The UN as an Organization. A Critique of its Functioning

II. The Evolution Towards the Radical Approach

But the present situation will inevitably change, and it is very likely that the direction of change will lead the political establishment to discover the importance of defining a new global institutional structure.

A. The Factors of Change

The accelerated change of the global political situation, which began in 1985 with the Gorbachevian revolution in the USSR, is still continuing and will continue. It is, of course, not possible to establish a scenario, but the factors of change are well known. The future will be made of:

- an irresistible trend towards planetary economic integration;

- the consequences of this trend on the social situation, i.e. globalization of the employment market, competition between workers with very unequal levels of pay, growth of unemployment (even during periods of economic growth), a trend towards the reduction of the level of salaries for routine workers, an increase in inequality and exclusion;

- a growing number of intra-State conflicts due to psychological collective reactions (nationalism, integrism, etc.) against the pressure and publicity for the adoption of the western way of life, which remains unattainable for poor peoples;

- the growth of migratory streams, that barriers at the borders of rich countries will not stop;

- the continuing unequal growth of world population, bringing a greater disequilibrium between the number of poor and the number of rich.

B. The New Content of the Political Debate

The electorate of rich countries, particularly the middle class, will search for protection against these growing threats. This will lead to a conflict between two opposed tendencies:

- a trend towards populist, authoritarian, and nationalist attitudes, which could create a drift towards fascist regimes in the developed countries, comparable to the trend towards nazism, fascism and militarism, that in the 30s led to the Second World War;

- a reaction of defence of human rights and of democracy.

The political question for citizens will no longer be merely selecting, by way of elections, leaders able to manage national problems, but will additionally involve their making a choice between fascism and democracy. The question will be in fact to define the type of society able to solve the contradictions

- between the enormous capacity of production of goods and services and the incapacity to guarantee jobs and decent conditions of life for the population of the planet;

- as well as between the proclaimed values of human rights, democracy and peace and the trend towards wars, insecurity and fascism.

This will become a universal concern. It will thus be more and more clear that the problems at stake in the economic, social and security fields are global and must find their solutions at the global level.

C. The Discovery by the Political Establishment of the Problem of Global Institutional Structure

Consequently the present paradoxical situation of the political establishment will change. The paradox today is that in all fields of activity - business, economy, communication, techniques, sciences, arts - individuals have the possibility of finding positions permitting them to play a role at the world level. Politics is the only field in which careers are only national. No doubt those who reach the most important posts (foreign affairs ministers, chiefs of State or of Government) are playing their part on the global stage. But these roles are played in a national capacity and only politicians belonging to superpowers have a chance of exercising any real influence.

At the very time when all problems are becoming global, there are no positions (the only exception being the post of the UN Secretary-General) permitting the interests of the whole international community to be represented. This phenomenon is directly related to the loss of credibility of the political establishment in numerous countries. Such a situation will be less and less acceptable, and the only way to change it and at the same time have an influence on the world situation will soon reveal itself as a proposal for the creation of a new global institutional structure.

It is in fact surprising that the political establishment has not already seized this opportunity. But if the world political situation continues to deteriorate, the central character of the global institutional question will become more and more obvious, and will be discovered rapidly at least by some politicians.

D. A New Institutional Debate

It is not very difficult to identify the nature of the problems to be considered, when the question is taken up at the political level, in a controversy opposing defence of democracy, human rights and peace against nationalism and fascism. In fact the list of actions that global institutions should be able to carry out are:

- the establishment of a permanent cooperation between heads of State or government of the great powers and of the regional representatives of all other countries, in order to cope with global problems;

- the progressive building of world peace, i.e. the definition and implementation of methods for preventing conflicts instead of letting them develop;

- the establishment of democracy and of respect of human rights everywhere in the world;

- the guarantee of the stability of the world economy;

- the control of all difficulties and troubles due to the economic, social, cultural and political progressive integration of the planet.

The present UN-IMF Specialized Agencies system, even completed by the Group of Seven, is not able to fulfil these missions. It does not ensure any serious cooperation of the actors on the world scene. The UN General Assembly is only a stage for confronting various propagandas. The G7 is composed only of some great powers and the Security Council is under the control of the permanent Five. The present institutional setting is able neither to appease existing conflicts nor to prevent those in preparation. The `collective security' system, which prescribes collective action against aggressors has never worked and cannot work, and the UN has neither the intellectual equipment nor the financial resources necessary to define and implement conflict prevention strategies capable of modifying situations leading to conflicts.

The present system exercises only a very limited influence on the global economy (through the adjustment structural policies imposed by the IMF and the World Bank on poor indebted countries). It does not guarantee exchange stability in any way and is not able to prevent crises that could destabilize the economy at the planetary level. It does not permit any transfer of resources from the rich countries to the poor ones in order to reduce social inequality and to facilitate the development of underdeveloped countries. The UN does not defend democracy, since it does not provide any democratic representation of peoples, or of national minorities, or of civil society. And the UN secretariat is not well enough equipped to be able to suggest new solutions, and to propose action.

To ensure real defence of democracy, human rights and peace, the establishment of an entirely new worldwide organization is indispensable, the main features of which are easily identifiable. The need for coordination at the global level should lead to the institutionalization of regular summit meetings between representatives of the major countries and the diverse regions of the world. The development of democracy should eventually emerge with regard to representation of people at the world level. The need to build peace should inspire the development of conflict prevention strategies. In order to be efficient, the organization should have sufficiently important resources provided through international taxation, and a secretariat similar to the Commission of the European Union. Finally, to guarantee economic security, the replacement of IMF by a Central World Bank, should be seriously considered.¹⁰

This is the type of institutional debate towards which the present evolution of the world situation is leading.

10 See the forthcoming book, M. Bertrand and D. Warner (eds), A New Charter for Worldwide Organization? (1995).

© 1990-2004 European Journal of International Law
All comments and suggestions should be sent to webmaster
This site is part of the Academy of European Law online, a joint partnership of the Jean Monnet Center at NYU School of Law and the Academy of European Law at the European University Institute.
This file was last modified: Saturday, August 14, 1999 01:53PM