Mankind has always been confronted with the challenge of eliminating the divisions in it, which are more psychological than physical, and more social and political than natural. These divisions have obviously been created and successfully utilised by the vested interests to serve their narrow selfish ends. The divisions will not, therefore, end until the scope for utilising them for the selfish purpose is eliminated. The need is to evolve a social order which will leave no such scope. Can we devise such social order internally in each country, and internationally the world over to tackle these common problems of the world?
Nationalism was once a force which served to unite the sub-national groups, to form a nation for united effort for common development and progress, and to eliminate the group conflicts and bring about peace and tranquillity for a large section of the humanity. But the narrowly conceived national interests soon gave rise to misguided patriotism and jingoism, resulting in wars between nations, one more deadly than the other.
The first and the second world wars, which were the result of misdirected spirit of nationalism, led to the half-hearted attempts at organising the nation-states first into the League of Nations, and then into the United Nations, for preventing future wars and for the common development of mankind. The first body, on account of its loose constitution, feeble structure and ineffective operation was never taken seriously by anyone, whether the strong or the weak. The constitution and the operations of the second organisation have more than proved the worst fears that were expressed at the time of its establishment. The dice were heavily loaded, by its constitution, in favour of the strong, and with their veto power, they were free not only to defy the assembly of the nations, but also to resort to any unilateral action for their own advantage. The forum so far has failed to prevent wars, give relief to the needy and to uphold the rights of the weak and the just. On the other hand, the forum has been used by the powerful for justifying the unjust, for blocking the desirable measures, for promoting their selfish interests, and for deriving the maximum benefit to themselves.
The constitution and the functioning of the present UN is power-oriented and not people-oriented, and they have, in fact, accorded power a legal status above that of the people. The adage that might is right has been legally sanctified, and power is granted a licence for its unbridled play. The assumption that those with greater economic and military power have a higher sense of wisdom and responsibility betrays a feudal tendency. It is neither rational nor democratic. On the other hand, the psychology of man works to the contrary, and history has proved it more forcefully in international life.
History repeats itself because man commits the same mistakes. In spite of the horrendous experience of the power play of the past, we have been forced to create the structure of the UN giving primacy to power. The result was foregone. Even since its establishment, no less than 130 small and big regional wars have taken place, many times more human beings have been killed, injured and maimed, property destroyed, the environment ruined and resources wasted, than the two world wars together did, and the process goes on unrequited every day. What is worse, there is the emergence of an absolute power, figuratively called the super power, which has arrogated to itself the power of policing the world and has virtually displaced the UN.
Power is being ostensibly used in defence of democracy and humanity, but is in effect being unashamedly exercised for self-aggrandisement. The uncontrolled naked dance of this power has become an international terror. No nation state, no section of humanity nor even democracy in any part of the world is safe, unless it pays its obeisance at its altar. Along with it has come a pile of the deadliest nuclear, chemical and biological weapons, and the increased insecurity for the entire planet.
We were forced to accept the power-based structure of the UN for without it the powerful nations would not have joined it, and without them, the purpose of the organisation would have been frustrated. But even with them, one now experiences the futility of the organisation every day. How can one create a world organisation devoted to world peace and progress, disarmament, security of life, to raising the standard of living of every human being, devoted to the protection and promotion of the environment, to bringing about equitable distribution and consumption of resources, and to the planning of population, and which, at the same time, is democratically organised both for policy-making and its implementation, and maintains effectively the rule of law and punishes its violations through democratic process.
There is no problem without a solution. A world parliament consisting of the representatives elected by the people from the constituencies drawn on the basis of the population spread across the nation-states and a world government elected by such parliament seems to be an obvious answer. But in such an arrangement it may be feared that the populous nations may have an undue advantage, unless the value of the votes from such countries is suitably reduced to ensure a balanced representation.
This done, parliament so constituted, and the government elected by it, should have all the powers to devise measures to solve all common problems facing mankind, and to enforce the solutions. The international judicial forum suitably structured can help the parliament and the government, wherever necessary, to implement the objectives of the world organisation.
The obstacles to this desirable measure will be many. The powerful nations will not cooperate, the nation-states will refuse to forego their sovereign power, the regions rich in resources will not share them with others, the vested interests in the present economic, political, social and religious orders will resist the changeover, and the militarists will refuse to part with their privileges. Fortunately, the European Community has shown the way, though that experiment is confined to a limited area. To facilitate the eventual establishment of the world parliament and the world government, we may begin with the constitution of the organisations on the pattern of the European Community, across the appropriate regions of the world with suitable modifications, if necessary, to accommodate the regional peculiarities.
What is most necessary is to change the fossilised mindsets of the peoples everywhere. The most difficult thing in the world is to change the human mind, and when the concepts such as those of the world parliament and the world government demand of the people to switch over their minds from the age-old beliefs, biases and prejudices, the resistance is bound to be stronger.
But on the positive side, we have the instances of the acceptance of the jurisdiction of the UN and the European Community. Even these ideas were new and unfamiliar when originally conceived. The threat of common dangers to mankind, which cannot be averted except by common efforts, has also been dawning on the minds of the people everywhere for some years now. The time is ripe for an intellectual revolution to push the world towards a new era by launching such a revolution. Only a revolution of this kind will help us eliminate the present malignant forces, and realise the goal of the world parliament and the world government for the benefit of all.