Boris Johnson Quotes

We shouldn't discuss the world of tomorrow in terms of becoming a balance to the United States. The real issue is whether the United States will define herself as part of the U.N. system-or not.

But I believe that the DPKO at this time was very much involved with American administration and was acting, taking on consideration the demand or the recommendation of the American administration. American administration was very powerful.

The statesmen still say that we should not interfere in the internal affairs of other nations and yet it is not possible any longer not to interfere, even when we do not mean to do so.

There are nearly 200 countries and a population of over 6 billion in today's world. International affairs should be addressed by all countries through consultations rather than monopolised by a few powers.

American foreign policy, for all its shortcomings, has underpinned political stability around the world.

The problem with the United Nations is that while democracy within nations is the best available form of government, democracy among nations can be a moral disaster - especially if some nations are not democracies.

What we need now is a Treaty of the World not a Treaty of Rome.

There is no such thing as the United Nations.

I've been quite involved in a lot of U.N. operations over the years. I was a U.N. observer at the East Timor referendum in 2000. I've been very involved in that for a long time.

As a conservative power, the United States has a vital interest in upholding and expanding the reign of law in international relations.

The European organisation contemplated could not oppose any ethnic group, on other continents or in Europe itself, outside of the League of Nations, any more than it could oppose the League of Nations.

But I would say if the Security Council is only relevant if it agrees with the United States, then we have come a long way in a direction that I do not like very much.

The U.S. cannot go it alone simply when it is convenient.

The most tragic paradox of our time is to be found in the failure of nation-states to recognize the imperatives of internationalism.

Where is the evidence that Washington's world view sways the multitude of nations? To enlist support for its wars in Korea, Vietnam and in the Gulf, the United States had to resort to a lot of bribery and threats. At the United Nations, the US has, with noteworthy regularity, been on the minority side in voting on resolutions.

If governments do not want to work with the U.N. and the international organizations, there is a limit to what you can do. And there is also a limit to patience.

No country can dictate its laws to the world.

Multilateralism is the democracy of international society.

Just as the United States doesn't like others to take charge, other countries also don't like the United States to play a dominant role in the United Nations.

You can't build a foreign policy on the presence of an individual [a particular foreign leader].

World government is a premature concept at this stage. We are moving more and more into supernational arrangements, but it is too early still.

It’s not a dictatorship in the United States. But it is dictatorial to the rest of the world. Who’s going to say no?

You cannot have individual foreign policy. You cannot have celebrity foreign policy.

American foreign policy must uphold the sanctity of international treaties. That is the cornerstone on which all relations between nations must rest.

We cannot cede our moral authority to multinational debating societies.