Synopsis
“A nation has no permanent
enemies and no permanent friends, only permanent interests.” Winston Churchill
We live in an international anarchy in which the most powerful nation states, (given their freedom to ignore international treaties with impunity) have fully independent sovereignty. The most powerful states take, and do, what they will. The UN, the most significant international institution tasked with moderating the worst excesses of this system, has no real legitimacy. Established by the world's most powerful nations, it was designed specifically not to have the power to override their sovereignty without their agreement.
The UN has no power to fund its own activities through taxation, no armed forces, no fully independent judiciary and no power to take any initiative that is not subject to the power of veto of its most powerful members. It is at best, no more than the sum of its parts. It has failed to prevent genocides, poverty, military conflicts, nuclear proliferation, the rapidly increasing destruction of the environment and the emerging conflict between the world's greatest religions.
The present and deteriorating situation will not change until Homo sapiens has a world government answerable to a world parliament, whether it is under the umbrella of a reformed UN or its replacement, which has power and legitimacy given to it by the democratic vote of the people of Earth: its members appointed directly by mechanisms that are quite different from those used for the appointment of the political managers responsible for looking after the less significant interests of individual nation states.
Full Text
Why Sapiens?
"A
nation has no permanent enemies and no permanent friends, only
permanent interests." Winston Churchill
In most cases, the interests Churchill is referring to are additional benefits to be gained at the expense of neighbours. As long as humanity is grouped into fully sovereign nation states, there will be neither peace on Earth nor uninhibited mutual collaboration for the greater benefit of all humanity.
The needs for international collaboration are obvious and increase with every advance in technology and global population. To satisfy these needs, ad hoc treaties between nations are called into being as convenience demands. The most significant and comprehensive of such treaties gave existence to the United Nations. As circumstances calling for unified global action become more frequent and more pressing, so too do expectations of the UN grow. Disenchantment with the UN's performance increases at a similar rate. How could it be otherwise?
The UN has no powers other than those granted to it by the nation states that are its members. The most powerful of these only ratified the treaty after they had ensured they had the power to veto decisions that, though of benefit to humanity at large, were not advantageous to their own national interests.
He who pays the piper calls the tune. The UN is funded by what are in effect, optional contributions from member states. The larger and more powerful the state, the larger its contribution and the more influence it has over how it is spent. The UN has no powers to fund its own activities through taxation. Its officials are in effect simply servants of their paymasters. It has no independent executive powers, no independent armed forces, no independent judiciary and no independent ability to exercise any initiatives that do not have the agreement of all the major nations who control the Security Council through their powers of veto. There are many proposals for reform of the operating mechanics of the UN, such as increasing the number of nations on the Security Council, but the only proposal, which would tackle the fundamental problem facing humanity is one which advocates its transformation into a democratic parliamentary system. The nation states, who benefit most from the present system that gives them the power to manipulate the outcomes from the UN decision-making process, will not abandon that power unless faced by overwhelming public pressure.
If the UN were doing the job of providing collective security for which it was intended (but deliberately not designed), would there still be nations eager to proliferate nuclear weapons? What has the UN been able to do to prevent the ongoing racial massacres in Africa, settle the impending oil-fired frontier disputes in Asia or dampen the USA's penchant for violent interference in the affairs of less powerful states? How many UN resolutions has Israel been able to ignore, or has had deflected by an American veto, while continuing with its illegal acquisition of additional Palestinian land? What has the UN been able to do to prevent the exploitation of so many of the Earth's resources to the point now reached where future generations are going to have to live without them?
The concept of total national sovereignty makes our world a free-for-all scramble; the devil takes the hindermost and the most powerful take the lion's share. The world's population needs enforceable world law. Humankind needs a government of universally recognised legitimacy that has the power to make laws applicable to all people, the power to demand of member states that those laws are obeyed, and the authority and executive power to ensure their compliance. The present and fast deteriorating situation will not change until Homo sapiens has a parliament which has power and legitimacy given to it by the democratic vote of the people of Earth: its members appointed directly by mechanisms quite separate from the election or appointment of the political managers responsible for looking after the less significant, but nonetheless essential and legitimate, interests of individual nation states.
