Israel has recently come under fire from the United Nations for their failure to sign the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty. If Israel doesn't want to abide by the UN's ruling, then why did they give up part of their own sovereignty to be part of the United Nations? John Locke explains this in his essay The Treatises of Government. His thesis basically is that states are "willing to joyn in Society with other who are already united, or have a mind to united for the mutual Preservation of their Lives, Liberties, and Estates." Israel like other members of the UN, joined for security reasons. But in order for the UN to be successful in its effort to avoid conflicts and promote peace, it must first establish law, second be an indifferent judge of the law disregarding passion and revenge, and third it must be able to enforce the law and support the sentence when right.The United Nations established the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty to protect the world from possible nuclear war. It requires nuclear powers to work toward disarmament while forbidding non-nuclear countries from obtaining nuclear weapons. Israel remains the only country in the Middle East that has not signed onto the treaty, which in turn has caused Egypt to lead the effort to encourage Israel to allow the International Atomic Energy Agency to inspect their nuclear facilities. Although the law of nature is clear in this case, according to Locke, Israel won't "apt to allow of it as Law binding to them in the application of it to their particular case." Secondly, the United Nations must be an indifferent and unbiased judge, "with authority to determine all indifference according to the established law." I find the UN falls short on this issue in this area. Unfortunately for the UN, the United States is a biased "indifferent judge" when it comes to the power of the United Nations. Because the US holds so much clout, we have managed to lead off direct criticism of Israel at the la...
