As reported in the Washington Post today, the U.N. General Assembly has suspended voting for a week as it tries to find a solution to the deadlock caused by competing bids for membership on the Security Council from Venezuela and Guatemala. Guatemala, backed by the United States, has led over 35 rounds of voting, but has yet to secure the necessary two-thirds majority. Some have predictably and irrationally labeled this as an example of UN inaction. This claim not only betrays a basic misunderstanding of the workings of international politics but of the overwhelming benefit of multilateral versus unilateral outcomes both for the United States and the rest of the world.<!--break-->In fact, the General Assembly is sending a very strong message - to extremists on both ends of the spectrum. It is clearly stating to the world that it will neither reward virulent anti-Americanism nor become too closely aligned with one superpower's desires, as some in the G-77 have claimed. This is happening despite Venezuela's two-year campaign for the seat, which included, as reported in the Christian Science Monitor, the signing of many bilateral trade pacts. According to the same article, the consensus in the General Assembly is that Hugo Chavez's rant at the World Summit has cost him significant support.

If we are truly interested in making the UN as effective as it can be, it's time that we understand what the United Nations is and what it is not. It is not a megaphone for any one nation. It is a platform for dialogue, diplomacy, and multilateralism. And the UN's carefully negotiated decisions, while not as black-and-white as those of any one nation or group, are all the more powerful for it. They carry the weight of the whole world along with it.

Next week, when the General Assembly returns to this issue, a consensus candidate will likely emerge. The process will have worked.

Watching the President's comments this week complaining "about [UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's] approach to the crisis, and for holding the view of many leaders [at the G-8 summit] that Israel and Hamas and Hezbollah should ceasefire and hash out their differences," one might think that the President is upset about the role that the UN is playing in the current crisis in the Middle East. Nothing could be further from the truth. Monday afternoon White House Press Secretary Tony Snow clarified the President's position saying that he "has been supportive from the very start of the U.N. mission to the region."<!--break-->That three-person UN mission, which includes Vijay Nambiar, the Secretary-General's Special Political Adviser, has arrived in Israel, after "discussing concrete ideas" in meetings with the Speaker of the Lebanese Parliament and Prime Minister Fuad Siniora in an effort to diffuse the crisis in the region. Over the next few days, they may return to Lebanon and, perhaps, travel to Syria, Jordan, and the occupied Palestinian territories before returning to brief the UN Security Council. This team's itinerary and access, along with the level of international support, has once again clearly shown both the ability of the United Nations to perform tasks that no one nation could on its own and its indispensability as the primary instrument for international cooperation, peace, and prosperity.

Wisely, as Tony Snow said on Monday, the Bush Administration has supported the UN mission from the beginning. Statements to that effect have been made by several members of the Administration over the last few days. Secretary Rice, during a press briefing in Germany on July 13, called the Secretary-General's mission "the best opportunity now for de-escalation of this crisis." During the same briefing, she spoke to the UN's central role in formulating a practical solution for the Middle East, noting Security Council resolution 1559 that oversaw "the withdrawal of Syrian forces, and that has tried to bring together an international consensus ... about a road ahead for Lebanon ... including the disarmament of militias." Referring to the discussions among the G8, she said:

"Everybody is now very focused on trying to help the U.N. Secretary General's mission work. And I think we don't want to send confusing signals. The kind of 'too many cooks in the kitchen' problem is one that we want to avoid, because the Secretary General has all the right mandates to deal with this issue. I might note, too, that as to the Gaza situation, of course, the U.N. is a member of the Quartet. And so the U.N. Secretary General I think has all the right mandates. Let's put all of our efforts behind making his effort work."

National Security Advisor Stephen Hadley echoed Secretary Rice's statements at the same briefing:

"We hope that the U.N. mission the Secretary talked about can be a framework for going forward, can do a number of things -- can increase the pressure on Hezbollah and Syria, who are going to be key in winding this down and getting these hostages back to Israel; can be a vehicle for strengthening the [Lebanese] government and help them ride out this very difficult path; and finally, to be a framework for avoiding further escalation."

At later press briefings in Russia and on the morning show circuit over the weekend, Secretary Rice and President Bush remained committed to supporting the Secretary-General's mission to the Middle East. In Russia, Secretary Rice said:

"This is really a time for diplomacy, but it's not just diplomacy of talking and talking and talking. It's diplomacy of moving toward a goal of using the diplomatic vehicles -- in fact, in the case of the road map, the international vehicle; in the case of the 1559, the Security Council vehicle -- that we have established over the last couple of years, and using that now. This is the time to use those vehicles to get results, because those vehicles are going to give us the best outcome for a permanent peace."

Late last week the UN Secretary-General announced that, in response to requests from both President Bush and the Iraqi government, the United Nations will provide strong support in developing an "international compact" for Iraq. <!--break-->The "compact," a framework for providing international assistance, is the latest in a string of rarely-reported UN efforts to improve the situation on the ground in Iraq. In the lead-up to the parliamentary elections last December, the UN provided expert advice to the Iraq's Independent Electoral Commission, established 6,000 polling stations, trained over 150,000 election workers, and accredited more than 200,000 election observers. UN special envoy, Lakhdar Brahimi, helped to build local consensus and form the necessary coalitions within Iraq for a peaceful transition of power from the U.S.-led occupying forces to an Iraqi government. Following the January 2005 elections, the UN established the International Assistance Program for Constitution-making that provided critical support during the drafting of the Iraqi constitution. And, most recently, the new UN special envoy, Ashraf Qazi led negotiations with anti-American Shi'ite leaders that resulted in Prime Minister Ibrahim Jaafari rescinding his bid for a new term and ended a month-long struggle that had kept Iraq from forming a government of national unity.

The new "compact" promises to stimulate even more progress. The UN was central to similar efforts in Afghanistan, raising billions of dollars for relief and reconstruction and forging an international agreement to improve security, adherence to the rule of law, human rights, and economic and social development. In large part due to international assistance, Afghanistan has its first democratically elected parliament in over 20 years; 4 million Afghan refuges have returned; 5 million children are back at school; 60,000 combatants have rejoined society; and the economy has grown steadily.