If the UN speaks but nobody listens, does it really make a sound?

Today's edition of the LA Times disclosed a leaked UN report that declared that the US is commiting acts of torture in Guantanamo Bay and may call for the military prison to be shut down. The fact that the United States military is violating its own laws as well as international treaties is nothing new, but UN condemnation is especially interesting considering the other things on the UN plate at present.

While the UN condemns the US and demands that Camp XRay be closed and the prisoners (who haven't been charged for four years) be released, it is also denounces the Iranian nuclear program.

How can the United States stand behind the United Nations as a source of legitimacy for its anti-Iranian policy while at the same time disregarding UN reports indicating the shortcomings of the United States?

Right now states attempt to push their agendas through the United Nations to gain legitimacy and the appearance of international support for their foreign policy agendas. For example, just look at the United States' desperate bids for support for war in Iraq back in 2002 and 2003. When the United Nations refused to support such action and the United States pursued, the United Nations lost some of its legitimacy and importance in the international system. Today, in the cases of both Iran and American torture, this is likely to repeat.

The UN will be little more than a sounding board until its member states stop the selective hearing. If the United States or anyone else is going to continue to use the UN to legitimize its intrusive foreign policy, it will have to stop undermining the same organization from which it seeks support every time the international community and the United States do not see eye to eye.