May 22, 2004

TOWARD GLOBAL JUSTICE

PART I: AT THE PLANETARY LEVEL

Issues

1. The Basis of Life on Earth: Global warming; the massive extinction of species; the use of monocultures and consequent erosion of diversity; genetic engineering B plant, animal and human, capitalism (because of its intrinsic need for growth and consequent unsustainability).

2. Dangerous Technologies: Nuclear power and weapons; biological and chemical weapons; nanotechnology; robotics.

3. Security: Nuclear war (either intentional or accidental); nuclear power in space; debris and oil in space; radioactive contamination of the earth=s atmosphere, land and ocean.

4. Wealth Disparity: Mal-distribution of global wealth; global financial speculation.

5. Communicable diseases.

6. Depletion of Natural Resources (pp. 11-12, 17-18, 83 and 103. Many of the above are my own additions).

At Present

We have no democratic global forum or institution in which these issues can be discussed. The United Nations is not democratic. It is also not global in its outlook, being a body of nation states in which national interests and inter-nation competition drive policy.

Solution: A World Parliament

This would be a representative body elected by one vote for each world adult. Assuming each representative to have a constituency of 10,000,000 people, there would be some 600 representatives. A world referendum every ten years would ensure that the world people would continue to approve of its activities. The parliament would be established in a poor country and the salary of the parliamentarians would be close to the global average wage (pp. 87, 109, 118-119 and 129-130).

The chamber would provide a forum for the discussion of global issues unconstrained by competition between nations; a means to promote awareness of common species interests B our global identity; a body which (unlike all other global and international agencies) could claim legitimacy and moral authority; and a system which could hold the global and international powers to account (pp. 84-85, 93-94, 99, 103 and 112).

PART II: AT THE INTERNATIONAL LEVEL

International violence

At present, the world has no means of preventing the escalation of disputes between nations into a world war. By attacking Iraq, in March 2002, against the wishes of three of the Security Council=s permanent members and against the wishes of most of its temporary members, the United States has severely damaged the credibility of the United Nations= ability to restrain international violence. In the future, disputes between nations may be resolved by means of bilateral diplomacy backed by force of arms (pp. 132 and 134-135).

At Present: The United Nations

The Security Council: The Security Council is controlled by the five principal victors of World War II (United States, United Kingdom, Russia, China and France) which have veto power in the Security Council, and as it regards any constitutional reform, the appointment of the Secretary General, the admission of new members to the organization, and the election of judges to the International Court of Justice (pp. 69 and 72).

The General Assembly: The one vote per state makes for severe inequality of representation B sometimes of the order of 100,000, such as between Tuvalu and India; many of the 186 member states are not themselves democracies; even democratic governments are beholden to powerful national interests B such as political parties, the national economy and the military-industrial complex (pp. 72-76).

Solution: A Democratic United Nations General Assembly

The democratization would derive from the weighing of each nation=s vote according to (1) The number of people the nation represents, and (2) The democratic legitimacy of the nation, as measured by such indices as those suggested by the Centre for Business and Policy Studies (Sweden), and Democratic Audit (United Kingdom) (p. 133).

A decision to use force would require an overwhelming majority of the Assembly=s weighted votes (p. 133).

Should the United States refuse to participate, democratization of the General Assembly would be started without the world hegemon (as has been done for the International Criminal Court and the Kyoto protocol on climate change) (p. 135).

Wealth Disparity

1. The Balance of Trade

Uneven trade is responsible for much of the poor world=s international debt (p. 140).

At Present: The World Trade Organization

a. Control: Each country has one vote. However, most of the weak nations have an opportunity to vote only after the key decisions have been made by Athe Quad@ (United States, the European Union, Canada, Japan and various assortments poorer countries), in AGreen Room@ meetings during which the agenda for the next round of talks is set (pp. 205-206).

b. Free Trade Only for the Poor: The WTO coerces indebted nations to open their markets to foreign corporations and foreign produce, privatize their services and abandon protection of their Ainfant@ industries. In the meantime, the rich countries subsidize their own agriculture and protect their own industries (pp. 189 and 193).

c. Trade-related Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS): The WTO is granting ever more generous global Aintellectual property rights@ to corporations, most of which are in the rich countries. Of all patents, 97 percent are owned by corporations in the rich world. Intellectual property rules now cost poor nations $40,000,000,000 a year in licence fees, half of which is payable to companies based in the United States (pp. 193-194).

d. Trade-related Investment Measures (TRIMS): The WTO forbids governments from excluding foreign companies from their countries, or from insisting that those companies that do come in, use local materials or local labor, invest their profits locally, or export more than they import. Only big corporations are able to invest abroad. Of the world=s 500 largest companies, only 29 are based in developing countries (pp. 194-195).

Solution: A Fair Trade Organization

For the Poor: The Organization would permit poor countries to (i) Protect industries by means of import restrictions, such as tariff barriers, development subsidies and export subsidies, (ii) Impose strict conditions upon foreign investors, (iii) Override intellectual property rights (p. 218).

For the Rich: The Organization would require the rich to eliminate all barriers to trade (p. 218).

For Corporations: The Organization would (i) Act as a licensing body for corporations wishing to trade internationally, (ii) Include environmental and social Aexternalities@ in all accounting, (iii) Count the extraction and export of natural resources as a loss to the national economy, (iv) Forbid any company from dominating the market (pp. 227-228, 230, 233 and 236).

2. Poor Countries= International Debt

The world=s impoverished nations owe a total of $2,500,000,000,000, largely to commercial banks, the IMF and the World Bank. Every year, $382,000,000,000 flow from them to the banks and financial institutions of the rich world in the form of debt repayment. The United States, which is the world=s biggest international debtor and owes a total of $2,200,000,000,000, is left to its own devices B without external pressure to have an austerity program, inflation control or forced liberalization (pp. 20, 154, 156, 158 and 174).

At Present

The International Monetary Fund (IMF)

Control: The IMF=s constitution requires an 85 percent majority for all major decisions. The United States alone has 17 percent of the votes (pp. 16 and 153-154).

Purpose: The purpose of the IMF is to maintain global economic stability by helping those countries which are indebted, stabilizing exchange rates, promoting economic growth, and helping raise both employment and workers= incomes (p. 143).

In Actuality: In 2002, Joseph Stiglitz showed that the IMF, in fact, works against its mandate. Regardless of circumstances, it instructs poor countries to control inflation, remove barriers to trade and the flow of capital, liberalize the banking system, reduce all government spending except debt repayment, privatize all assets which can be sold to foreign investors, and hold all foreign exchange reserves in dollars B all precisely policies which suit the rich world=s financial speculators (pp. 136, 143-144, 148).

The World Bank

e. Control: The World Bank=s constitution requires an 85 percent majority for all major decisions. The United States alone has 18 percent of the votes (pp. 16 and 154).

f. Purpose: The original purpose of the World Bank was to provide long-term loans to nations whose economies had been devastated by World War II (p. 149).

g. In Actuality: Over the years, the Bank has arrogated for itself the power to provide Aproject aid@ (such as for building dams or planting cash crops), Aadjustment loans@ (to help countries pay their debts), and Aloan guarantees@ to corporations, many of which are based in the rich world. The Aconditionalities@ imposed by the Bank for loans are the same as those of the IMF (p. 149).

Solution: An International Clearing Union

A global bank B which John Maynard Keynes, when he suggested such an institution, in 1941, christened an International Clearing Union. The bank would:

h. Issue its Own Currency, the Bancor. Both those countries going into a trade deficit and those going into a trade surplus, would be charged interest once a year. All surpluses and interest payments would be placed in the Clearing Union=s Reserve Fund which, together with bancors in circulation, would likely amount to tens of billions of dollars B and could be used to finance a World Parliament (pp. 160-162, 170 and 173-174).

i. Encourage Control over the Movement of Capital (p. 171).

The Debt as a Weapon

The poor world owns the rich world=s banks. A mass, coordinated default on their debt B or even the threat of such a default B would bring the rich world to its knees as it faced the collapse of its economy. The poor countries could impose Aconditionalities,@ directing the replacement of the IMF and World Bank by a Fair Trade Organization and an International Clearing Union (pp. 174-177 and 247).

CONCLUSIONS

Violence: Monbiot=s ideas are good but the United States would certainly use its strong suit B the military B in order to prevent the suggested changes which it would invariably consider detrimental to its Anational interests.@ It would never allow the threat to its economy which would be posed by a mass default on their debt by the poor countries. As Monbiot himself notes, AWe will know our approach is working only when it is violently opposed.@ It is difficult to see how Monbiot=s ideas can be put in practice without violence (see pp. 3 and 136).

Focus on Economic Issues: Monbiot discusses economic issues with little reference to the other global issues threatening life on the planet.

Omission of Childrearing Methods: Monbiot does not mention the need for a childhood devoid of violence, exploitation and competition B that is, the importance of the mother-child relationship in the production of the sometimes very irrational and violent humans we have in the world today (see p. 33).

REFERENCE

All page numbers refer to:

Monbiot, George, Manifesto for a New World Order (The New Press, New York, N.Y.), 2003.

***