#12: Wars Can Be Averted (PART 4)

【Solution 2: Authority】
The second fundamental framework is to entrust the United Nations with the authority and structure to abolish wars as a global police force.
 
Currently on the verge of dysfunction, the UN must be entrusted with the authority and structure to take on its original mandate. Following the catastrophic destruction by modern weapons of World War I, the League of Nations (predecessor to the UN) was established by the international community in an attempt to prevent another world war.

The original mandate of the LN was to abolish wars by serving as a global police force.
 
Nevertheless, at present, most nations of great power show no true intention of entrusting the UN with the authority and structure to abolish wars as a global police force. Perhaps, it’s because they want to forcefully advance their own national interests before others.
 
Iraq War is a clear example of such. In 2003, the US proposed a resolution to the UN Security Council to establish the international legal basis to invade Iraq. The US – with Britain and Japan – attempted to persuade other council members to pass this resolution, but it failed. If the UN were entrusted with the authority and structure to abolish wars as a global police force, then the Iraq War would have been averted at this point. Averting such war was precisely the original mandate of the LN.
 
Yet, despite coming so close, the war couldn’t be averted. It’s because the UN is not entrusted with the authority and structure to abolish wars. Blinded by My Country First, the great powers of the world wouldn’t entrust the UN with such capacity. As a result, the US and Britain deliberately attacked Iraq without UN authorization, ignoring the original mandate of the LN.
 
Iraq is hiding weapons of mass destruction, which has become a deadly threat. We can no longer afford to stand idle. This war is necessary to protect the global security in this era of grave danger. The US forcefully professed such message of propaganda. In many respects, it resembles the recent US verbal onslaught targeted against North Korea.
 
And despite Iraq was deliberately invaded, weapons of mass destruction were nowhere to be found. In the process, too many innocent people were killed, great many more endured unbearable injustice, and too much hatred was brewed.

And in midst of such chaos packed with murders and hatred, terrorist groups like ISIS were bred. In hindsight, this War to protect the global security did exactly the opposite – it sank the world into an even more dangerous abyss of hatred and terror.
 
A long-term, lasting world peace can’t be attained through A mass murder called war. Iraq War is one of those countless reminders for us.
 
And even then, will we still continue to profess wars and violence as viable means to attain peace? How long will we carry on with such spiral of death before we humbly come to realize that even moral ends can’t justify immoral means?
 
Precisely, what constitutes the authority and structure to abolish wars as a global police force? That is, for all nations to transfer all their war capacity and delegate complete conflict resolution authority to the UN. As a result, the UN will possess the one and only standing armed forces in the world deployable at any time to resolve conflicts and abolish wars.
 
The existing military system around the world is designed on a single-nation basis, with each country in control of its own armed forces. Wars are waged because of this system exploited to selfishly advance national interests. Let us pursue a system designed on a global-basis, that prevents nations from deploying their own armed forces to selfishly advance their own national interests at the expense of others. 
 
For all nations to transfer all their war capacity including nuclear arsenals to the UN. The UN to be delegated a full and complete authority to abolish wars, equipped with the one and only standing armed forces in the world deployable at any time to resolve conflicts. Then, each nation will have virtually no need to maintain its own armed forces.

Perhaps, the only military necessity for a nation may be Ballistic Missile Defense System, which will be implemented purely to intercept and shoot down enemy missiles launched towards one’s country. If a nation attempts to secretly advance its own war capacity, then the UN will swiftly take strict measures to resolve the issue with such offender nation. The UN will be capable to do so equipped with complete war abolition authority and standing armed forces.
 
Everyone in the world will be an eligible voter to decide upon the UN policy to abolish wars. One person, one vote, and the majority decides. Voting will not be nation-based, but people-based. Surely, no veto power by special nations or persons. Everyone is equal, as per the Universal Declaration of Human Rights adopted in 1948 by the UN General Assembly.
 
          All human beings are born free and equal in dignity and rights.
​          (Universal Declaration of Human Rights, Article 1)
 
Furthermore, an independent oversight by human rights advocacy committee will be crucial to fend off oppression of the minority by the majority. Until a system of equality and justice that’s better than the current form of democracy is established, this structure will be essential and effective.
 
And, the UN will negotiate with the perpetrators of conflict. To avert a war against North Korea, avoid cornering such ailing country into desperation. The country’s top priority is preservation of the current regime, and to that end, they obsessively cling to their nuclear weapons and war capacity.

Given their apparent motivation, perhaps, we promise North Korean regime’s survival. That is, the UN will guarantee its current regime to remain in power. That’s their top priority, so without such guarantee, this issue with North Korea may not be solvable.
 
A nation's government is for the nation's people to decide. Such right of the people must be respected so long as we retain today’s artificial line drawing system called “sovereign nations,” a system not necessarily so admirable.

However, like all nations, North Korea is to transfer all their war capacity and delegate complete war abolition authority to the UN. And with the help of the UN, North Korea is to provide a decent living condition to its citizens ailing in poverty, and recognize the basic human rights of its people.
 
Guaranteeing the current regime to stay in power. That’s an enormous concession – a mind-boggling hurdle to overcome. Nonetheless, it will in exchange bring human dignity back to the lives of millions of innocent North Koreans. It will also avert a war. The two largest issues with the current regime – abhorrent human rights violations and the risk of war – will be rectified and averted.
 
And a peaceful transition of powers may become more realistic down the road as the citizens of North Korea realize better lives. At the very least, a peaceful conflict resolution seems far more likely than continuing on the present perilous path of intimidations and provocations involving the US, South Korea and Japan.
 
To entrust the UN with the authority and structure to abolish wars as a global police force. Maybe we can’t completely entrust all at once. That’s understandable, as long as we’re unequivocally advancing in that direction. Perhaps, the slow-moving nuclear disarmament and arms reductions may pick up the pace once we commence in that direction.

At present, everyone is pointing the finger at everyone else accusing, Unless YOU advance, I'll be at a greater risk, so it’s YOUR fault that I can’t advance. It’s quite obvious that no one advances while everyone continues to make excuses like a little child, complaining about others and standing idle for everyone else to advance first.
 
After all, everyone must advance together. At the minimum, nations of great power must accept their leadership role, step up to the plate, and simultaneously advance together. It's an absurd argument to forcefully intimidate North Korea into surrendering its war capacity while we arm ourselves so robustly. One can argue that North Korea is simply duplicating the My Country First attitudes so recklessly boasted by the great powers.
 
This isn't unique to the problem with North Korea, but is the common thread running through the struggles we faced in Iraq War and currently face with terrorists like ISIS. In fact, it’s a challenge that us humans have been facing for several thousand years in our history of wars.
 
For several thousand years, people deliberately fought wars. With atrocities of war unfolding in front of our own eyes, what was deliberately waged couldn’t be rewound no matter how bitterly we cried, “I didn’t think this could happen to us.” And the grudges led to vows for retaliation. Our enemies did likewise, as hatred only escalated into more attacks. There was no true ending to the acts of violence.

Wars produced short-term victories, but never a permanent solution. It’s because wars breed extreme hatred through unbearable downpour of injustice. And the hatred kept multiplying and spinning out of control. Yet, people continued to profess hollowly, This war was inevitable because the enemy provoked us.

People have been repeating such emptiness for several thousand years now, absolutely in vain.
 
Certainly, it wasn’t us who live here today who repeated several thousand years of emptiness. Without a doubt, it was people of the past. Nevertheless, if we who live here today are Taking the time and making a systematically deliberate choice to advance war capacity, then it puts us in the continuum of several thousand years of same emptiness – without breaking away from the heritage of wars. That holds true regardless of whether we emphasize passive support through a mere process of elimination.
 
A human history of wars interrupted by peace. If we don’t break such pattern, then we who live here today will merely be living the replays of the past.
 
A vast majority of wars don’t suddenly turn up due to an instantly urgent life or death situation. We have the time to think. With this time on our hands, let us advance our thoughts and actions on How to avert wars. To clearly define the war responsibility of Congressmen and citizens by changing laws and modifying the ballots. To entrust the UN with the authority and structure to abolish wars as a global police force. These two fundamental frameworks that we examined here are real examples of how we can advance.
 
It’s all right if we can’t make the great leap forward all at once, as long as we’re unequivocally advancing in that direction. For several thousand years, people deliberately fought wars. Why not break away from that pattern and strive for a peaceful permanent solution? We gave War a chance – for several thousand years – and it continues to fail us. Why not give Peace a chance  – for the next several thousand years ?
 
It will take time – perhaps generations. For it requires further moral advances from us who’ll live here from today. There’s no silver bullet for moral advancement. As the first sitting US President to visit Hiroshima, Barack Obama voiced hopes that his country is so far from achieving in light of the daunting struggle for nuclear disarmament. His hopes – A moral revolution.
 
Let us advance forward so we who’ll live here from today won’t be living the replays of the past. And let the next generations build on further.
 
Ultimately as a person of conscience, what good is a life of unbearable guilt – of tolerating killings? For I just can’t truly and honestly persuade my loved ones that it’s fine for the innocent people to cry in pain and die as long as they don’t happen right in front of our own eyes. Even in exchange for our own survival.
 
If the vast majority of us thought in this way, perhaps, wars can be averted and a peaceful permanent solution can be found. Perhaps, we can reach moral ends via moral means. If so, then nobody will have to die or suffer from wars. No one will have to endure the unbearable injustices of wars. If so, then the extreme hatred bred from wars will find no path to the future generations. It may sound contrarian and paradoxical, however, such thoughts are already shared by people in no small numbers even today.
 
As a person of conscience, to avert wars is to avert killings by putting my own life at stake.
 
We can make progress, one human at a time. Nobody can stop us from doing that. We can choose as we wish. In places like this, we find signs of hope that Wars can be averted.

Read Previous: Wars Can Be Averted (3)【Solution 1: Voter Accountability】
 
Complete Series: Wars Can Be Averted (1)～(4)
[1]   [2]   [3]   [4]   
​
Read Theme: Violence/Peace