The Future Of The International Order
Is It Time To Revisit The Community Of Democracies?
Jim Arkedis believes it is time to recognize that the United Nations Security Council is now broken. Furthermore, he says, it might be worth consideration other options, such as the “Community of Democracies.”
The organization, which was started in 2000 with help from former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright, is a global coalition of democratic countries, with the goal of promoting democratic rules and strengthening democratic norms and institutions around the world.
Although Arkedis believes it is a viable alternative, he recognizes it faces several challenges to gaining legitimacy.
“First, the Community of Democracies’ governing council has too many countries that, well, aren’t fully democratic, as defined by free and fair elections, peaceful transfers of power, and strong civil institutions. Freedom House, a good governance watchdog, scores members Morocco, Nigeria, Mexico, and the Philippines too negatively to be considered pure democracies.
“Second, the Community of Democracies’ mandate is too narrow, focused only on “democratic transition” and “bridging the gap between principles of democracy and universal human rights and practice,” writes Arkedis in The Atlantic.
UN Concludes Its 67th Session With Mixed Record
In a speech on September 16, United Nations General Assembly President Vuk Jeremic pointed to the adoption of 90 written and oral decisions, and around 300 resolutions, including Arms Trade Treaty, which establishes common standards for the international transfer of conventional armaments, as some of the achievements realized during the UN’s 67th session.
Syria, he said, was a “glaring failure” on the UN’s record and represents the “latest fissure” to appear in the global system.
“Humanity is facing a test of unprecedented proportions – an existential crisis unlike any the world has experienced in its long and tumultuous history. We are in the midst of a period of great consequence, characterized by growing economic instability, rising social inequality, and spiraling environmental degradation,” he noted.
Future Of United Nations Lies In The Next Generation R.P. Thead and Javiera Alarcon assert that while distrust and suspicion continue to linger after the end of the Cold War, that distrust does not seem to have infiltrated the outlook of the next generation of leaders.
“The Millennial Generation is young; we are not programmed with the same mistrust as our predecessors. . . . The international order, as we know it is, is also very young. It has changed rapidly and significantly since its major institutions were established. These institutions were set up to prevent the conditions that the victors agreed were the main reasons for the outbreak of World War II. They too are also young, but they are also expansive and flourishing,” they assert.
Thead and Javiera concede that the current international environment is not quite conducive to cooperation, but, they add, as a new generation of leaders emerges, “we are going to see an increased willingness to cooperate on global issues, including climate change. Globally, there is no ‘them’ for the Millennial Generation. Only “us”.the writers acknowledge.”