Friday, October 2, 2015

Not a World Government but governance by world in parts is a necessity




Science fiction writers and some utopian philosophers have at times mentioned the idea of a world ruled by a single world government rather than governments of different countries. It is a horrible idea if not a very stupid one. At times governments become bad, dictatorial or even brutal and while there is an escape for humans presently with several countries in the world, in the case of a world government there would be none.

However, while a single world government is a horrible idea, the world does need badly, governance over parts by a world body, for limited periods, in order to rescue those parts from a terrible mess and ensuing suffering that is taking place in some countries. These are the failed states of the world where people have just not been able to get their act together on their own for various reasons. Present examples of such countries are Iraq, Syria, Libya and South Sudan to name some. At times the chaos leads to an exodus of refugees as families flee for their lives leaving home and all behind and while they may be given refuge in other countries they may bring problems to countries that host them. They often do over the long run.  

There are countries that have such deep ethnic, tribal, religious or other sectarian divides that they just cannot function as modern democratic countries. They may under a very tough dictator as Iraq did once under Saddam Hussein or Libya under Gaddafi but not otherwise, not just toughness but shrewd wisdom too because without it, just toughness may lead to utter devastation. The present attempts of the world have been to bring about reconciliation between warring parties and factions but even if that succeeds it blows apart the moment external pressure weakens as it must. It is not a solution except to kick the can down the road.

http://www.latimes.com/world/africa/la-fg-south-sudan-october-deaths-20151024-story.html
The world can end the suffering of these sweet children of South Sudan within days if it wants to

However, there is an easy solution, it is to impose foreign rule on the country for limited periods of five or ten years even twenty five and work on restoring order in this period as well as imposing a constitution etc. but is a foreign rule possible? Why not ? The world has seen many examples of this in colonial period of earlier years. However while colonial rule was in the self interest of some countries such a rule has to be by the world as a whole, through their appointed representatives and administrators, just as in colonial rule and its purpose would be a humanitarian one not one of dominance by any one country, or even a block of aligned countries but by the world as a whole and not for economic interests. It may be through a reformed UN that is not dominated by the veto of a few countries.

The world is smart enough to develop the mechanics of this concept, it is not rocket science, but if not they are welcome to consult this author for details. It is with such a concept in mind that this author had written a note to solve the problem of Syria and other countries that are leading to a huge refugee exodus presently, see:


At times ensuring sustainable peace may even require redrawing borders of some countries as described here:
https://ashokmalhotra.wordpress.com/2015/09/03/a-plan-to-end-the-world-refugee-crisis-phics-and-beyond/

It may be mentioned that it is not a luxury for countries presently in peace to watch this from a distance as a horror movie on TV, while shedding huge tears over some occasional disaster at home. These national situations of chaos have within them the seeds to blow into an apocalyptic event for all of humanity, as the one in Syria is already showing signs of leading to. The sweet children of our lovely Mother Earth need joy and play, not tears, suffering and dangers of a refugee escape.




Top globe image from Nasa images lower Public domain children image with thanks to: 
https://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:Children_in_a_Primary_Education_School.JPG




(copied from comment because of its urgent relevance)
UPDATE November 16, 2015

While this post was written more than a month ago, and similar linked posts more than a year ago, the tragic event in Paris has reminded the world of some of what has been mentioned in this note and they have decided on a transitional government for Syria within six months. While Syria needs a solution as fast as possible, it would be too soon to bring about changes in International law and UN so soon and the composition of the transitional government remains undecided. Yesterday on twitter this blogger suggested that the Syrian government may be placed under a five member council consisting of one representative each from USA, Russia, Saudi Arabia and Iran with one neutral member selected by the other four in the chair. A twitter friend suggested finding a neutral member would be difficult and academics have been known not to be neutral. The neutral member could be a Professor, Noble Peace prize winner, a representative of the Noble committee or the Dalai Lama, whatever the other four can agree on. With a wide world to choose from, it should not be a difficult task. This council can decide all matters by a majority and go on to appoint administrators etc. It will be steps towards peace and peace shall then start returning to Syria, bit by bit, part by part and the flow of refugees will stop because the peaceful parts shall be the safe zones. Military action under this council assisted by Europe, Russia, Saudi, Iran and USA etc. would still be necessary to bring into compliance parties that do not lay down arms.

None of the local parties have been suggested as a part of the governing five member council. The reason is they will never come to agree. If they were in a position to do so, then things would not have come to such a pass. It is precisely for similar reasons that colonial governments in the past were far more successful in maintaining peace and order in parts of the world, that are unable to do so now. In that case everything functioned under a single governor because it was rule at a distance by a single country. Here we have five members council instead working by majority vote amongst them because here there is a need to keep diverse world interests in mind. Many local persons would however be needed to run the administration under this council. The role of Assad remains undecided but it could be something ceremonial much as colonial rulers granted to local princes and tribal chiefs or anything else the five members decide.

Similar solutions can bring immediate peace in Yemen and South Sudan too.

1 comment:

Ashok said...

While this post was written more than a month ago, and similar linked posts more than a year ago, the tragic event in Paris has reminded the world of some of what has been mentioned in this note and they have decided on a transitional government for Syria within six months. While Syria needs a solution as fast as possible, it would be too soon to bring about changes in International law and UN so soon and the composition of the transitional government remains undecided. Yesterday on twitter this blogger suggested that the Syrian government may be placed under a five member council consisting of one representative each from USA, Russia, Saudia and Iran with one neutral member selected by the other four in the chair. A tweeter friend suggested finding a neutral member would be difficult and academics have been known not to be neutral. The neutral member could be a Professor, Noble Peace prize winner, a representative of the Noble committee or the Dalai Lama, whatever the other four can agree on. With a wide world to choose from it should not be a difficult task. This council can decide all matters by a majority and go on to appoint administrators etc. It will be steps towards peace and peace shall than start returning to Syria, bit by bit, part by part and the flow of refugees will stop because of the peaceful part. Military action under this council assisted by Europe, Russia, USA etc. would still be necessary to bring into compliance parties that do not lay down arms.