Dawn Breaker's Reflections

European Union Trade Commissioner Pascal Lamy addresses the media following the World Trade Organization meeting in Cancun, Sunday, Sept. 14, 2003 after WTO talks collapsed. ' I would not say the Doha round (of trade talks) is dead, but it is certainly in intensive care' Lamy said. The talks, designed to change the face of farming around the world, collapsed Sunday amid differences between rich and poor nations, the second failure for the World Trade Organization in four years. (AP Photo/Laura Rauch) -Copyright © 2003, The Associated Press Non-governmental organization workers sing while celebrating in the corridors of the World Trade Organization meeting in Cancun, Sunday, Sept. 14, 2003 after WTO talks collapsed. The talks, designed to change the face of farming around the world, collapsed Sunday amid differences between rich and poor nations, the second failure for the World Trade Organization in four years.(AP Photo/Jose Luis Magana)-Copyright © 2003, The Associated Press

When the collapse of the WTO ministerial meeting in Cancun was sadly announced this weekend by Mexican Foreign Secretary Luis Ernesto Derbez, there was great rejoicing and celebration in the corridors of the meeting facilities by both governmental and non-governmental representatives. Was the collapse of the WTO trade talks a success or a failure? Well, it depends on whose point of view you are looking at the ministerial meeting from.

While some may view the collapse of the WTO Cancun meeting as a great setback and failure, many are looking upon this event as a great success. Why? For the first time in history, developing nations have successfully stood up to the industrialized nations, and in one collective voice, called for equality and justice in the field of international trade negotiation. In the past, developing nations did not have a collective voice and were therefore not heard when complaining about the unfairness of current world trade practices; the poorest of nations had to be content with whatever the wealthier nations decided.

While the delay in the talks (estimated to be at least two years by some experts) is a temporary setback for the WTO, it can also be viewed as a window of opportunity for all WTO member nations to reflect upon the nature of the events that took place in Cancun, analyze what might have caused such antagonism and inflammation of the WTO body, and come up with new cooperative strategies of negotiation and discussion (Ahem! such as consultation, perhaps) that might lead to a more universal agreement on new global trade policy platforms.

Personally, I feel that the WTO alone and unaided, without the direction and enforcement of the United Nations, will be unable to successfully address the enormous issues it is facing. I also believe that the United Nations itself, without a significant change in the way it carries out its business (such as giving veto power to five industrialized nations over the decisions of all the nations of the world), will soon find it is unable to successfully address issues such as these. Until all nations are represented equally in the decision-making process, and until grass roots organizations representing the people of the world are consulted and involved in the multiple stages of decision-making at the U.N. and its agencies, the crying needs of billions of poverty-struck, disillusioned human beings will remain unmet and unaddressed.

Rather than ramble on with my personal opinions on the subject, I would like to quote the Baha'i International Community's statement, "The Prosperity of Humankind", which provides a clear explanation of the causes underlying many of our current global economic, social and environmental crises, proposes the solution to such problems and provides a vision of a future global society where these issues have been addressed:


"...If humanity is indeed coming of age, if all the inhabitants of the planet constitute a single people, if justice is to be the ruling principle of social organization -- then existing conceptions that were born out of ignorance of these emerging realities have to be recast.

Movement in this direction has barely begun. It will lead, as it unfolds, to a new understanding of the nature of the family and of the rights and responsibilities of each of its members. It will entirely transform the role of women at every level of society. Its effect in reordering people's relation to the work they do and their understanding of the place of economic activity in their lives will be sweeping. It will bring about far-reaching changes in the governance of human affairs and in the institutions created to carry it out. Through its influence, the work of society's rapidly proliferating non-governmental organizations will be increasingly rationalized. It will ensure the creation of binding legislation that will protect both the environment and the development needs of all peoples. Ultimately, the restructuring or transformation of the United Nations system that this movement is already bringing about will no doubt lead to the establishment of a world federation of nations with its own legislative, judicial, and executive bodies.

Central to the task of reconceptualizing the system of human relationships is the process that Baha'u'llah refers to as consultation. "In all things it is necessary to consult," is His advice. "The maturity of the gift of understanding is made manifest through consultation."

The standard of truth seeking this process demands is far beyond the patterns of negotiation and compromise that tend to characterize the present-day discussion of human affairs. It cannot be achieved -- indeed, its attainment is severely handicapped -- by the culture of protest that is another widely prevailing feature of contemporary society. Debate, propaganda, the adversarial method, the entire apparatus of partisanship that have long been such familiar features of collective action are all fundamentally harmful to its purpose: that is, arriving at a consensus about the truth of a given situation and the wisest choice of action among the options open at any given moment.

What Baha'u'llah is calling for is a consultative process in which the individual participants strive to transcend their respective points of view, in order to function as members of a body with its own interests and goals. In such an atmosphere, characterized by both candor and courtesy, ideas belong not to the individual to whom they occur during the discussion but to the group as a whole, to take up, discard, or revise as seems to best serve the goal pursued. Consultation succeeds to the extent that all participants support the decisions arrived at, regardless of the individual opinions with which they entered the discussion. Under such circumstances an earlier decision can be readily reconsidered if experience exposes any shortcomings.

Viewed in such a light, consultation is the operating expression of justice in human affairs. So vital is it to the success of collective endeavor that it must constitute a basic feature of a viable strategy of social and economic development. Indeed, the participation of the people on whose commitment and efforts the success of such a strategy depends becomes effective only as consultation is made the organizing principle of every project. "No man can attain his true station," is Baha'u'llah's counsel, "except through his justice. No power can exist except through unity. No welfare and no well-being can be attained except through consultation."

(Baha'i International Community, 1995 Mar 03, The Prosperity of Humankind)

French Foreign Minister Dominique de Villepin, left, Secretary of State Colin Powell, center, and U.N. Secretary-General Kofi Annan pose after a news conference following a foreign ministers meeting of the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council, in Geneva, Switzerland, Saturday, Sept. 13, 2003. (AP Photo/Keystone, Sandro Campardo)-Copyright © 2003, The Associated Press -- On this day in 1948, a groundbreaking ceremony took place in New York at the site of the United Nations' world headquarters.

Why is it that only five nations hold in their hands the reins to the collective security of all the nations of the entire planet? To answer this question, one simply needs to look at the history of the formation of the U.N. after WWII. Throughout history, one can easily observe that the formation of power-wielding organizations almost always appears to take place in such a manner that the reins of power are kept in the hands of those who are in power at the time of the formation of such organizations.

Although I could ramble on for many, many pages to justify the above statements, I would much rather reference a much more eloquent, authoritative statement prepared on the occasion of the 50th anniversary of the United Nations by the Baha'i International Community entitled, "Turning Point For All Nations" which among many other things presents a clear vision of how the United Nations and its agencies can be re-organized to effectively carry out the role they must play in establishing and maintaining the collective security of all nations of this global community. I could quote the entire set of recommendations to the U.N. set forth in this document, but for brevity's sake (this still will be a rather long post), will only post the section entitled, "Defining a Role for the UN Within the Emerging International Order":


"The United Nations was the centerpiece of the international system created by the victors of World War II and, during the long decades of ideological conflict between the East and the West, it served as a forum for international dialogue. Over the years, its activities have expanded to include not only international standard-setting and promotion of social and economic development but also peacekeeping operations on several continents.

Over the same period, the political reality of our world has experienced a dramatic transformation. At the time of the UN's inception, there were some fifty independent states. That number has grown to exceed 185. At the close of World War II, governments were the main actors on the global scene. Today, the growing influence of organizations of civil society and of multinational corporations has created a much more intricate political landscape.

Despite the growing complexity in its mission, the United Nations system has retained more or less the same structure that was designed for a new international organization some fifty years ago. It is not surprising then that the occasion of its fiftieth anniversary has stimulated a new dialogue about its ability to meet the political realities of the 21st Century. Unfortunately, in this dialogue, criticism has far outweighed praise.

Most criticisms of the operations of the United Nations are based on comparisons with the operations of the leading organizations in the private sector or on measurements relative to inflated initial expectations. Although some specific comparisons may be useful in increasing the efficiency of the United Nations more general exercises of this kind are essentially unfair. The United Nations lacks not only the clear authority, but also the requisite resources to act effectively in most instances. Accusations of the UN's failure are in fact indictments of the member states themselves.

Judged in isolation from the reality within which it operates, the United Nations will always seem inefficient and ineffective. However, if it is viewed as one element of a larger process of development in systems of international order, the bright light of analysis would shift from the UN's shortcomings and failures to shine on its victories and accomplishments. To those with an evolutionary mindset, the early experience of the United Nations offers us a rich source of learning about its future role within the international regime.

An evolutionary mindset implies the ability to envision an institution over a long time frame perceiving its inherent potential for development, identifying the fundamental principles governing its growth, formulating high-impact strategies for short-term implementation, and even anticipating radical discontinuities along its path.

Studying the United Nations from this perspective unveils significant opportunities to strengthen the current system without the wholesale restructuring of its principal institutions or the intensive re-engineering of its core processes. In fact, we submit that no proposal for UN reform can produce high impact unless its recommendations are internally consistent and direct the UN along a projected evolutionary path toward a distinctive and relevant role within the future international order.

We believe the combination of recommendations described herein meets these conditions and that their adoption would represent a measured but significant step toward building a more just world order... "

(Baha'i International Community, October 1995, Turning Point For All Nations)