2. G7 or UN =» Gx + UN?
G8 Summit in Strelna · перевод (English) · раздел 2 из 2
Перевод исходного произведения; точность перевода оценивается отдельно.
2. G7 or UN =» Gx + UN?
The signing of the UN establishment declaration in 1945 summed up the mutual activity of many states within frames of globally important concept with the aim to clampdown the global expansion of powers of the axis “ Berlin - Rome - Tokyo ”. This aim was reached in 1945, but taking in consideration the fact that the USSR wanted to build socialism and communism in global scale, while the US and other states-winners in the 2 world war were for the capitalism and middle-class - individualistic formal democracy, the concept of countries cooperation that joined the UN was ruined.
So the Organization of the United Nations was fated to be inefficient from the very beginning of its establishment.
To prove its inefficiency one can recall the fact that the veto had been used 279 times until 1989.
The veto had been used 6 times per year and that’s because of inconsistency of accepted by different states concepts of social control. Each of these concepts tried to become the dominant concept of social control, uniting the humankind on basic principles; other concepts just ignored the existence of global problems at all. Such conceptual uncertainty of global civilization’s life lead to new global problems and aggravated the old problems.
Because of the UN’s inefficiency as the global coordinator of efforts of different states in resolving common problems, the emergence and development of other international organizations was inevitable. Their declarative destination was to resolve those problems left by the UN, and that the member states couldn’t resolve on their own. Such organizations had been created since the late 1940-s on the basis of regional community, ideological community (military organizations such as NATO, SEATO, Warsaw pact and so on), on the basis of common problems (Organization of non-alignment states, Council of mutual economic aid, the forerunner of G7 - G6, and G7 on its own) and organizations uniting the states on the basis of complex principles (Common Market, that triggered the development of the EU).
In this light the end of the 20th century can be characterized in the following way:
· The so-called “world system of socialism on the basis of Marxism and its regional modifications” doesn’t exist any more. As a result the global confrontation of states alliances that emerged on the basis of bourgeois ideology (in its liberal and dictatorial modifications) - on the one hand, and on the basis of Marxism-socialism ideology on the other hand disappeared on its own. It seemed that there was the green light for the UN to become efficient if not in the role of Federative Government for the whole Humankind, but as the coordinator and responsible advisor of the states governments.
· But this didn’t occur because of the fact that by the end of the century some ex-colonies of “great powers” in the 19th century and some “undeveloped” formally independent states reached the same level of development that characterized so-called “developed countries” in the middle of the 20th century. Most of these states were oppressed and robbed by “developed countries” of the West topped by Great Britain (at first), and by the US later. The “developed states” still insisted on their predominance over the “newly-developed” states, so dismissed and oppressed states started to establish their own international organizations for their common problems resolution. The post-soviet states stepped in this process after the Soviet Union collapse [9]. And as a result occurred such organizations as Eurasian economic community and Shanghai Organization of cooperation.
As a result:
The difference of historical cultures of the regional Western civilization and especially its leaders, “newly-developed” and post soviet states lead to the change of the world system and to the creation of alliances, not defined by the state ideologies of the member-states. And such cultural difference dooms the Organization of United Nations to be inefficient [10].
According to the mentioned above circumstances the G8 Summit in Strelna is incredibly important not because of those documents signed during the meeting, but because of the tendencies and prospects, reflected in the last day of the Summit - when even the heads of the states (not G8 members) such as China, India, Brazil and Kazakhstan took part in the meeting. This means that G8 is not the detached community of the most rich and irresponsible states any more.
If the subsequent summits ruin this tradition, that was put in pledge during the Summit in Strelna that will lead to the G8 degradation and the closure of some possibilities for the humankind to overcome biosphere-ecological and social crisis that occurred in the end of the 20th century.
The support and development of this tradition in the future will contribute to the UN’s efficiency and will help it to become consulting organ responsible for its recommendations (if not the Federal Government for the whole humankind).
The thing is that the UN doesn’t have any administrative rights in regard to the states. What’s more the heads of the states and ministers outrank the UN officials. That’s why they have to look back at officials of their own countries of higher ranks. That explains the UN inefficiency as the Federal government for the whole humankind, its inability to be the world parliament and its vainness to be coordinator, responsible for its recommendations (but however the international officials of the UN have pretensions for supranational power).
In case the G8 is not the detached community of the most rich and irresponsible states any more, and the heads of other states (not G8 members) take part in the future Summits, and discussions are devoted to real problems resolution, this will help the heads of the states taking part in summits to understand the global problems better and to see regional problems conditionality by global ones and vice versa.
In this case the cultural singularity of different regions and nations will develop in combination with the cultures of other nations. As a result all the states will have a single strategic concept of multinational humankind development and finally there will be worked out a consent concerning the best ways of its realization.
This process will undoubtedly take some time for double ethical-moral standards perception and their denial. There will certainly occur some political groups against it. But at present day it’s beyond any doubt that the G8 Summit in enlarged format in Strelna opened the gates for this process.
That gives the possibilities for the UN officialdom subordinated to the governments of the UN member-states and primarily to the high-end group of states - enlarged G8 -to work in behalf of the whole humankind more effectively, rather than the Organization of United Nations did it in the past.
[1] Officially Summit opened on July, 15, but factually on July, 14 taking in consideration the fact that the Russian and American presidents came to Strelna exactly on July, 14.
By the way, July, 14 - is the day of Bastille’s capture: Western countries consider that the development of democracy and civil society has started since that day. It’s quite possible that this very day will signalize the end of the western form of democracy that has been propagandized for the last 2 centuries.
[2]http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2273399,00.html
[3] This is an excellent example showing how “Times” distorts events. Literally the leaders said the following:
George Bush: “Today I’ve told Mr. Putin about my will to develop institutes of democracy all round the world. Let us say, as in Iraq, where there is a freedom of speech and religion. I know, that many people think that there should be the same situation in Russia. But I personally think that the democracy in Russia should have some distinctions from that we have in the US ”.
Vladimir Putin: “We certainly wouldn’t want to have the same kind of democracy as they have in Iraq ”.
Pay attention to Mr. Bush’s phrase: practically it shows that he agrees with “sovereign democracy”, the concept of which asserts Mr. Putin.
One of our analytical notes was devoted to “Sovereign democracy”, ser. “About the current events” #7 (55), 2006 y. This note along with other works are published in the Internet on different sites, such as:
www.vodaspb.ru, www.globalmatrix.ru, http://mera.com.ruhttp://subscribe.ru/catalog/state.politics.bkz
[4] Lord Levy is brought to trial for “conferring the dignity of a peerage for Labor Party financing” (http://www.russ.ru/comments/124249331?user_session=7774a17cc75c2bad394c1b138df1fdca).
[5] In the weekend on February 11-12, 2006 Richard Cheney during his shooting campaign shot 78 year old Harry Whittington, a lawyer. “As ITAR-TASS referring at mass-media representative of vice-president says, two hunters together with Cheney were looking for partridges. Whittington was first to notice a wildfowl, he shot and then went to check it up. Suddenly he disappeared in a high grass. Than it was vice-president’s turn to shoot. Mr. Cheney had been following a partridge for awhile and then fired. Unfortunately Whittington turned out to be between vice-president and a wildfowl. The lawyer got serious injuries - he got the shot in the right part of his face, shoulder and chest. He was taken immediately to the nearest hospital. Cheney has already visited wounded. According to the words of representative of vice-president’s mass media, the casualty is ok. George Bush was informed about that accident”. (http://www.vesti.ru/news.html?id=86412).
This episode with Cheney is similar to one famous musical comedy “Bat” - when the main hero - Azeinshtain, shot during his hunting campaign a forester’s breech instead of a hazel-hen. He was put in prison for hen’s murder. And as it turned later, the shot got right into forester’s breech and the hazel-hen died because of a great fright. Being guiltless, Azeinshtain was released.
[6] http://delo.ua/ru/news/8504.html
[7] Actually, even if George Bush is against this war, the US backstage wheeler-dealers are definitely interested in it, because this war spoils the investment climate in the Middle East. And what is more this war contributes to the oil price growth. All mentioned above factors support the dollar as the world currency, the emission of which exceeds the real products production.
[8] Here is implicated the Bible doctrine of the whole humankind enslavement on the basis of racially-corporative monopoly of Jews for the transnational usury.
[9] Except Baltic States, Ukraine, Moldavia and Georgia. These states were ready for the servile’s life in the EU system.
[10] If you want to get more information about the UN’s inefficiency you can read the analytical journal “Germany” #3, June, 1995 y., the works digest of Interior predictor “Intellectual position” «1б 1996 y., and the analytical note “Global sociology from different points of view”.