There is Nothing American About
Doing Whatever You're Told
by Charley Reese
There is Nothing American About
Doing Whatever You're Told
by Charley Reese
© The Orlando Sentinel -- November 9, 1995
Michael New, a young American soldier from Conroe, Texas, is being court-martialed for refusing to wear a United Nations uniform and serve under foreign command.
That is an outrage.
New, a medic, is scheduled to be sent to Macedonia as U.N. peacekeeper under command of a Finnish general. It is important to understand what this young man is willing to do and what he is refusing to do. Already, his own congressman, Rep. Jack Fields, has tried to confuse the issue.
New is willing to go to Macedonia and to serve there as an American soldier. He is not willing to wear a United Nations uniform and serve under the command of a foreign officer. His position, which is absolutely correct, is that he took an oath to protect and defend the United States Constitution. He owes no loyalty to the United Nations.
His court-martial ought to cause a national uproar, but the only national figure I've heard raise the issue as of this date is Pat Buchanan. Forty or so conservative congressmen have written President Clinton, asking what constitutional authority he has to order American soldiers to don a foreign uniform and serve under foreign officers.
The lame excuse is that a soldier must obey his orders. In fact, however, soldiers must obey only lawful orders, just as the commander in chief must obey the Constitution. The president's courtesy title is Mr. President, not Your Majesty or Your Royal Highness. Clinton and several others have had a difficult time remembering that.
It's too bad and too obvious that members of Congress don't have the courage of this young man. It's too bad the presidential candidates, with one noted exception, are ducking this issue.
Why should any American soldier be compelled to serve under the command of a foreigner?
They should not. Americans should serve only under the command of Americans. If the president wishes to send troops to Macedonia, as stupid an idea as that is, then he should send them to Macedonia as American soldiers in American uniforms under the command of American officers, presumably to accomplish an American mission for the benefit of Americans. There is nothing altruistic or globalistic about the Constitution. It is for Americans only.
What young Michael New is pointing out, by the sacrifice of his military career -- which has been honorable -- is how utterly contemptuous President Bill Clinton, the foreign-policy establishment, most congressmen and a lot of people in the press are of the American Constitution.
In better days, when we had a better-educated group of Americans, such blatant contempt for the Constitution would be the end of a public career. Now many Americans seem to think the duty of a citizen is to do what he is told. Nothing is more revealing of ignorance of American history and tradition than this dreary, pathetic, heel-clickers' attitude.
Young Michael New is being loyal to the Constitution at a time when most of the institutions are not. Thus, he is being punished not because he's wrong, but precisely because he is right.
It is Clinton, not New, who should face charges, because Clinton could fulfill any treaty obligation to the United Nations by dispatching American soldiers in American uniforms under American command. Instead, he is turning over control of American soldiers to a foreign organization. That he clearly has no constitutional authority to do.
We, the people, ought to rise in defense of New and bombard the White House and Congress with protests.
We should not allow this young man, a good and faithful American soldier, to be crucified on the cross of internationalism by people whose intent is to rob Americans of the very independence and liberty for which their ancestors fought and died.