On Thursday, Nikki Haley spoke at the United Nations and condemned its censure of President Trump's decision to move the U.S. embassy to Israel to Jerusalem.
While I oppose Trump's relocation, I have zero sympathy for those U.N. members who believe they get a veto over American sovereignty. I also could not resist but share some thoughts on liberal Twitter reactions to Haley's speech. Here are the five most idiotic reactions I found.
1) Wajahat Ali, New York Times contributor
U.S., through Nikki Haley, threatened and bullied allies over the #UNGA vote condemning moving the embassy's move to Jerusalem. The fact they still voted NO should speak volumes. Everyone, including European allies, realize this is a reckless decision.— Wajahat Ali (@WajahatAli) December 21, 2017
Why it's stupid: Here we see the most frequent criticism of Haley's threat: that it's "bullying." From the most basic realist standpoint of international relations theory, however, such criticisms are patently idiotic. States act in their own interests and in this case, U.S. sovereignty is being challenged by an international organization. Recognizing the broader context of supranationalist authoritarianism, Haley and Trump are thus right to resist efforts to delegitimize the U.S. government.
Ali also seems to believe that by putting "NO" in capitals he will be more persuasive. This is equally idiotic.
2) Nicholas Kristof, New York Times columnist
Boy, Trump's threats and @nikkihaley's bullying were effective, weren't they. As effective, and as childish, as Kruschev banging his shoe at the U.N. This is how Trump is frittering away US soft power. https://t.co/K89oVvQvrt— Nicholas Kristof (@NickKristof) December 21, 2017
Why it's stupid: First off, Kristof spells Khrushchev's name wrong. Second, the shoe-banging incident involved Khrushchev rebuking a Filipino representative who was complaining about Soviet abuses of human rights in Eastern Europe. Is Kristof comparing Trump's decision to Soviet imperialism? If so, he's engaging in the most historically illiterate of comparisons. Third, "soft power" is a nation's power outside of military force. In turn, whether one agrees with Trump's Jerusalem decision or not, the threat to cut back on U.S. assistance spending is a very obvious example of using soft power. Kristof only says Trump is "frittering" because he disagrees with Trump's action. This is pretty embarrassing stuff from one of America's most respected liberal foreign policy columnists.
3) Christopher Moore, author
Nikki Haley sounding very much like a mafia thug threatening the U.N. So ashamed of our sinking standing in the world.— Christopher Moore (@TheAuthorGuy) December 21, 2017
Why it's stupid: One imagines that as he wrote his weepy tweet, Moore was engaged in Chris Crocker-esque crying. But at a more intellectual level, Haley is the democratic representative of the world's most powerful democracy. If Moore is looking for examples of mafia politics, he should look to Hamas.
4) Ali Abunimah, Electronic Intifada
Nikki Haley is now openly threatening cuts in US funding to the UN if it doesn’t get its way on Jerusalem. A poorer UN without US bullying and blackmail would be a stronger and more effective UN. Kick US and Israel out.— Ali Abunimah (@AliAbunimah) December 21, 2017
Why it's stupid: Two things would happen were the U.S. to withdraw from the United Nations. First, U.N. programs would collapse in the absence of the U.S. government funding that sustains them. Does Abunimah want that? Second, U.N. Security Council resolutions on concerns such as the refugee situation in Myanmar would be left to the whims of China and the human rights situation in Syria, to Russian President Vladimir Putin's imperialism.
But as long as Abunimah is happy, who cares about the innocent dead?
5) Sherine Tadros, Amnesty International
128 states vote in favor of #Jerusalem resolution - clear rebuke of the #Trump administration’s reckless policy. https://t.co/h9QecCgwjv— Sherine Tadros (@SherineT) December 21, 2017
Why it's stupid: While Tadros might believe Trump's decision is "reckless," as Amnesty's U.N. representative she knows full well that U.S. aid is crucial to the U.N.'s ability to operate. As such, her tweet here isn't so much idiotic as it is amusing: she knows that, at the margin, Trump holds the cards and there's nothing she can do about it. Moreover, seeing as Amnesty intersects with much of the left-wing U.N. bureaucracy, Tadros' organization also has much to lose here!
Ultimately, while Twitter might suggest that Haley has made a fateful mistake in threatening U.N. members, the international reality is quite different. The U.N. needs U.S. funding and when it comes to the crunch, the organization will bend in return for that funding. That's a good thing, because it means Trump can leverage this situation in order to force the U.N. into much overdue and humanitarian interest-positive reforms.
Still, this reminds me of a great scene in that greatest of Shakespeare's plays, Henry V. The French establishment arrive at the English court to arrogantly threaten the young King Henry. Confident in their elitism and perceived supremacy of opinion, the French give Henry a gift of tennis balls in testament to his shallow youth. Henry responds in fine fashion.
"When we have march'd our rackets to these balls, we will, in France, by God's grace, play a set — shall strike his father's crown into the hazard. Tell [the French King] he hath made a match with such a wrangler — That all the courts of France will be disturb'd With chaces."
Translation: The ball is in my court and I have a bigger [expletive] racket.
