A "small" issue indeed!

Submitted by Abu Nudnik (Canada), Jun 5, 2009 at 12:37

The entire thrust of international cooperation requires that the "national" in the word "international" mean something. It was sovereignty that led the Americans, Armenians, Canadians, Belgians, Britons, etc... to their own states. That idea led George Bush to decline to accede to the ICC, closing Guantanamo Bay, unsign Kyoto, preferring to set policies from the White House and Capitol Hill and the peoples' representatives rather than the international bureaucrats of the UN Building, so far not recognized as suzerains over the American taxpayer. In democratic states, the people and their representatives decide what their goals, policies and laws are. The destruction of Israeli sovereignty threatens national sovereignty everywhere. With what will we replace it?

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".