Orion Digest №25 — The UNSC Members and World Federation
The nations of Earth are widely varied in history, environment, and people, giving us a rich landscape of human society to view across the world. There is no one nation unimportant, and the goal of a world federation is to support and protect all of them. However, the development of recent world history in the wake of the World Wars has led to five nations in particular becoming prominent world superpowers, as evidenced by their position as permanent members of the United Nations Security Council — the People’s Republic of China, the Russian Federation, the French Republic (and, for purposes of this discussion, the rest of the European Union), the United Kingdom, and the United States of America. These are not the world’s only superpowers, but their position as founders and shapers of the post-WW2 world is undeniable.
Each of the UNSC Permanent Members is noteworthy among superpowers — the United Kingdom once ruled an empire that stretched across the world, and their influence has been left behind in language and culture (as evidenced by my writing in English). One of its offspring, the United States, grew from colonies to a major world power, and invented the nuclear bomb that set off an international arms race. The European Union is a potential model for stable world federation, and its members have all spread their ideas, languages, culture, and inventions around the world. The Russian Federation pioneered one of the largest and most well known examples of socialism in the 20th century, and is the largest nation in the world. The People’s Republic of China is one of the oldest lasting nations in the world, dating back to the dawn of civilization, and not only is it the most populous nation in the world, but it has emerged as an economic giant among the international economy.
For their participation in the Second World War (Russia, the US, and the UK fought to liberate France in Europe, China and the US pushed against Japan in the Pacific), each of these nations was granted access to the United Nations Security Council, a section of the UN dedicated to maintaining international peace. While regular members are rotated out to allow other nations to serve for two year terms, each of these nations has remained on the UNSC since its inception, only changing due to changes in the respective national governments for the members. They also receive the power to veto adoption of policy and elections of Secretary-General, an authority that has been exercised hundreds of times.
For these reasons, I believe that among the nations of the world, these five superpowers (counting the EU in lieu of France) are the keys to the foundation of eco-socialist federation, both economically and politically. The error in previous attempts to make an international alliance was the lack of coerciveness, the lack of participation. In both the League of Nations and the modern United Nations, there is little incentive for nations to cooperate for the greater good of peace, environmental security, and preservation of human rights. If, through democratic push or through the means of revolution, these five nations were to establish a precedent for the principles of eco-socialist federalism, to be the founders of a United World Federation and use their position in the world as leaders to open membership up to the entirety of the world, a greater chance could be secured of its establishment than done otherwise.
In order to create a strong and moral world federation, a constitution and set of guidelines for each nation must be laid out, rules that a nation must follow for membership, rather than allowing nations to operate within it that don’t abide by fundamental moral principles. In the United Nations, having as many nations as possible as members takes precedence over withholding the moral standards that the UN stands for; there is compromise and accommodation where there should not be. This makes for an easily formed but ineffective federation where oppressive nations hold the advantage, as they can simply disagree and overturn attempts at reform, since their peers have little way to force them without risk of conflict. There needs to be a point at which we put our foot down, at which we prioritize the protection of the people over the interests of the government. There needs to be a minimum set of legal qualifications for entry into the world federation; standards are worth the difficulty.
To back up this constitution and the subsequent protections of human rights and freedoms that it entails, as well as the willingness to put economic interests aside for the greater good, we must have founding nations that can act as the first examples of these guidelines, the first members of a federation that can demonstrate principles not just on paper but in action. These first nations need to be powerful, to show that the federation can stand even despite the costs it must undertake, and that the enemies that could conspire against it shall not easily destroy such a partnership of nations. If we start the federation off with morally uncompromising nations that are powerful to run a federation by themselves, it will demonstrate the strength and the worthwhileness to the world of membership, the value of the cost of moral and legal reform.
The Five Nations I have listed are some of the most powerful and influential in the world, acting as longstanding centers of culture, development, and economy. To sway them from their current political paths, and to get them all to commit to the foundation of a world federation would be difficult, for various reasons — opposition to socialist economics, current violation of civil rights, historical divides and grudges. However, I believe that if it were done another way, and if we were to try to form federation and gain their support afterwards, they would prove even more of a challenge as an adversary, opposing entry through the theatres of diplomacy or war. A fledging federation would already face enough difficulty trying to establish itself to come up at odds with major world powers in the way other socialist nations throughout history have. On the other hand, their resources and reputation would automatically make a young federation a considerable world power, and by that image alone could serve to sway many more nations to our side.
Democracy and diplomacy are always the first option, but to some degree, each of these nations would require some sort of reform, a preparation phase to move each into the proper position for entry into a world federation. While I have ideas, I know that I can only reliably speak for my own nation — the United States is plagued by discrimination and a propaganda-fueled hatred for socialist and internationalist principles. We have an idea of how to advance, but decades-old paranoia of social change and a widespread contentedness with the shallow victories of moderate liberalism keep us moving at a snail’s pace. Simply put, we have no time to wait years for the old and the wealthy to come around to diversity and livable salaries while people and the environment are suffering. Fear of public backlash from outdated ideologies keeps us in political gridlock, and we must be bold and not cautious in our time of need.
Other nations in the Five run along the same general trends, having not reached a level of societal development where the equality of gender, sexuality, race, religion, etc. are guaranteed, or where the social freedoms granted to citizens either restrict the ability to live a fulfilling live (i.e. violations of a citizen’s free speech) or put citizens needlessly in harm’s way (i.e. open and unrestricted use of firearms). As with my feelings about my own nation, I simply don’t have the patience for the slow crawl of politics when any delay harms others, and I don’t believe that anyone should have patience for it. It is not in the nature of citizens to restrict and disadvantage themselves, and it is often more in the interest of government. Government is meant to serve its people, and if it cannot evolve with the times, it is in need of an upgrade.
Should the need arise where these nations refuse to change and to meet the conditions necessary for a functioning eco-socialist federalist society, the option arises of simultaneous and coordinated revolution, at varying levels, of the five major superpowers. Once again, this proves no easy task, but the difficulty of this task does not diminish its worth. The first step is to spread the word, to make the concepts and principles of eco-socialist federation known, and when the people see that there is a way beyond war, pollution, and hatred of our fellow humans, they will rise up in support of it. It is the choice of their respective governments if they will heed the demands of the people, or if they will face the consequences for holding us back.
Through whatever means, to have the citizens of each of the Five Nations move to prepare their nations for entry into a federation designed to benefit all of humanity and all future generations will be the next step in securing eco-socialist federation. At some point or another, an eco-socialist federation will require the agreement of all nations to democratic structure, socialist economics, and environmentally friendly policy, and if we are to start with any nation, a coordinated turn of these five nations, whose position in the world is exemplified by their position as permanent members of the UNSC, would be the most advantageous and strongest start to a future world federation.
