BY PAUL S. ARONSOHN

COMMENTARY

Sadly, our world is in great disrepair.

So much violence. So much disaster. So much poverty. So much disease. From the estimated 80 terrorist attacks that have already occurred this year to the 25,000 people who die every day from hunger-related disorders, our world is a dangerous place — one full of human conflict and unmitigated human tragedy.

It is against this backdrop that leaders from 192 countries will soon converge on New York for the 65th United Nations General Assembly — the annual meeting convened to address such matters of international security, economic development, and human rights. And it is against this backdrop that the American people will soon go to the polls to elect a new Congress — one that could have a profound impact on the conduct of U.S. foreign policy.

In fact, it appears that the political pendulum is about to swing back again, bringing with it a Republican majority in at least one chamber of Congress. That means a new Speaker of the House and a new Chairperson of the House Foreign Affairs Committee. Accordingly, that also means potentially big changes on the foreign policy front, particularly with respect to the United Nations.

During the 1990s, following the Republican landside, I served alongside three U.S. Ambassadors to the United Nations. I was there when Republicans called for U.S. withdrawal from the world body. I was there when Republicans refused payment of U.S. dues to the organization. And I was there when Republicans tied U.S. membership to a list of demands, including a very controversial one related to international family planning.

Suffice it to say, it was a challenging time — one that tested the patience of U.S. allies and one that tested the resolve of serious foreign policy practitioners in both parties. Most importantly, it damaged U.S. standing in the world and undermined our ability to deal with threats to our national security.

Obviously, much has changed since the 1990s. The world is a very different place, and the isolationist, anti-United Nations impulse seems somewhat subdued. Gone is the incessant UN bashing. Gone is the irrational talk about black helicopters and world government.

But there is already reason for new concern.

Last year, Republicans introduced the "United Nations Transparency, Accountability and Reform Act" (HR 557), which among other things would make U.S. dues voluntary. This bill, which would effectively abrogate our treaty obligations and destroy the UN, was introduced by the ranking Republican on the House Foreign Affairs Committee and was cosponsored by 106 Republicans, including the likely next Speaker of the House of Representatives, John Boehner. There have also been other similar initiatives, including one to immediately terminate U.S. membership in the UN and its related agencies.

To paraphrase Yogi Berra, it seems like "déjà vu all over again," although this time the risks are greater and the stakes are higher. Thanks to Al Qaeda, the proliferation of nuclear technology and a global recession, today's world is a far more dangerous world, and there is absolutely no room for political gamesmanship when it comes to U.S. foreign policy. Now, more than ever, America must speak with one, strong, commanding voice.

In other words, we must avoid a replay of the 1990s.

To that end, here are a few key principles for our once and future congressional leaders to consider.

Presidential Leadership: All Members of Congress — regardless of Party — should have a seat at the foreign policy table, but at the end of the day, we must remember that we have only one President with the public mandate and the international stature to articulate and conduct U.S. foreign policy.

Global Engagement: American engagement is a prerequisite for American influence in the world. Middle East peace. Sudanese genocide. Global finance. Whatever the issue, U.S. national interests are best served through strong U.S. involvement. To win, we need to show up.

The United Nations: Our UN membership must remain an important expression of that engagement. Through it, we are often able to pursue key U.S. national interests, such as disaster relief in Haiti, arms control in North Korea, and human rights in the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Granted, the UN is certainly not a perfect institution, but it is often an invaluable tool in our foreign policy toolbox — one that allows us to protect vital national interests at a fraction of the cost — financially, militarily and politically.

***

Again, we live in a world beset by very real, very grave challenges — many of which directly threaten our interests and confront our sensibilities. We need to recognize this fact and rise to the occasion.

Presidential Leadership. Global engagement. The United Nations. Taken together, these are three key components of an effective U.S. foreign policy — one that can help us navigate the treacherous waters of our dangerous world and one that can help us avoid the mistakes of the recent past.

Needless to say, this is important — now, more than ever.

Paul S. Aronsohn, who is a Councilman in Ridgewood, served three U.S. Ambassadors to the United Nations (Madeleine K. Albright, Bill Richardson, and Richard C. Holbrooke)

ALSO BY ARONSOHN

New Jersey's budget crisis and the human imperative