Saturday, March 19, 2016
The world needs a place where the voice of every nation can be heard and it's concerns given fair consideration. It pains me deeply when I hear fellow Americans trash talk the current institution the world has in place for this necessity, but when you are made aware of internal disfunction of the magnitude described by Anthony Banbury you can certainly understand why so many people, and not just Americans, consider the UN either a waste of time, or an actual disservice to the needs of the nations it was formed to serve. This cannot be allowed to continue.
There are, certainly, a lot of reasons why this is so. On the one hand the lopsided way it was formed, with the developed nations of the world having such overbearing power within it, gave it only a modest credibility with the rest of the world's nations. And on the other hand, too many of the power elites of all nations see it only as either a gold mine of feather beading employment, or as propaganda tool, and far too often as combinations of the two.
The question then becomes: How do we go about reinventing it? And to be perfectly honest here I don't have many ideas on the matter, and I'm pretty sure a lot of people are in the same boat. Having said that, though, should not dissuade us from attempting to do a complete reinvention. And perhaps one way to go about it would be to think in terms of separation of mandates. Perhaps even to go so far as to suggest that there needs to be two separate institutions.
One would be a combination of the World Health organization, a World Refugee organization, a World public transportation organization, and a World public energy organization.
I would combine these because I believe they are interlinked. Simply put, how we generate power is a tremendous health issue. How well you can deliver aid where it is need is a tremendous issue. And displaced peoples of whatever nationality are not only a humanitarian crises, they are ripe ground for further political instability, as well as the incubation of diseases that should have been a non issue decades ago. I also believe that the energy aspect, as well as a truly universal transportation aspect, might provide the means to make the institution at least partially self supporting. And to be clear here, the management of this organization, however broadly based the recruitment might be, would have to be based on results; as in: you don't deliver you don't get to stay.
The other institution then would be reserved for the deliberation and restitution of grievances between nations. This body would also be involved in how priorities for the other body would be determined, but would not necessarily have any absolute control over it; something for which I have to admit that I don't know how you could do in practical terms, but also for which a bit of independance still needs to be seriously considered.
This is just an outline of possibilities of course. The input of a lot more, better informed, people than I need to weigh in on it as well. The main takeaway here, however, needs to be this: If the world doesn't take seriously the need to have these service institutions, as well as a global forum to air and resolve differences, than we are all headed for a very rude awakening.