Nowy międzynarodowy (nie)porządek

neweasterneurope.eu 1 miesiąc temu

The election and inauguration of the fresh US president and his first decrees have one more time put the issue of global institutions on the agenda. Obviously, this full strategy has long ceased to function, but what will happen next?

International institutions have usually been created after a major war to consolidate the planet order that the victors sought. Following the Second planet War, the slogan “Never Again” was utilized to make impossible what the vanquished had done before. The victors established the values ​​and rules of post-war life. This was the case with the League of Nations and the UN, which gave emergence to the Universal Declaration of Human Rights and another papers that specify the rules of our world. 1 can besides mention older examples, specified as the Peace of Westphalia.

However, after the Cold War, the defeat of communism was not celebrated. No fresh institutions were created, no fresh fundamental papers were developed, and no analogue of the Nuremberg trials took place. Instead, the victors immersed themselves in celebrating the “end of history”. Of course, a unpunished evil always returns, which is what we have now. alternatively of “Never Again”, the planet was greeted by the Russian revanchist motto of “We Can Do It Again”. Incidentally, this means that without Russia’s apparent defeat in the current war, the planet will receive a safety vacuum alternatively of a safety order.

Maybe it is better this way, at least for the US? I uncertainty it. There are 2 alternatives: a planet based on rules and agreements, and a planet of the right of the strong. In specified a world, the strong must prove from time to time that they are the strongest. Therefore, American blood will be shed, which is precisely what Americans want to avoid. The analysis of benefits and losses shows the benefits of a planet of rules even for those who like something different. As the Chinese proverb says, “a individual surviving in a glass home should not throw stones.”

Ukraine has the moral right to talk about restarting global institutions due to the fact that we have acutely experienced their failure.

Obviously, the fresh planet order must be based primarily on the designation of the changing global balance. For example, the current UN safety Council does not include respective of the world’s most powerful states as permanent members.

Secondly, the fresh planet order must be based on the abolition of double standards, otherwise it will not stand. First of all, this concerns decolonization. The Declaration on the Granting of independency to Colonial Countries and Peoples from 1960 became the basic paper for the decolonization of most of the world, which prevented further imperial wars. The peoples of Africa, South and Central Asia, the mediate East, Oceania and Latin America gained freedom — but not the peoples of North Asia, colonized by Moscow. The Russian Empire survived, which resulted in the current war. That is why last year the European Parliament, PACE, and the OSCE Parliamentary Assembly adopted resolutions in which the decolonization and “de-imperialization” of Russia are defined as the only way to a sustainable peace and democratic development, and the most fresh PACE resolution openly calls for seeking the implementation of the above mentioned UN Declaration in the Russian Federation. Otherwise, we will have “the end of past in reverse”.

Thirdly, the strategy of task implementation in global institutions needs to be revised. The current strategy mostly works on its own and does not fulfil assigned tasks; has its own interior performance indicators; is weakly connected to larger goals; and frequently lacks a systemic approach. Overall, the main measurement of quality is comfort inside the bubble and not efficiency. An crucial change could be the transition to task implementation by local organizations. This will require more work in central and regional offices but will make local capacity, which will straight affect the improvement of local institutions, which is the eventual goal.

The indecision in implementing any plan to restart global institutions is explained both by fear and Russian money. It is besides explained by the false tradition of “Russian studies”, which in russian times did not separate between Russians, Ukrainians, Georgians, Estonians and Uzbeks, and now does not see Tatars, Chechens, Buryats, Sakha (Yakuts) and another peoples. This fog is besides made stronger by the unconscious, but mostly accepted, classical thought of “historical” and “non-historical” nations introduced by Hegel. “Historical” nations have more rights, including the right to “zones of influence”, and they cannot face defeat, be embargoed, have their assets confiscated, or have restricted membership in global organizations, etc.

Russia began actively disrupting the planet order in 2008, and the planet turned a blind eye to it. But, as Herman Pirchner shows in his book Post Putin: Succession, Stability, and Russia’s Future, Russia had been violating most of the treaties it had signed long before that.

The first applicable steps are described in the Sustainable Peace Manifesto, a fragment of which I will quote in the next paragraph.

Ukraine’s authoritative position is that the gross and unprecedented violation of the UN Charter, which has been ongoing since 1991, erstwhile the Russian Federation bypassed the UN Charter procedure to inherit the seat of the USSR in the UN, should be rectified. In December 1991, this happened with the tacit consent of the associate states of the safety Council and the UN Secretariat, thereby limiting the rights of all another UN associate states to have their say on the substance through the General Assembly voting procedure, as provided for in Article 4 of the UN Charter. Moreover, in clear contravention of the UN Charter, the Russian Federation usurped a permanent seat on the UN safety Council. After all, the words “Russian Federation” are nowhere to be found in Article 23 of the Charter, which lists the permanent members of the UN safety Council. Instead, it is listed as the “Union of russian Socialist Republics”. Changes to the Charter have not yet been made, and there has not been a single vote of the General Assembly in support of transferring the USSR’s seat in the safety Council to the Russian Federation.

Section 1.3 of the Sustainable Peace Manifesto contains many another aspects of the problem of Russia’s membership in global organizations.

While this article was being prepared for publication, the request for a renewed rules-based global order was approved by a special PACE resolution, which, in my opinion, is simply a very crucial message to the world.

Without a restart of the strategy of global institutions, alternatively of de-imperialization, we will see “re-imperialization”, as described by the Ukrainian philosopher Volodymyr Yermolenko, that is, “the arrival of fresh empires in place of the old ones, alternatively than the establishment of republics and democracies on their ruins.” He notes that in this case “…the planet of the 21st century will be a planet of fresh empires, no better than the erstwhile ones. And then the “end of history” will happen with a completely other sign.”

Valerii Pekar is simply a president of the board of Decolonization NGO, the author of 4 books, an adjunct prof. at the Kyiv-Mohyla Business School and Business School of the Ukrainian Catholic University, and a erstwhile associate of the National improvement Council.


Please support New east Europe's crowdfunding campaign. Donate by clicking on the button below.

Idź do oryginalnego materiału