition Centre party inc- have criticised the government. reased its share of the vote by 2.6% Muutos 99 and the CP were not to 22,4%, failing to capitalise on its seen as a serious alternative. opposition role and overtake the The CP's campaign tactics were Social Democrats. not the best. Instead of presenting
Voters failed to punish the Left the profile of a socialist alternative, league and the Greens for their un- the party represented itself as a principled participation in the Social normal smaller oppositional party. Democratic government. The Left The neoliberal Young Finns lost League received 11% of the vote, both their seats in parliament, down only 0.3%. Half their new despite spending at least 1m Finnish MPs are former "left" communists Marks on their campaign. Money and other opponents of the can't buy everything. League's moderate line (like MEP There were 20 candidates from an Seppanen). Voters failed to reelect immigrant background, represenLL minister Terttu Huttu-Juntunen. ting all the parties. Despite a good Expect growing tension as the LL reception among young people, comes to terms with its results. none were elected.
The Green share of the vote was As we go to press, all the parties 7.3%, up 0.8%. Cabinet member want to form a government. The Pekka Haavisto was not returned to Social Democrats and the Conservaparliament. tives are close to agreement, but
The alternative left block Muutos some Conservative leaders want a 99 (Change) got less than 1% of the coalition with the Centre Party. The vote, and no seats. Most of these leadership of the Left League wants votes went to the Communist Party, to continue their participation in (0.8%, or 20,519 votes). Party government. But the left of the leaders had expected several times organisation is not happy about more support, and up to six seats in this. * parliament. * The author is the chairman of the Socialist League 10 International Viewpoint #311 May 1999
US policy, and were particularly annoyed by Secretary of State Albright's "sabre- C( rattling" (Kevin Cullen, Boston Globe, W
SU
Today, the more closely one approa- SU ches the conflicted region, the greater the gr opposition to Washington's insistence on force, even within NATO (Greece and th Italy). France had called for a UN Security Council resolution to authorise rC deployment of NATO peacekeepers. The gI US flatly refused, insisting on "its stand re that NATO should be able to act di independently of the United Nations, fo State Department officials explained. The pr US refused to permit the "neuralgic word "authorise'" to appear in the final NATO W statement, unwilling to concede any ur authority to the UN Charter and ot international law; only the re "endorse" was permitted (Jane Perlez, V1 NYT, Feb. 11).
Mac
Similarly the bombing of Iraq was a brazen expression of contempt for the UN, even the specific timing, and was so lir understood. And of course the same is true of the destruction of half the ar pharmaceutical production of Sudan, a ob small African country. on
It could be argued, rather plausibly, that further demolition of the rules of po world order is irrelevant, just as it had be lost its meaning by the late 1930s. The (F contempt of the world's leading power th for the framework of world order has ex become so extreme that there is nothing no left to discuss.
A review of the internal documentary do record demonstrates that the stance traces by back to the earliest days, even to the first tru memorandum of the newly-formed Hi National Security Council in 1947. ha During the Kennedy years, the stance ad began to gain overt expression. do
The main innovation of the Reaganca Clinton years is that defiance of
One international law and the Charter has become entirely open. It has also been tio backed with interesting explanations, in which would be on the front pages, and jus prominent in the school and university curriculum, if truth and honesty were SUC considered significant values. The atti highest authorities explained with brutal
CO clarity that the World Court, the UN, and other agencies had become irrelevant thi because they no longer follow US orders, Ur as they did in the early postwar years. rep
One might then adopt the official position. That would be an honest stand, int at least if it were accompanied by refusal it to play the cynical game of self-righteous VO posturing and wielding of the despised Bu principles of international law as a highly sta selective weapon against shifting the enemies. of
While the Reaganites broke new of ground, under Clinton the defiance of me world order has become so extreme as to be of concern even to hawkish policy analysts. In the current issue of the leading establishment journal, Foreign Affairs, Samuel Huntington warns that
Washington is treading a dangerous course. In the eyes of much of the world-probably most of the world, he suggests-the US is "becoming the rogue superpower," considered "the single greatest external threat to their societies."
Realist "international relations theory," he argues, predicts that coalitions may arise to counterbalance the rogue superpower. On pragmatic grounds, then, the stance should be reconsidered. Americans who prefer a different image of their society might call for a reconsideration on other than legitimise the use of force in those circumstances are unpersuasive and dangerous...
"Violations of human rights are indeed all too common, and if it were permissible to remedy them by external use of force, there would be no law to forbid the use of force by almost any state against almost any other. Human rights, I believe, will have to be vindicated, and other injustices remedied, by other, peaceful means, not by opening the door to aggression and destroying the principle advance in international law, the outlawing of war and the prohibition of force."
Recognised principles of international law and world order, solemn treaty obligations, decisions by the World Court, considered pronouncements by the