ARE WE about to see history repeat itself and create a new global peace-keeping institution? Will the United Nations follow in the footsteps of its predecessor, and dissolve itself? The next seven to eight months should give some insight into the likely future of the U.N.
Marcus Garvey himself stated "It is history and history will repeat itself" (p.76-77 of Philosophy and Opinions Vol.I). This was in reference to the changing fortunes of a country (or race) over the passage of time, that sees the ruler at one stage of life, become the ruled in another time period. His inference was that we should not abuse our power because "today one race is up, tomorrow it has fallen" (p.76-77).
I am reminded of the words of Marcus Garvey (with the disregard of the U.N.) in wake of the U.S.-led attack on Iraq. Excuses aside, regardless of whether you agree that Saddam Hussein is a tyrant, the U.N. will have to engage in much soul-searching to see if it can still accomplish its major mandate, of maintaining peace and security. Will it repeat history and dissolve like its predecessor, The League of Nations?
The League of Nations was formed just after World War I, for the preservation of peace. It was headquartered in Geneva, Switzerland and was comprised of almost all of the independent countries of the time. Over its tenure (1920-1946) the League of Nations had 63 members, at one time or another. Of some importance however, the U.S. was never a member.
It was the failure of the League of Nations to protect some countries from the aggression of other countries (other members), that led to its demise. Small countries like Ethiopia from fascist Italy, to the preference by the Great Powers of the day (France, Britain, Japan, Soviet Union, Italy and Germany) to handle things its own way, rather than go through the League. World War II hastened its end.
Its successor was the United Nations. It was established to maintain peace and security; to develop friendly relations among nations; to achieve international co-operation in solving economic, social, cultural or humanitarian problems; and encourage respect for human rights and for fundamental freedoms.
Its various institutions range from the General Assembly; the Secretariat; the Security Council; the Economic and Social Council; the International Court of Justice; and the Trusteeship Council. As time passed some of these institutions became relics. The U.N. also has specialised agencies, ranging from W.H.O.; UNESCO; UNDP; UNICEF; to UNCTAD. Together all these agencies comprise the United Nations System.
Formed at the end of World War II, it was headquartered in New York. First in Lake Success, then to its present site in Manhattan. Of interest, the U.S. and four other victorious powers, got veto rights on the Security Council. The rapid decolonisation of the globe, across Africa, Asia and the Caribbean, in the 1950s, 1960s, and the 1970s rose the number of members well above 183 by 1998.
The question that we now have to ask, given the breaches of the UN's authority, is, will the U.N. be effective in enforcing any of its peace mandates? How does the collective will of the world deal with the 'big bully' (or small bully), that uses force rather than dialogue to resolve issues, in the 21st century? History seems set to repeat itself with the 'gun-boat diplomacy' of the first decades of the 20th century, replaced by the 'air-strike diplomacy' of the 21st century? Will a new peace institution have to be created?
