The Rights of Nations

     At the end of WWI Woodrow Wilson took a triumphant tour of Europe. He and his fourteen points were so wildly popular Catholics were praying that the Pope not die while he was there. They were afraid Protestant Wilson might be elected to succeed him. Wilson’s League of Nations failed even more miserably than the United Nations but the trip was a huge boost for liberal democracy. By the time the Berlin Wall fell it was almost universally accepted as the sole legitimate form of government. Even despots hold sham elections.
     So man is to be ruled by these principles. The powers of government are to be strictly limited and will require the consent of the governed. We will all be equal under the law.  Our rights will be protected. Neither the government nor our neighbor can unreasonably interfere with our liberty, our property, or our general well being. When they do we can seek redress in fair and open courts. Or can we? What if the offending neighbor is Chinese? What redress do we have then?
     It’s not an idle question. It was only 2003 when China suppressed news of a SARS epidemic and endangered the health of the world. Some authorities in Oregon believe mercury mines in China may be responsible for a spike in autism in that state. Now we’re worried about an avian flu pandemic worse than anything seen in living memory, the sort of devastating sickness that in the past has brought down civilizations. Avoiding it may require an unprecedented level of international cooperation. Will we get it? Is there anyone who has the power to ensure the necessary precautions? In a word, no. Neither the WHO nor anybody else has that kind of enforcement mandate.
     Let’s take a less cataclysmic case. If the Governor of Nevada were targeting his citizens with death squads we wouldn’t hesitate to send federal marshals to Reno and put a stop to it, troops if necessary. We fought the bloodiest war in our history to settle that issue. But the world stood idly by for many years while Saddam Hussein brutalized Iraqis Much of the world roundly objected when the US invaded, and still objects as the gruesome evidence continues to emerge. Are the sovereign rights of states  to trump the rights of man? To say it is a matter for the UN is to say yes. If it were left to that flawed body Saddam would not only still be in power, he’d still be in Kuwait. Witness the continuing genocide in Sudan.
     I’m not saying raw US military force is the answer to all ills. Pax Americana has a frightening ring to it. So what is to be done? Only in the economic sphere have nations been willing to cede significant sovereignty for mutual benefit. But economic issues are powerful motivators. The benefits of capitalism have forced even the United States to change it’s tax laws under threat of trade sanctions. China was required to honor enforceable contracts before joining the WTO.  Turkey is cleaning up some of its worst human rights abuses in hopes of joining the European Union. Even Libya’s Muamar Ghadaffi dismantled his nuclear arms program in exchange for sanctions relief.
     We’re well into our third century learning how to make liberal democracy work inside the state. We have not made nearly so much progress on just how the states themselves are to get along. I think we’ll get there but Hegel was wrong. History isn’t over, not yet. We’ve still got another set of governing principles to work out.