Politics: Problems Inherent in the International System

It is, perhaps, fitting for the inaugural real post of this blog to be graced with some lines from the magnificent G. K. Chesterton. Here we have his comments on the inherent difficulties of setting up a workable international system:

It is the weakness of many worthy and well-meaning attempts at international justice just now, that the international council can hardly help being merely a microcosm or model of the world outside it, with all its little things and big things, including the things that are much too big. Suppose that in the international interchanges of the future some power, say Sweden, is felt to be disproportionate or problematical. If Sweden is powerful in Europe, she will be powerful in the council of Europe. If Sweden is too powerful in Europe, she will be too powerful in the council of Europe. And because she is the very thing that is irresistable, she is the very thing to be resisted; or at any rate to be restrained. I do not see how Europe can ever escape from that logical dilemma, except by discovering again an authority that is purely moral and is the recognized custodian of a morality. The Thing, p. 246.

After spending due time contemplating the words of the Master, we can then turn to relevance. One of the main problems with the UN, in my mind, is not that it includes dictatorships, kleptocracies, etc. (afterall, there must be some forum in which all countries can intereact), but that it insists on according every country with the same respect. Thus we have the ridiculous situation where countries with a less than spotless track record on human rights (Tunisia, China, North Korea, etc.) are allowed to set up a UN conference for the alleged purpose of expanding the availability of the internet to their respective peoples while in reality they mean to find a way to clamp down on the internet as efficiently as possible. Now everyone knows this is the case, but there goes Kofi Annan tootling around just as if America, the UK, and Germany suddenly decided to give half of their tax revenues to shore up Sierra Leone.

Chesterton wanted a recognized moral authority. Tongue in cheek, he puts forward the Pope. Not that I think that's necessarily a bad idea, but it may be just a tad impractical. What I'd really like would be some sort of world body halfway between NATO and the UN--an organization for countries of general good will. Not much more chance then acknowledging the authority of the Pope, but there it is.