Dawn Breaker's Reflections

German Defense Minister Peter Struck, left, congratulates NATO Secretary General, Lord Robertson, after awarding him the ' Grand Cross of the Order of Merit of the Federal Republic of Germany' in Berlin on Monday, Nov. 3, 2003. Robertson, NATO's outgoing leader urged U.S. and European defense officials to put aside differences that arose over the war in Iraq as they transform the alliance to meet new threats. (AP Photo/Markus Schreiber)-Copyright © 2003, The Associated Press) Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency, addresses the United Nations General Assembly at U.N. headquarters in New York, Monday Nov. 3, 2003. ElBaradei delivered his annual report to the United Nations on Monday. (AP Photo/Richard Drew)-Copyright © 2003, The Associated Press)

In two separate events taking place on the same day on opposite sides of the Atlantic, the overwhelming need for increased international cooperation in the enforcement of International treaties was aired by the leaders of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) and the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA).

In New York, Mohamed ElBaradei, Director General of the IAEA, addressed the United Nations General Assembly, while Lord Robertson, Outgoing NATO Secretary-General, addressed defense ministers and security officials of Eastern and Western countries at an international security meeting in Berlin.

These two separate addresses on the same day in history mark a significant step in the progress of humanity world towards world peace. How is this so? Both of these leaders essentially have acknowledged that without increased international cooperation that oversteps the boundaries of national sovereignty and overcomes the individual differences between national sovereignties, progress cannot be made in enforcing international legislation. In other words, they are calling for structural reform both within their organizations, and at an implied higher international level (which could only mean the United Nations level) which would allow for swift and effective enforcement of international legislation so that nations in violation of treaties or agreements are stopped in their tracks before they act unilaterally, and are not left free to their own devices while individual nations bicker and quarrel over what ought to be done.

Acknowledging that a problem exists and expressing a need for measures to be taken in order to solve this problem is a significant step in the process of overcoming such a problem. For many years, national sovereignty has ruled in all international organizations; that is, the sovereignty and best interests of individual nations have taken a more important role in decision-making than those of the collective group of nations making up such organizations. Only when the needs and interests of the power-wielding national sovereignties in such organizations were met did resolutions or decisions pass, and this after much debate and negotiation between all parties involved.

It appears this is changing very slowly. With the looming threat of nuclear standoffs and global terrorism, international security organizations around the world are finding that current decision-making processes involving the collective security of all nations are extremely slow and will be ineffective in preventing rogue nations from carrying out destructive plans if determined to do so. They are finding out that unity among sovereignties on a global scale is the key to swift executive action, and that individual sovereignties must give up their differences in order to achieve this unity. They are also finding that it is obviously much easier to obtain moral and financial support from the rest of the world when they decide to act multilaterally, rather than unilaterally. Hopefully, it will not be long before the equation: "unilateral military action = bankruptcy" is universally accepted.

Without the presence of an accepted international police force, The IAEA will be unable to effectively carry out its 'watchdog' responsibilities and safely allow entry to, protect and withdraw its inspectors and officers from rogue nations' nuclear facilities; the ability to achieve this will continue to be hampered while there are conflicting views among individual sovereignties involved in the decision-making process over such rogue nations' fates during and after enforcement. Only when unity among national sovereignties is achieved, and when these submit to a greater sovereignty, that of the collective body of nations they belong to, will these organizations effectively meet their objectives and fulfill their duties.

In my humble opinion, NATO is finding out its resources are far too limited, and the interests of its few member nations are too divided in order for it to become the effective global police force it is striving to become. If it continues to function with its current structure, NATO will find itself perceived as a tool for unilateral rather than multi-lateral enforcement of international legislation, and will be subject to the suspicion and mistrust of non-member nations. Also subject to suspicion is the current executive branch of the United Nations, the Security Council itself. As long as there are members with exclusive rights such as veto power and permanent membership in the Security Council, such an organization will be subject to the suspicion and defiance of nations without such privileges. If the Security Council refuses to eliminate such antiquated tools whose original purpose was the retention of power by the allied victors of World War II, a new world executive branch will need to be established with equal representation and privileges for all nations.

In order to be able to enforce international legislation globally, the UN will need to either recruit a global military police force such as NATO and transform it into a much larger organization with equal representation for all nations and place it under its complete control, or if NATO refuses to restructure in such a manner (which is quite likely), create an entirely new global military police force (that is financed by and pledges allegiance to the UN General Assembly) under the United Nations' reformed executive branch that is many times larger and more powerful than NATO in its current state or the very small peacekeeping forces now under the control of the UN.

Where am I going with this? Scattered as these personal comments may seem, the point is that without enforcement, international law will not be respected. No matter how much international legislation is passed to safeguard the collective security of humanity, it will not be obeyed if there is not an international 'credible threat of force' serving to enforce this legislation. An international credible threat of force would require so much military power that no individual nation or coalition of nations could stand up to and defeat it. Such a display of power would require a level of cooperation between nations as never seen before, one where individual national sovereignty has given way to the greater collective, global sovereignty of the United Nations, and where Force is made a servant of Justice. To make this global police force a servant of justice, a UN Executive Branch that is trusted, respected and obeyed by all nations (or a majority of all nations) will be needed.

To close this post, another quote taken from "Turning Point For All Nations", A Statement of the Bahá'í International Community on the Occasion of the 50th Anniversary of the United Nations. This particular section deals with developing a meaningful executive function for the United Nations, as one of three steps in Defining a Role for the UN Within the Emerging International Order:


B. Developing a Meaningful Executive Function

At the international level, the single most important executive function is the enforcement of a collective security pact. [20]

Collective security implies a binding covenant among nations to act in concert against threats to the collective. The effectiveness of the covenant depends on the degree to which members commit themselves to the collective good, even if motivated by a sense of enlightened self-interest.

Within the United Nations, the enforcement role is largely carried out by the Security Council, with other functions of the executive being shared with the Secretariat. Both are hampered in fulfilling their mandated roles. The Security Council suffers from an inability to take decisive action. The Secretariat is pressured by the complex demands of the member states.

In the short term, four practical measures are possible to strengthen the executive function within the United Nations.

1. Limiting the exercise of the veto power

The original intention of the UN Charter in conferring veto power on the five Permanent Members was to prevent the Security Council from authorizing military actions against a Permanent Member or requiring the use of its forces against its will. [21] In fact, beginning with the Cold War, the veto power has been exercised repeatedly for reasons that have to do with regional or national security.

In its 1955 submission on UN reform, the Bahá'í International Community argued for the gradual elimination of the concepts of "permanent membership" and "veto power" as confidence in the Security Council would build. Today, forty years later, we reaffirm that position. However, we also propose that, as a transitionary step, measures be introduced to curb the exercise of the veto power to reflect the original intention of the Charter.

2. Institutionalizing ad hoc military arrangements

To support the peacekeeping operations of the United Nations, and to add credibility to resolutions of the Security Council, an International Force should be created. [22] Its loyalty to the UN and its independence from national considerations must be assured. The command and control of such a fully armed Force would reside with the Secretary-General under the authority of the Security Council. Its finances, however, would be determined by the General Assembly. In constructing such a force, the Secretary-General would seek to draw competent personnel from all regions of the world.

If properly implemented, this Force would also provide a sense of security that might encourage steps toward global disarmament, thereby making possible an outright ban on all weapons of mass destruction. [23] Furthermore, in line with the principle of collective security, it would become gradually understood that states need only maintain armaments sufficient for their own defense and the maintenance of internal order.

As an immediate step toward the establishment of this Force, the present system of ad hoc arrangements could be institutionalized to establish core regional forces for rapid deployment during a crisis.

3. Applying the notion of collective security to other problems of the global commons

Although originally conceived within the context of a threat of military aggression, the principle of collective security, some argue, may now be applied in an expansive manner to all threats which, although apparently local in nature, are actually the result of the complex breakdown of the present-day global order. These threats include but are not limited to international drug trafficking, food security, and the emergence of new global pandemics. [24]

We believe this issue would have to be included on the agenda of the proposed Global Summit. However, it is unlikely that expansive formulations of collective security would preclude the fundamental cause of military aggression 4. Retaining successful UN institutions with independent executive function..

Some of the more independent organizations within the UN family, such as the UN International Children's Emergency Fund, the International Civil Aviation Organization, the Universal Postal Union, the International Telegraph and Communications Union, the International Labor Organization, and the World Health Organization, have enjoyed conspicuous success with focused but important areas of international concern.

Generally, these organizations already have their own executive function. Their independence should be retained and reinforced as part of the international executive. [25]

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



Another loong post this dawn, but very worthy of meditating upon (great food for mental munching)! Until next post!