United Nations Postal Administration

One of the problems that the United Nations encounters is the confusion between its decisions and actual capabilities on the one hand, and the actions and gestures that fall under the international community", on the other. In the eyes of most, the UN Charter and UN resolutions mean little, if what prevails in the end is the law of the strongest or the richest.

At a time when the world seems to be facing life and death issues--ecological, security, religious and economic--the greatest challenge for the United Nations is perhaps not the reforming of its rules and procedures, but rather the universal, symbolic significance of its raison d'être.

The UN lacks the desire to speak directly to the hearts and minds of the world's inhabitants--to move beyond Governments with their cynicism and bargaining, beyond corporations with their rapacity and irresponsibility, and beyond religions with their intolerance and instrumentalism. Yet the "sacred" UN texts themselves contain the means to mobilize the entire planet. We need only to refer to the passage in the UN Charter that says "to reaffirm faith in fundamental human rights, in the dignity and worth of the human person, in the equal rights of men and women and of nations large and small".

Abraham Lincoln was able to put an end to the civil war that was ravaging the United States by "reinventing" the American Constitution in order to make it more egalitarian. Through his Gettysburg address on 19 November 1863, he created a new vision for the whole nation, including the slaves, with a few right words at the right moment: "Four score and seven years ago our fathers brought forth, upon this continent, a new nation, conceived in liberty and dedicated to the proposition that all men are created equal." Of course, exegetes will say that Lincoln was deliberately exaggerating, but it was inspiration that carried the day.

The dream

We should be allowed to dream of a UN Secretary-General who can liberate himself from the pressure imposed on him by current members--both States and Governments--with the type of discourse that can resonate deeply within even the most insignificant person in the smallest country.

Imagine for a moment that Kofi Annan or his successor announced his sincere intention to do everything in his power to ensure that every man and woman in all parts of the world feels that he or she is a beneficiary of and responsible for equal rights. That would indeed be a dream. By pursuing this dream, the United Nations can make the spirit of its universality vibrate anew. Upon seeing the popularity of the 2006 World Soccer Cup, Kofi Annan expressed his desire to create a UN World Cup in order to mobilize people around the theme of peace. Was he not in fact expressing this same aspiration?

The shadow, the vacuum

Can we seriously hope to attain this dream? What shadows threaten to obscure it? Many major decisions concerning the environment, economy, security, education, health, technology, etc. do not depend solely on the UN and its agencies. However, there is a more intangible and yet essential area where the UN can move forward in a relatively autonomous fashion: the balance of power between what can be called the "actors" in globalization and the way in which this balance of power involves or excludes the citizens of the world.

The UN can free itself from the pressure placed on it by taking advantage of the great confusion that surrounds it and the vacuum in which it currently finds itself. In a world of global communications, the UN will survive and prosper if it asserts itself with its own system of values, instead of stubbornly adhering to a deficient multilateral system.

The end of a reign

In 2006, we clearly see that the international public scene has become a vacuum devoid of projects and consequently devoid of any official hope. UN conferences, G-8 summits and institutional campaigns, both large and small, mobilize scarcely those who organize them, barely those who attend them and only vaguely those trying to render them into good work. Consequently, the geopolitics of bargaining and the gap between the governors and the governed are even more perceptible.

With respect to world powers, we are now seeing several regimes slowly coming to an end at the same time: the American empire, whose decline has more than just begun; the international architecture inherited from the Second World War, whose economic and financial institutions are all but in deadlock; and finally the end of globalization too closely tied to neoliberal ideology, the death of which some, such as Canadian essay writer John Raston Saul, are predicting or dispassionately observing.

Factors of Change

For some time now, those in official circles have acknowledged that a reform in the conduct of world affairs is inevitable. There are, in fact, many factors for change. First, there are the negative factors, such as conflicts brought on by terrorism and the response to it, or the persistent pressure from the Americans on the multilateral system. Then there are emerging factors, such as the growing power of the Chinese, Indian and Brazilian economies, and the new political alliances in Latin America. However, what has become of the emergence of civil societies-the new forms of citizen representation outside governments?

At present, organized civil society (NGOs, social forums, etc.) does not seem to know how to occupy public space in a convincing manner. Of course, the public arena still needs to be more accessible to civil society, i.e. non-privatized and non-polluted. Nonetheless, by mingling with the established powers, this same civil society acts as though it has lost its wings, as though it is drowning in its internal meanderings and/or has cut itself off from the type of sincere listening that gave it its legitimacy.

A common second wind

A second wind for both the United Nations and the forces of civil society, which have been emerging since the 1990s, could come from an alliance based on fundamentally similar values and processes. In a value-based world, the single-minded quest for profits and the view that citizens are simple consumers, first and foremost, has dominated the recent phase of neoliberal globalization. However, one way to put the emphasis back on the ethical issues of justice, equity, solidarity and democracy is to focus on the central notion of rights.

There is a common ground between the alter-globalists, whose movement is increasingly based on respect for human rights, and an international community that would like to be able to enforce international law in letter and in spirit. If this common ground related to the citizen as a person able to claim his/her individual rights, there would be some degree of modernity to this rapprochement. This would be in keeping with post-collectivist ideologies, post-neoliberalism and the era of the global village, where the social link is established outside the realm of the nation-State, all in a public space that transcends borders and where the individual makes his/her own world, leaving room for a diversity of beliefs, convictions and cultures.

To reach this point, the process of rapprochement cannot depend on the Security Council or the intergovernmental system. The UN should not simply try to illustrate its message through goodwill ambassadors or limit itself to consulting with civil society. It must work with civil society on projects that take advantage of the possibilities of a connected society in order to reach as many people as possible.

Roles to play

Of course, such a dynamic would also involve the other "actors", who are knocking on the door of what we call global governance: cities and local authorities truly engaged in managing public affairs and often more open than national governments, researchers and environmentally and socially responsible companies. Above all, this would be a bottom-up construction, from the local to the global, so as to avoid the past temptation to impose a single model everywhere.

Just as decolonization followed colonization, a "de-globalization" phase must now take place. This does not mean reverting to sovereignty or nationalism, but rather allowing solutions that are better adapted to the world's problems to emerge without assuming that the West or the North are necessarily capable of supplying the framework for this response.

As Laurence Tubiana, President of the Sustainable Development Institute, stated, it is likely that new approaches in terms of growth and the environment will come from Asia or China, new approaches to democracy from Africa, and new approaches to resources from Latin America. What about Europe? A little too restricted by its certainties and obstacles, Europe could indeed become a real place of power and counter-powers and a place of peace and tolerance. However, it must become, above all, an international lever to encourage and crystallize the forces of reform, rather than sinking into fear and dependence.

Public Space, public good, positive obligations

There is, however, one potential danger that could hinder any positive evolution. It comes from the "central actor" represented by public space--in other words, that which goes beyond the media, whose role is to inform citizens and encompasses everything that now stems from the exchange of information or the forming of communities through new communication technologies.

We know that the primary traditional means of information have gradually become concentrated in the hands of a few and that they have succumbed to or promoted propaganda strategies or even abandoned all notions of public service. What would happen if the new emerging forms of public space--the Internet, telephony--were controlled by only a few big commercial operators, who at present seem to have no requirements in terms of the nature of the content they are spreading or generating?
It is urgent and vital that we consider public space to be a public good, like water or culture, that can never be completely privatized and to which a certain number of rules should apply. Until now, one visible constraint has consisted in censuring that which is too shocking. Would it not be better to formulate "positive obligations" on an international scale for the few groups that control the networks?--"a positive obligation to produce and/or disseminate content that deals with the true issues and leaves room for a diversity of identities, views and aspirations". Shouldn't the UN and civil society tackle this challenge head on that will affect all areas of life in the future--education, consumption, violence, identity and relationships? For now, Governments are too close to the big operators to be involved in this task.

New global narratives

However, while the communication channels of the global village may yet become subject to such demands, the need remains to put forward new global narratives. And if collectivist or neoliberal ideologies can hardly pretend to offer any glimmer of hope, how can any form of coherence emerge? How can we favour resonance between new forms of discourse and practice? How can we make sure that the local, national or global social links do not amount to a mere connection behind a screen or to one of total relinquishment?

We are far from being able to answer that. Yet, despite all, we feel attempts must be made to quickly fill this vacuum via proposals, which will encourage a sentiment that the world of tomorrow is open to all, including the victims of social exclusion, the humiliated, and those left by the wayside in all areas of life. We need initiatives, which can intimate that in the face of nuclear threat or the shadow of climate change, a gentle and colourful revolution can win the day, because in the end the dominating forces may prove relatively fragile in years to come.
For our part, over the past few months, Bridge Initiative International has been formulating a proposal that we feel will publicly symbolize awareness and continuity.

2008 Humankind Olympics

We are organizing an event entitled the "Humankind Olympics" in parallel to the Olympic Games in Beijing, China from 8 to 13 August 2008. The primary goal is to renew the terms of the debate over the main issues concerning globalization, the future of the planet and the place for each of its inhabitants. Establishing a focal point--for instance, a stadium in a French city like Lyon, which has shown interest--the event would be shared and promoted by several cities worldwide.

Thanks to the participation from Beijing of a number of athletes from each national delegation, a collaboration with the official Olympic Games may interest the traditional media to consider our event--just like the satellite "dialogue" set up by our organization in January 2001 between Davos and Porto Allegre, and between the World Economic Forum and the first edition of the World Social Forum.

But just like the Olympic Games, the Humankind Olympics is intended to become a playful creation of the people. The establishment of a committee and juries, the formation of non-national teams and the choice of disciplines, their modes of presentation, medals and awards would all provide a pretext to leave the beaten path and to encourage participation. This competition, which would be open and transparent for almost two years, would pave the way for political and citizen-based creativity at a crucial time in world history. It would be reflected in the international public space through the introduction of platforms for exchange and opinion sharing on both ideas and methods. A mere dream? Not necessarily. In any case, it would not be that difficult to implement. For both the United Nations and civil society in its multiplicity, this would be an opportunity to work together outside the constructs of nations and Governments.

And indeed the conclusion of these Olympics in 2008 may compel a new beginning, with or without the United Nations. For no one knows if the United Nations will end up disappearing in the twenty-first century, metamorphosing into an organization of united peoples or promoting the emergence of counter powers strong enough to redress the power imbalances in a global scale, while attentive enough to give the widespread feeling that the life of one is truly worth that of another.