Whether George W. Bush or John Kerry wins on Tuesday, the United Nations will gain in importance and relevance to United States foreign policies. Either man will need U.N. help in devising a U.S. exit strategy for the Iraq war and in meeting other challenges in a dangerous and changing world.

A visitor to our area had some wise and constructive things to say recently about the United Nations and its likely future role. Thomas R. Pickering is a retired diplomat and former U.S. ambassador to the U.N. His appearance as the lead-off speaker at a projected annual lecture series on foreign affairs, sponsored by the weekly newspaper the Ellsworth American, drew an audience of 100 on a Saturday morning in the Ellsworth High School auditorium.

Mr. Pickering titled his presentation “The U.S. and the U.N. – Menace or Miracle?” He dispensed quickly with the menace seen by some right-wing extremists that the United States is plotting to use black helicopters and jack-booted troops to impose a world government. He pointed out that the United States has veto power and will continue to have it, since it could veto any proposal to change the U.N. charter.

Another, more imminent, menace, he said, would be a U.S. failure to use its position as the unparalleled leader of the world community to lead the U.N. “If we don’t, others will, often against our interests,” he said. “If we do, we can get our way in many key situations and otherwise reduce or limit damage to us.”

Mr. Pickering described the U.N. and particularly its Security Council as a potential “tool of American diplomacy – depending upon how we want to

use it.” Noting that the Security Council opposes the use of force, he said lawyers had defined too narrowly the Article 51 provision authorizing individual and collective self-defense without specific U.N. approval, by limiting it to a response to attack. He supported in principle the Bush administration’s new strategy of pre-emptive war as “a swing in the right direction, but possibly a swing too far.”

While accepting the first principle that no president can ever leave the country unprotected, he said resort to war needs “more than an implied standard of unilateral decision.” He said: “Any state can cause havoc by using that approach. That’s what happened when Hitler invaded most of Europe in 1939-40.” He suggested that a clear and present danger standard should be applied.

For the future, Mr. Pickering suggested that the U.N. should abandon its informal rule that the selection of a secretary-general must rotate among Europe, the Americas, Asia and Africa, with Asia next in line. He said it would be better to let a Security Council selection committee choose the best person – man or woman – from the entire world. Similarly, he questioned the present policy of apportioning top- level U.N. officials by geographical area. He also advocated reduction of the U.N.’s huge headquarters staff. But he opposed any enlargement of the 15-member Security Council, on the grounds that a body of 20 to 25 could be unwieldy and indecisive.

Mr. Pickering’s main thrust: “We are in the world to stay. There is no way to jump off the planet.”