The Challenge of Omnilateral Governance
“The mystery to be overcome is one all peoples share – how divergent historic experiences and values can be shaped into a common order.” These are the words of Henry Kissinger introducing his latest bestseller with the subtitle ‘Reflections on the Character of Nations and the Course of History’. However, the current ‘World Order’ is far from accepted and shared by all people(s). It is basically limited to governance by ‘nations’. However, the term ’nation’ originated in Europe under particular circumstances, notably following long-fought religious wars, and found its definition in the western concept of what nowadays is regarded as ’international law’ in order to rule between and among those ‚nations’. Only colonialisation -mainly by force- brought the concept to Africa, America and Asia, where ‚national’ borders were drawn by the conquerors irrespective of natural, native and cultural identities on these continents.
As a result, the subsequently Western-dominated multilateral system of ‘nations’ is today in the globalising world increasingly dysfunctional, especially with its fiction of ‘national sovereignty’ badly operating in view of growing interdependence. The days of the so-called ‘international’ rules and institutions established by the West seem to be numbered for many critical observers. The present system’s protagonists in America as well as in Europe hardly show any willingness or capability to implement the necessary reforms in the relevant institutions, such as the UN, UNSC, IMF, WB, WTO etc. Our mostly militarily circumscribed ‘nations’ now are often falsely considered the only official actors in the ‘inter-national’ or rather global arena. Neither does it include all the major non-state stakeholders ranging from civil society and multinational corporations to various representatives of other global interests. Nor does it cover for instance the High Sea or (Cyber and Outer) Space beyond any national borders that urgently need comprehensive and legitimate governance by and for all, that is to say omnibus. Furthermore, the entities recognised as ‘nations’ in the official bodies of the current so-called multilateral order of the world, the two hundred-odd officially listed members of the United Nations (UN), hardly represent the weight of their various peoples and societies. Hence, amendments for enhanced global governance are needed to ensure not only a better weighting of representation, but also for opening of the current exclusively multilateral framework towards an omnilateral participation, namely by all stakeholders involved. Recent plurilateral initiatives, like the G20, ‘coalitions of the willing’ and certain members within the WTO for instance, have improved consensus-building amongst the few involved, but are far from legitimately representing a comprehensive global governance by and for all. Hence, notably in view of the highly advanced state of globalisation in terms of economics and notably finance, there remains the immense challenge to open up for omnilateralism with all relevant stakeholders worldwide to enhance the pyramid of multi-level governance at its very top. In addition, such opening upstream from the nation and region at the very top should also lead to enhanced governance downstream within nation-states all the way to the local level with people empowered by more proximity and participation in decision-making.
Dr Wolfgang PAPE, Bruxelles 2016/01/05
“The mystery to be overcome is one all peoples share – how divergent historic experiences and values can be shaped into a common order.” These are the words of Henry Kissinger introducing his latest bestseller with the subtitle ‘Reflections on the Character of Nations and the Course of History’. However, the current ‘World Order’ is far from accepted and shared by all people(s). It is basically limited to governance by ‘nations’. However, the term ’nation’ originated in Europe under particular circumstances, notably following long-fought religious wars, and found its definition in the western concept of what nowadays is regarded as ’international law’ in order to rule between and among those ‚nations’. Only colonialisation -mainly by force- brought the concept to Africa, America and Asia, where ‚national’ borders were drawn by the conquerors irrespective of natural, native and cultural identities on these continents.
As a result, the subsequently Western-dominated multilateral system of ‘nations’ is today in the globalising world increasingly dysfunctional, especially with its fiction of ‘national sovereignty’ badly operating in view of growing interdependence. The days of the so-called ‘international’ rules and institutions established by the West seem to be numbered for many critical observers. The present system’s protagonists in America as well as in Europe hardly show any willingness or capability to implement the necessary reforms in the relevant institutions, such as the UN, UNSC, IMF, WB, WTO etc. Our mostly militarily circumscribed ‘nations’ now are often falsely considered the only official actors in the ‘inter-national’ or rather global arena. Neither does it include all the major non-state stakeholders ranging from civil society and multinational corporations to various representatives of other global interests. Nor does it cover for instance the High Sea or (Cyber and Outer) Space beyond any national borders that urgently need comprehensive and legitimate governance by and for all, that is to say omnibus. Furthermore, the entities recognised as ‘nations’ in the official bodies of the current so-called multilateral order of the world, the two hundred-odd officially listed members of the United Nations (UN), hardly represent the weight of their various peoples and societies. Hence, amendments for enhanced global governance are needed to ensure not only a better weighting of representation, but also for opening of the current exclusively multilateral framework towards an omnilateral participation, namely by all stakeholders involved. Recent plurilateral initiatives, like the G20, ‘coalitions of the willing’ and certain members within the WTO for instance, have improved consensus-building amongst the few involved, but are far from legitimately representing a comprehensive global governance by and for all. Hence, notably in view of the highly advanced state of globalisation in terms of economics and notably finance, there remains the immense challenge to open up for omnilateralism with all relevant stakeholders worldwide to enhance the pyramid of multi-level governance at its very top. In addition, such opening upstream from the nation and region at the very top should also lead to enhanced governance downstream within nation-states all the way to the local level with people empowered by more proximity and participation in decision-making.
Dr Wolfgang PAPE, Bruxelles 2016/01/05
No comments:
Post a Comment