may result in automatic imprisonment.nUnder this act, every member of thenCity Council of Chicago, black andnwhite, Christian and Jew, could findnhimself on trial in the Hague. Ethnicntensions there have risen high enoughnthat the council had to introduce a billnbanning racial and sexual insults fromncouncil meetings. The President couldnnot have picked a better site for hisndramatic gesture.nEach nation in the world, if it isnreally a nation, must insist upon beingnthe judge of its own interests or run thenrisk of allowing its enemies to judge fornit. The principle of sovereignty used tonbe understood by nearly everyone innthe United States. There is, however, angrowing number of political ignoramusesnin high places. The UnitednNations Association of the UnitednStates, under its chairman Elliot Richardsonn(the sanctimonious attorneyngeneral), recently called for a UN armsnregistry that would monitor all internationalnarms sales, including those engagednin by the United States. The salenof arms to our allies and supportersnplays a vital part in US foreign policy,nand we simply cannot afford to turnncontrol over to any multinational organization.nIn the past ten years the UnitednStates has not only signed the GenocidenConvention, but our governmentnhas also begun to use the language ofndemocratic globalism, as if we were annideological state like the Soviet Unionnor the government of the French Revolution,nas if the national interest had toncome second to the interest of globalnrevolution.nIf this were not bad enough, the UNnGeneral Assembly almost simultaneouslynopened its debate on an internationalnchildren’s rights convention as itsnfirst move toward commemorating thententh anniversary of The Year of thenChild (1979). The General Assembly’snThird Committee is expected tongive its approval to a Polish resolutionnin favor of adopting the contents. WhynPoland? Libya and North Vietnamnhave human rights records that arenalmost as distinguished.nThe draft includes a few salutarynobservations on family life, but evennthey are couched in the perniciousnlanguage of rights. It is hard to say whatnthe final document will look like, butnmuch of the paper (including state lawsnin the US) spawned by The Year of thenChild included freedom from’ bigotryn(i.e., the belief that some religions arenbetter than others) and access to sexneducation as basic components of anchild’s right to be brought up in anwholesome family setting.nThe draft convention does containnseveral strange provisions: adoption willnnow be subject to international law,nwhich presumably makes it more complicatednfor Americans to adopt foreignnchildren. “Children” will also be guaranteednimmunity from conscription upnto the age of 15 or even 17.nThis seems an acceptable notion —nuntil a nation finds itself fighting for itsnsurvival. Besides, in matters of nativendefense governments should beware ofneven appearing to surrender the smallestnparticle of their sovereignty.nIt was our government, by the way.nJ-nSERIES OF SmSnrnnnthat insisted upon the most bizarrenprovision: the right of association. Presumablynthis means that children haventhe right to divorce their parents, as innthe famous case of Walter Polovchak,nwho refused to return to the USSRnwith his family. On that occasion, thenUS State Department successfully preventednthe parents from taking theirnown child back home with them. Ofncourse, most decent Americans sympathizednwith Walter’s desire to stay here,nwhatever his motives. But remembernthis: if we allow the government tondivide an alien family, it will not benlong before it will do the same to us. Itnwas bad enough getting the State Departmentninvolved in a family decision.nImagine how much worse it will benwhen the UN begins to interfere.n(TF)nFEBRUARY 1989/7n