Do we, the world citizens, approve of the way international affairs run in this age? Is it a bad idea to claim or want a just world ensuring equal rights and opportunities for the citizens as well as nation states? Some of the readers might think - what the hell I am talking while every citizen and nation states have equal rights and opportunities according to law. My question is: can we enjoy those rights and opportunities fully? In some cases, law is not doing favour to the equal opportunity theory e.g. the UN Systems. The UN was established on the background of two devastating World Wars. The resulting formation of the UN was like ‘winners take all’. And you know all about the end results – you cannot take any decision against the wrongs done by any of the permanent members of the Security Council. So they are indeed immune from anything and everything.
The superbly powerful countries extend their tentacles to other countries affairs. In the name of protecting human rights, democracy and justice, they go for action against anything that they think incorrect or something that goes against their interests or endorsements. You know about the stories of invading Iraq and Afghanistan and how the prisoners of Guantanamo Bay and Abu Gharib were tortured and also how the sovereignty of Pakistan was broken to kill Bin Laden. You also know about the continuous drone attacks into the land of Pakistan. It is like whoever has the clout can flout the international law.
Iraq was invaded to change Saddam regime under the pretense that he had stockpiled weapons of mass destruction which was proved false later. Shouldn’t the people responsible for the destruction of the country and killing thousands of innocent people be brought to justice? But it’s like ‘who is to bell the cat’! They’re out of the purview of International Criminal Court (ICC)if the respective states are not signatories to the ICC. Is it possible to make the international courts obeyed by all? Each of the UN member states should come under the purview of ICC. The UN should be empowered to make and implement the provisions which are made to ensure justice to all nation states.
Iraq is the breeding ground of Al-Qaeda and sectarian violence is the routine of the days whereas, the socio-political condition was not this worse before the invasion. Yes, democracy was not there and violation of human rights was rampant under the rule of Saddam. Democratic rights should come from within the people; you cannot impose it from without. How is that you kill innocent people and destroy the economy in the name of protecting the people! Yes, the people now have got one kind of freedom i.e. engaging into sectarian violence. Before, the ruler was violating the rights of some groups of people but now each group is trying to kick out other opposing groups engaging in killing each other. The condition is worse than the previous regime. So what is the end result of the mission of regime change! Are the people better off now! Who are responsible for creating this situation? Shouldn’t they be brought to justice?
To capture only one man, the land of Afghanistan has been destroyed, hundreds of people were killed and scores of suspected Al-Qaeda members had been imprisoned and tortured inhumanely. The prisoners of Abu Gharib, Iraq were tortured to an unprecedented level. How come the preachers and protectors of human rights and democracy can torture people!
Why can’t we agree on destroying all weapons of mass destruction including the nuclear warheads! Why can only a certain countries be the owners of these destructive weapons!
Shouldn’t all the countries and nation states honour and respect the sovereignty of each other? It seems that you can break it if you have that much power and you won’t need to answer – intruding stealthily into the heart of a sovereign country to kill a suspected criminal and the drone attacks inside Pakistan without asking the authority are blatant examples.
A Bangladeshi student, Ehsanul Islam Sadequee (21), suspected to have links with Al-Qaeda was arrested on 17 April 2006 by the secret service agents and later handed over to the FBI with the help of local police from Dhaka and flown to USA flouting domestic laws.
Your diplomats would be immune from court proceedings if you have that much clout, otherwise not – a CIA contractor, Raymond Allen Davis’ killing two people in broad day light in Lahore couldn’t bring him to trial for punishment. Recent spat on diplomatic immunity between the US and India on the issue of Devyani Khobragade is an outstanding experience. It’s like a fight between a tiger and a buffalo. You never know if anyone would win.
The right to self-determination in several parts of the world is ignored e.g. Kashmir and Tibet. We don’t see any prospect of resolving the issue of Kashmir in the near future; ultimately the people of the respective lands are suffering. There is also an issue of flouting UN Resolution. The comparatively powerful one wants it to settle the issue bilaterally but it’s already been more than six decades since the problem erupted and several wars were fought on it.
When people are being tried for the crimes against humanity in Bangladesh, some are raising questions about its international standards. But they are not raising questions on maintaining the same in other cases like convicting and executing Saddam Hussein.
To maintain equality in the world order, key international institutions can play leading roles. So they should be made free from the influential states. All those institutions should be endorsed by every UN member state. Chiefs of the international institutions should not be recruited only from the handful of powerful countries.
The issue of surveillance by a couple of countries is another example of intruding into the internal affairs of others disrespecting privacy and freedom, the qualities for which they fight themselves the world over.
Equal rights and opportunity to minority population in different countries are ignored. In many cases, they are tortured and killed. The UN may be empowered to monitor and help resolve the issue and the respective state or authority may be tried by the International Court of Justice or by the International Criminal Court if it fails or ignores their rights or tortures them only because of belonging to a minority community.
As regards the disputes on land boundary, new islands or sea shores, the UN should interfere if the parties concerned fail to resolve the respective issue by themselves. It is necessary that the UN System works neutrally giving equal rights and privileges to all the member states. There should not be any permanent seat in the Security Council. All the 15 Security Council seats should be filled in either by voting or rotation by the member states.
There is an allegation that China claims almost all of the areas of South China Sea as its territory which enables it to explore natural resources and fishing extending more than 800 miles from its coastline and which also comes within 30 miles of the coast of the Philippines. Six countries: Taiwan, China, the Philippines, Vietnam, Malaysia and Brunei, claim in whole or in part of the South China Sea and its islands and shoals. The Philippines have brought a case to the Arbitral Tribunal under the 1982 United Nations Convention on the Law of the Sea (UNCLOS) which China refuses to participate even though it’s a signatory to the convention. There are also disputes over Senkaku or Diaoyu islands between Japan and China. Every UN member country should abide by the UNCLOS which governs the world’s oceans.
Now time is ripe to make the UN System more democratic to establish justice, freedom and equal opportunity to everyone. All the important international crises including those that cannot be resolved bilaterally may be brokered by the UN. We want to see the UN at that level. It is high time to transform the UN to a more democratic and empowered institution. It is necessary to raise the member states’ level of confidence on the UN.
No comments:
Post a Comment