On Fri, Mar 14, 2003 at 01:41:26PM -0600, Marvin Long, Jr. wrote: > That sounds good, but I think it's very hard to do. How would one > start, since buidling such a thing would appear to involve scuttling > or restructuring NATO and possibly the UN as well? I can't think > of a way for anyone to begin such a process unless the US itself > were to place such a plan before the UN, or maybe just NATO, as the > overall framework for fighting tyrrany and terrorism around the world. > (Which perhaps is what the US should have done before leaping towards > Iraq, but I'm not sure how doing so would benefit the US - or more > specifically, any given US administration - in its immediate goals. > If the US can attract a group of allied states that have no votes > or veto powers, why create a structure that must limit the US just > by existing?) Any ideas, beyond just not blowing the list of blown > diplomatic opportunities you gave to John G.?
It does seem unlikely that the US would lead the way for the creation of a LoDN. But I do think that the kind of determination that many European countries have shown in opposition to the war would be enough to start such an organization if it were redirected in that way and fueled by the same emotions that are fueling the war protests. The trick would be to get it going without the US, but leave an opening for the US to join later. Since the US would not be a highly privileged member unless it paid a lot of dues (I favor the ideas others have mentioned about democratic population and dues paid forming the basis for LoDN voting power), America would not join at first. But if such an organization made the member states feel empowered, maybe they would be inspired to develop the capability to project military power, and regardless the organization would probably have economic power. The choices made by the organization could have serious impact on the US, so if the US wanted to have a vote it could be enticed to join eventually. The EU probably works against the chances of forming a LoDN, since some will say it isn't necessary because of the EU, but to me the EU seems incapable of forming an effective world government. > (Which, in turn, supports the idea the European nations need to spend > a hell of a lot more on the ability to project force around the world > if they want their views to be taken seriously.) Yes. It is easier, and perhaps more satisfying, to complain about the way somebody else is doing something than to do it better yourself. Which is maybe the biggest hurdle to overcome in trying to start a LoDN. > say) to listen more than talk. And I think it does me good to just > listen to what you and Gautam and John G., for instance, have to say. Not that you meant it that way, but it struck me as funny that you grouped me in with JDG politically. I don't think he would agree with that! :-) > And alas, I have no quick answers to the questions you pose above. I > see more obstacles than opportunities...and in any event, these issues > deserve their own threads. I'll try to think of something. Oh, plenty of obstacles. Nothing worth doing is easy! But if enough people think about it and work together, perhaps a path can be found. -- "Erik Reuter" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.erikreuter.net/ _______________________________________________ http://www.mccmedia.com/mailman/listinfo/brin-l
