It doesn't matter whether they're "required" to or not. The fact is that they almost univerally (or perhaps completely universally) do remain, and that wouldn't be the case if there weren't consequences for leaving that countries aren't willing to accept. Once you have that basic element, you effectively have the beginnings of a government. Governments have a tendency to get more powerful over time, especially when few people are paying serious attention.
To me his message to the UN is to stop trying to reach into areas of national sovereignty that have nothing to do with relationships between countries, while at the same time redirecting the UN into areas that *do* affect relationships between nations.
We should know from our own constitutional history (think "commerce clause") that there's almost no problem of government that can be incontrovertibly considered a purely internal matter. It's a total fiction to say that by confining a superintending authority to "external" matters only, it won't end up swallowing all powers. Either you're a sovereign nation, or you're not a sovereign nation. That's all there is to it.
You're wrong. It matters a great deal.
The fact is that they almost univerally (or perhaps completely universally) do remain, and that wouldn't be the case if there weren't consequences for leaving that countries aren't willing to accept.
You mean like the consequences the US faces for staying out of the world court & Kyoto? For many, staying has more to do with carrots than sticks. Some stay because they think it's a good place to gang up on the bigger guys (the US). How has that been working out for them?
Once you have that basic element, you effectively have the beginnings of a government.
I disagree with your premise. From your previous quote from Bolton, I don't see anything in there about enforcement. I see a requirement for members. I see monitoring of activities. I don't see any kind of stick for misbehaviour. Okay, so you flunk & the UN issues a resolution against you, then what?
Governments have a tendency to get more powerful over time, especially when few people are paying serious attention.
But you're dealing with someone here who is not accepting the premise that it is a government. Short of the US pulling out, what would you like to see in the American rep to the body? Do you want someone who is going to show up there every day to tell everyone that the organization is useless or that is should be made useless?