# Should U.S. soldiers be forced to wear the U.N. uniform?

**URL:** <https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-u-s-soldiers-be-forced-to-wear-the-u-n-uniform/153951>\
**Category:** Great Debates\
**Created:** [February 9, 2003, 10:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-u-s-soldiers-be-forced-to-wear-the-u-n-uniform/153951 "2003-02-09T22:16:57Z")\
**Posts on this page:** 1\
**Page:** 3

<div class="post-metadata">

**Author:** ![Northern\_Piper](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/northern_piper/32/5304_2.png) [@Northern\_Piper](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Northern_Piper)\
**Post date:** [February 12, 2003, 6:34am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-u-s-soldiers-be-forced-to-wear-the-u-n-uniform/153951/41 "2003-02-12T06:34:48Z")

</div>

> [@](#):
>
> \*Originally posted by Hermann Cheruscan \*  
> \*\*Heres another thing to consider.
> 
> US servicemen take an oath to protect and defend the Constitution, against all enemies, Foreign and Domestic. Now, since the UN does not recognise many rights under the US Constitution, such as the Right to Keep and Bear Arms, a US serviceman would be fully justified in refusing to serve in a UN uniform.\*\*

Well, let’s see.

Starting with [Article II, section 2](http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articleii.html#section2) of the United States Constitution:

> [@](#):
>
> He [the President] shall have power, by and with the advice and consent of the Senate, to make **treaties,** provided two thirds of the Senators present concur.

And then there’s [Article VI](http://www.law.cornell.edu/constitution/constitution.articlevi.html):

> [@](#):
>
> This Constitution, and the laws of the United States which shall be made in pursuance thereof; and **all treaties made, or which shall be made, under the authority of the United States, shall be the supreme law of the land;** and the judges in every state shall be bound thereby, anything in the Constitution or laws of any State to the contrary notwithstanding.

So a treaty, made by the President and duly ratified by the Senate, is part of the supreme law of the land, under the terms of the United States Constitution itself.

And then there’s President Truman’s [Proclamation of United Nations Charter and Statute of the International Court of Justice](http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/decade/decad029.htm)

> [@](#):
>
> AND WHEREAS the Senate of the United States of America by their Resolution of July 28 (legislative day of July 9), 1945, two-thirds of the Senators present concurring therein, did advise and consent to the ratification of the said Charter, with annexed Statute;  
> …  
> AND WHEREAS the said Charter, with annexed Statute, was duly ratified by the President of the United States of America on August 8, 1945, in pursuance of the aforesaid advice and consent of the Senate;

So under the U.S. Constitution, the Charter of the United Nations is part of the supreme law of the United States. How can a soldier refuse to participate in U.N. activities, when ordered by his lawful superior? The constitutional process has been followed to ensure that U.S. participation in U.N. activities is fully constitutional. A soldier who refuses to participate in these circumstances would be acting contrary to the Constitution.

[Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/should-u-s-soldiers-be-forced-to-wear-the-u-n-uniform/153951.md?page=2)