I had come to regard the U.S. Senate's rejection of the League of Nations as a tragic mistake.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
It is a commonplace that the League of Nations is not yet-what its most enthusiastic protagonists intended it to be.
No one wants the United Nations to suffer the fate of the League of Nations, which collapsed because it lacked real leverage. This is possible if influential countries bypass the United Nations and take military action without Security Council authorization.
With regards to the expansion of NATO, I see it as a mistake, even a provocation in a way.
Let us return, however, to the League of Nations. To create an organization which is in a position to protect peace in this world of conflicting interests and egotistic wills is a frighteningly difficult task.
All in all, the League of Nations is not inevitably bound, as some maintain from time to time, to degenerate into an impotent appendage of first one, then another of the competing great powers.
The most tragic paradox of our time is to be found in the failure of nation-states to recognize the imperatives of internationalism.
Rome had Senators too, that's why it declined.
I am extremely disappointed by the actions of the 9/11 commission.
All the nations they had to deal with, had the same fate.
The failure of the United Nations - My failure is maybe, in retrospective, that I was not enough aggressive with the members of the Security Council.