Then world has come a long way since the ages of Kings, Queens and Feudal lords. As far as the developed world is concerned feudalism started dying in late 19th Century and mid 20th century saw widespread adoption of democracy across the globe. Feudalism at the international level, represented by colonial practices, also started disintegrating soon after and barring some parts of the world, feudalism as a system has ceased to exist today globaly.
However, the mindset of people is far from changing even today. Whether it is Jehadi rebels or castiest voters - the feudal mindset of leaders (who act as feudal lords) and their followers keeps rebutting every now and then. One finds that internationally too, some nations (or leaders of some nations) have not been able to develop a post-fuedal mindset.
In this age of internet, blogs and (resulting rise of) individualism - there are still institutions like the United Nations Security Council which stink of feudalism. The UN came about in a world trying to learn to live in a democratic way - and it represented an effort to democratize international politics too. However, this transition wasn't an easy one for a world marred by the wounds of the World War II. The UN Security Council was hence created to balance the power equations - I am sure the idea even then was to move to a completely democratic system than this semi feudal one. Technically, the whole of the UNSC should have been an elected body by now.
But instead of moving towards, the world seems to be moving away from democracy. The US today announced -"Potential members [of the UNSC] must be supremely well qualified based on factors such as commitment to democracy and human rights, economic size, population, military capacity, financial contributions to the UN and record on counter-terrorism and non-proliferation". Further adding to it that "....only Japan satisfies all the requirements...."
To be frank India qualifies on all these aspects except - financial contributions . And as goes to Japan, this clearly indicates that it too would fail on this clause if not given a seat in UNSC. But just a minute! Why are we at all discussing eligibility on these criteria? Who is the US to prescribe criteria? The Zameendar of the Globe? Are the other members of the UNSC, or for that matter all members of the UN dead? More so, the very clause of 'financial contributions', makes it evident that one is trying to say that only rich nations have the right to enter the UNSC.
This is clearly an example of a feudal mindset where the US is acting as a feudal lord. What is unfortunate is that no one (including India) has given a statement against this practice. Newsday.com says it pretty well:
"Up until the 1990s, you could do a global trade deal or a global environmental deal if the United States, Japan and Europe were on the same page. But thanks to the energy unleashed by globalization, emerging powers led by China, India and Brazil now demand a seat at the top table.
"After two years of planning, the United Nations is convening a summit of world leaders that was supposed to relaunch the organization 60 years after its creation. The key challenge was to refashion the Security Council, whose five permanent members reflect the power relations of another age, excluding the second-biggest economy in the world (Japan) plus 1 billion Indians and all of Africa and Latin America.....
"Rather than seizing this chance to bolster a key global institution, the Bush administration joined the debate on Security Council reform belatedly and limply .....So whatever comes out of this week's summit, it's not going to be the full-blown relaunching of the United Nations that its sponsors had aspired to."
My previous post on UNSC: http://the-complete-man.blogspot.com/2005/05/waking-up-from-siestas-of-cold-war-era_01.html
However, the mindset of people is far from changing even today. Whether it is Jehadi rebels or castiest voters - the feudal mindset of leaders (who act as feudal lords) and their followers keeps rebutting every now and then. One finds that internationally too, some nations (or leaders of some nations) have not been able to develop a post-fuedal mindset.
In this age of internet, blogs and (resulting rise of) individualism - there are still institutions like the United Nations Security Council which stink of feudalism. The UN came about in a world trying to learn to live in a democratic way - and it represented an effort to democratize international politics too. However, this transition wasn't an easy one for a world marred by the wounds of the World War II. The UN Security Council was hence created to balance the power equations - I am sure the idea even then was to move to a completely democratic system than this semi feudal one. Technically, the whole of the UNSC should have been an elected body by now.
But instead of moving towards, the world seems to be moving away from democracy. The US today announced -"Potential members [of the UNSC] must be supremely well qualified based on factors such as commitment to democracy and human rights, economic size, population, military capacity, financial contributions to the UN and record on counter-terrorism and non-proliferation". Further adding to it that "....only Japan satisfies all the requirements...."
To be frank India qualifies on all these aspects except - financial contributions . And as goes to Japan, this clearly indicates that it too would fail on this clause if not given a seat in UNSC. But just a minute! Why are we at all discussing eligibility on these criteria? Who is the US to prescribe criteria? The Zameendar of the Globe? Are the other members of the UNSC, or for that matter all members of the UN dead? More so, the very clause of 'financial contributions', makes it evident that one is trying to say that only rich nations have the right to enter the UNSC.
This is clearly an example of a feudal mindset where the US is acting as a feudal lord. What is unfortunate is that no one (including India) has given a statement against this practice. Newsday.com says it pretty well:
"Up until the 1990s, you could do a global trade deal or a global environmental deal if the United States, Japan and Europe were on the same page. But thanks to the energy unleashed by globalization, emerging powers led by China, India and Brazil now demand a seat at the top table.
"After two years of planning, the United Nations is convening a summit of world leaders that was supposed to relaunch the organization 60 years after its creation. The key challenge was to refashion the Security Council, whose five permanent members reflect the power relations of another age, excluding the second-biggest economy in the world (Japan) plus 1 billion Indians and all of Africa and Latin America.....
"Rather than seizing this chance to bolster a key global institution, the Bush administration joined the debate on Security Council reform belatedly and limply .....So whatever comes out of this week's summit, it's not going to be the full-blown relaunching of the United Nations that its sponsors had aspired to."
My previous post on UNSC: http://the-complete-man.blogspot.com/2005/05/waking-up-from-siestas-of-cold-war-era_01.html
Comments
Post a Comment