The
new selection procedure for the UN Secretary-General shows that, after
all, reforms of the United Nations are possible. In a series of guest
articles, representatives from politics, science and civil society
answer to the question: If you could change one thing about the
functioning of the UN, what would it be? Today: Andreas Bummel. (To the start of the series.)
- “Why is there no elected world parliament that would exercise democratic oversight on behalf of the world’s citizens?”
As
global interdependence becomes ever closer and more complex, more and
more issues cannot be dealt with by states acting alone. To a large
degree, achieving prosperity, development, and security depends on
international collaboration and integration. The Brexit vote is an
anomaly and an irrational response to this global trend. While the
new British government is preparing for the exit negotiations with
the EU, the African Union plans
to introduce a continental passport
and to abolish border controls just as it’s the case in the EU
Schengen area. Whatever xenophobic and nationalistic demagogues would
want people to believe, a Zombie-like resurrection of “national
independence” is not a viable option and will only wreak havoc in
the world.
Intergovernmentalism
undermines democracy
There
is a growing
recognition, however, that the current form of globalization
cannot continue. It accentuates class divisions as economic benefits
are distributed in a very uneven way. At
the same time, it undermines
democracy through
intergovernmental cooperation.
In many cases, national parliaments are reduced to rubber-stamp
institutions that are expected to approve of whatever the government
negotiated, if they are consulted at all.
The
UN and its many specialized agencies, the international financial
institutions, the World Trade Organization and various
intergovernmental networks already perform many of the functions of a
world government. But this regime primarily serves the interest of a
global elite. As Mary Kaldor put
it some weeks ago,
“in theory we should be able to influence decisions through
national membership in global institutions, but in practice such
institutions are shaped more by the interests of the global elite
than by ordinary citizens.”
In
a previous
post, Danny Sriskandarajah argued that the system of global
governance is supporting “the blatant, endemic collusion between
economic and political elites.” He made the case for “radical new
forms of representation and oversight” at the global level. At the
EU level, the directly elected European Parliament guarantees that
there is a democratic connection to the citizens. It is the most
distinctive expression of the global democratic deficit that no such
thing exists in the system of global governance.
Strengthening
world citizens against the global elite
Tax
evasion and the use of anonymous shell companies by the super rich is
a major assault on the capability of states to provide public
services and augments global inequality. It
is said that between $24 to $36 trillion are hidden in tax havens
today. In June, following the spectacular publication of the Panama
Papers, the European Parliament established an inquiry
committee to look into the issue of tax
evasion and money laundering.
Why is there no elected world parliament that would do the same and
exercise democratic oversight on behalf of the 99% of the world’s
citizens? “The Panama Papers confirm that the world’s elite
cheat, lie, and steal,” wrote
Fredrik
Deboer and proclaimed, “Taxpayers of the
World, Unite!” Considering the inability or unwillingness of
national governments, the OECD and other bodies to actually deal with
the problem, a world parliament composed of government-independent
delegates seems to be the best way forward.
A
UN Parliamentary Assembly
Bold
thinking is necessary. The concept of global governance—that
pretends that government functions can be provided at the global
level without the form—is past its best. It is a good sign that
leading scholars in international relations, political science,
philosophy, sociology, economics and other fields have joined last
year to establish a World
Government Research Network.
For
sure, a world parliament cannot be established from one day to the
other. But it’s an alternative and progressive approach to the
notion of “taking back control.” It is based on the values of
global solidarity and world citizenship. A first step would be
possible right now if sufficient political will existed: the creation
of a United Nations Parliamentary Assembly (UNPA). It could be set up
by the General Assembly without the need of Charter reform or the
Security Council’s approval.
More
than 1,500 parliamentarians support a UNPA
Boutros
Boutros-Ghali who was UN Secretary-General from 1992 to 1996 (ousted
by the United States) was an outspoken proponent of this project.
When the international campaign
for a UNPA was launched in 2007, to no
small part due to his encouragement, he
declared that “we need to promote the democratization of
globalization, before globalization destroys the foundations of
national and international democracy. The establishment of a
Parliamentary Assembly at the United Nations has become an
indispensable step to achieve democratic control of globalization.”
To
date, the international appeal for a UNPA is supported by a broad
range of individuals and institutions from more than 150 countries—in
particular, around 1,500 sitting and former members of parliament.
Last
May,
the Pan-African Parliament called
on the African governments to advance the project at the UN. The
African Union’s parliament declared that “a UNPA is necessary to
strengthen democratic participation and representation of the world’s
citizens in the UN” and that the new assembly would “contribute
to strengthening democratic oversight over UN operations,
particularly in Africa.”
The
best interest of humanity
Indeed,
there would be a lot to do for a UNPA. Who, for instance, would be in
a better position than the representatives of the world’s citizens
to assess the progress on the new sustainable development goals? A
UNPA should set up its own human rights commission. It should
pressure governments to proceed on disarmament issues. It could
monitor the progress on climate change mitigation efforts. Over time,
a UNPA should be vested with rights of information, participation,
and oversight vis-à-vis all relevant global governance institutions.
According
to a recent poll
in 18 countries, more than half of those surveyed in emerging
economies saw themselves first and foremost as global citizens rather
than national citizens. This sentiment would be the dominant feeling
of most world parliamentarians. They would be called upon to pursue
the best interest of humanity as a whole. In contrast, whatever
career diplomats might feel, their duty is to represent their
government’s views.
The
most important proposal to give world citizens a say at the UN
The
UN and the institutions of global governance are in dire need of
reform. The system is fragmented and often ineffective. There are a
myriad of issues that need to be addressed. One of the best overviews
in recent times was provided by Joseph Schwartzberg in his book
Transforming
the United Nations System.
Many proposals are also included in the report of the Commission on
Global Security, Justice, and Governance that
was released last year.
The
creation of a UNPA, however, is the most important one if the world
citizens are to have a say at the UN and in the future direction of
globalization.
Andreas Bummel is co-founder and director of the Committee for a Democratic United Nations (KDUN), a non-partisan and non-governmental group located in Berlin, and a Council member of the World Federalist Movement-Institute for Global Policy (WFM-IGP) in New York. Since 2007, he has been coordinating the international Campaign for a UN Parliamentary Assembly.
|
If you could change one thing about the functioning of the United Nations, what would it be?
1: Start of the series [DE / EN]
2: A new process for selecting the UN Secretary General [DE / EN] ● Stephen Browne
3: The Secretariat of the United Nations: Independent, efficient, competent? [DE / EN] ● Franz Baumann
4: Putting citizens at its heart: The UN needs a 21st century makeover [DE / EN] ● Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah
5: Weichenstellung für die Vereinten Nationen: Wie kann der Sicherheitsrat reformiert werden? [DE] ● Sven Gareis
6: The World’s Citizens need to take back control – with a Global Parliament [DE / EN] ● Andreas Bummel
7: Elect the Council: Global Security Needs a reformed UN Security Council [DE / EN] ● Jakkie Cilliers and Nicole Fritz
1: Start of the series [DE / EN]
2: A new process for selecting the UN Secretary General [DE / EN] ● Stephen Browne
3: The Secretariat of the United Nations: Independent, efficient, competent? [DE / EN] ● Franz Baumann
4: Putting citizens at its heart: The UN needs a 21st century makeover [DE / EN] ● Dhananjayan Sriskandarajah
5: Weichenstellung für die Vereinten Nationen: Wie kann der Sicherheitsrat reformiert werden? [DE] ● Sven Gareis
6: The World’s Citizens need to take back control – with a Global Parliament [DE / EN] ● Andreas Bummel
7: Elect the Council: Global Security Needs a reformed UN Security Council [DE / EN] ● Jakkie Cilliers and Nicole Fritz
Pictures: UNMEER/Pierre Peron [CC BY-ND 2.0], via Flickr; privat.
Ich weiß nicht, ob ich Deutschland unbedingt unter ein Weltparlament unterordnen will, in dem z.B. 1/5 chinesische Abgeordnete sitzen oder vielleicht auch Abgeordnete aus der Duma. Außerdem zeigt die EU, zu welchen Problemen solche Zusammenschlüsse führen. Ich bin deshalb für einen anderen Weg.
AntwortenLöschen