Posted on 25th July 2010 by Jeorge Poitier in Politics
change the world, global governance, global political philosophy, international relations, Politics, United Nations, UNPA, unpa club
The world as it is has a lot of potential for improvement – many people feel frustrated that they have no power to change the way it is run. However, together we are all able to change the world – this article shows how we can make the world a better, fairer place in which to live.
Step 1: Set up a World Parliament
The United Nations Security Council is where decisions with some of the greatest impact are made, and yet it is democratically deficient. Whilst all stages of government have some sort of parliamentary body, the highest level of governance – the UN – has none. We therefore need to change this by establishing a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA) which would provide democratic representation of the people of the world.
Step 2: Encourage a Public Mind Shift
The formation of the UNPA could be part of the public mind shift that is already happening in the public around the world at the moment. We need to encourage more people to move to a higher level of thinking where they see themselves not just as individuals but also as citizens of the world.
Step 3: Develop a New Global Political Philosophy based upon Conflict Resolution
As a result of this changing mind shift, we can begin to create a new political philosophy for the world, which will be an evolution of the thinking from previous years.
Step 4: Developing Global Law
It is evident that international law today is just not sufficient for a truly global decision making – we therefore need to move beyond national sovereignty and replace it with global law.
Step 5: A Transformed System of Global Governance
We can then achieve a transformed system of global governance whereby we have a democratic system run by the people for the people. We can have a new form of democratic leadership by the people of the world, representing the voice of the people.
If we were to follow these steps, the world would certainly be a better place – we would have real representation on a global level, meaning that people could participate in the decision-making process and ensure that their voice is heard.
Visit The UNPA Club. The UNPA Club is for people who are frustrated with the way the world is being run and who want to see real change in the world. http://www.unpa-club.org has been created as a meeting place for members to support global campaigns, share ideas and contribute to making the world a better place to live. Together, we can work for the long term objective of transforming global governance, including how global decisions are made.
Posted on 15th June 2010 by Silvana Gomes in Politics
Brazil, Brazil United Nations, brazilian, Diplomacy, diplomat, diplomatic, foreign policy, Iran, Nuclear, peace, Politics, United Nations, war, weapons
Not too long ago, Iran finally agreed to send out some of its very divisive uranium out of the country. This actually revives a stalled agreement put together by the UN. This agreement works to monitor Iran’s uranium enrichment program. Many leaders see the Brazil diplomatic victory towards peace with Iranian nuclear deal as a new phase in talks, while others are approaching the deal with caution.
Even though this may be a minor step in the right direction for peace, Iran has not promised to stop its divisive uranium enrichment development. The halt of this program, and others like it, is what most Western nations want from Iran. Why? Simply because these types of programs are seen as a threat to world peace and stability.
Many countries see this deal as a victory, however, some countries are not convinced of Iran’s intentions. Whatever their intentions may be, Iran has successfully halted the sanctions process, or at least postponed it. This deal makes resolving the nuclear issue a more tangible goal, at least more so than it was previously.
Some countries are confused by Iran. Simply because Iran says that its uranium enrichment program is being developed solely for peaceful energy uses, but yet, it will not let international monitors oversee their nuclear production. This sends out mixed messages to the international community and troubles world leaders across the globe.
The priority that Iran gives to privacy regarding the issue is what worries many global leaders. The logic behind this is that if Iran is not doing anything against international law, why does it insist on hiding its program? However weary some countries may be on this topic, Iran exporting some of its uranium is a step in the right direction for a resolution to the conflict.
Even if people may feel conflicted over Brazil diplomatic victory towards peace with Iranian nuclear deal, this deal has for the meantime halted increased sanctions on Iran. Before this deal was in affect, many countries were working to increase sanctions on this country. Since the deal, talks of increased sanctions have stalled, at least for the meanwhile.
Read complete information and details on the Obama letter to Lula regarding Iranian nuclear talks and see the interesting arguments given. When you read the original Obama letter, you will see how a Brazilian diplomatic victory can be achieved easily.
Posted on 18th May 2010 by Marcos Costa Gomes in Politics
geopolitics, history, international, international affairs, Politics, Security Council, UN, United Nations, United Nations Security Council, UNSC, world politics
The United Nations Security Council represents, to some extent, the conditions just after the Second World War. The victors of that conflict became the permanent members of the group. The United States, Russia, China, France and The United Kingdom were granted seats on the Council and special privileges.
Veto power is perhaps the most well-known of these. Any of these five countries can shoot down a resolution by veto. Non-permanent members, however, can only take part in discussions and vote. They possess no similar power.
As the economic and military power continue to shift, some call for a reformulation of how we view the world. Proponents say that our current perspective may not conform to the entrenched ideas we have.
In terms of the economy, much has been said about the BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) as a new and important bloc. At the same time, weaker European economies have been classified the PIGS (Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain). Some have called for the same kind of reassessment in the political sphere.
Now, it is argued, the world is plagued by problems that the original body was not assembled to deal with: genocides outside of the context of a world war, failing states breeding extremism and new conflicts like the Indian Pakistani nuclear stand-off. Instead of perpetuating an institution designed for a Cold War world, it is argued, we need to reshape the Council to something more in tune with reality to ensure all affected countries have a voice.
Whether this will happen or not (or when) is, of course, a source of speculation. There are many vested interests and many legitimate doubts about how well an extended or modified United Nations Security Council would work. Regardless of what happens, this institution will have to be there when future catastrophes or conflicts arise.
Did you find this article interesting? You can find more information about international relations today! Learning about foreign policy throughout the world will help you to be a more active global community member who can participate knowledgeably in world affairs.
