MrBill,
I agree that the current UN is not working very well. However, it worked well enough from 1948-2000. As one U.S. congress member once stated a few decades ago (paraphrasing) "
The purpose of the UN is not to get you into Heaven, but to keep you out of Hell." In otherwords, it is a vehicle originally designed to prevent the outbreak of global warfare. It served this purpose well enough during the Cold War standoff. Thank God.
However, for the past 5 years, the United Nations has not worked well because the sole superpower has been acting unilaterally in an attempt to maintain its declining economic status, while also attempting to strategically control the world's largest remaining hydrocarbon energy supply -
this strategy be default requires that the UN be purposely undermined. Need more evidence? just review comments of John Bolton regarding the UN.
These recent developments may ultimately become the real tragedy of this new century, which began with the unilateral war against Iraq. Why could this become the tragedy of the 21st century? Its becoming obvious, what the world needs desperately is the UN to step-up and engage in multilateral negotiations with the G-8 (plus China and India) regarding the global energy challenges: mainly the pursuit of both
demand side strategies and cooperateion regarding
alternative/renewable energy implementation. Monetrary reform is also required, but energy is first.
Specifically, the UN needs to advocate something like the Upsalla Protocol, otherwise known as the Oil Depletion Protocol. Failure of the UN to get nations to adopt to such a multilateral treaty may lead to what Heinberg calls the "Last One Standing" strategy. That outcome will indeed lead us into Hell on Earth...global resource warfare
BTW, to address your comments about North Korea, pages 184-185 of
Petrodollar Warfare:
Korea
Resolving the Korean peninsular dispute requires at the very minimum the reinvigoration of the Sunshine Policy rapprochement and ending this administration’s rather irrational antagonism of North Korea. A German-style reunification should become the ultimate target of US foreign policy, with UN involvement for the reassimilation of North Korea’s disastrous economy. Furthermore, the $13 billion South Korean military budget alone is larger than North Korea’s entire $9 billion governmental budget. Negotiations should entail blanket amnesty for Kim Jong Il as well as all North Korean officialdom, a concrete US military withdrawal timeline (as a concurrent de-escalation), and an economic revitalization development plan could easily include $8 billion of the current South Korean annual military expenditure bolstered with $2 billion of US assistance ($100 billion/10 years).
To gain amnesty, the North Korean government would be required to forfeit all 8,000 spent uranium fuel rods, transferable technology, and related nuclear material to the UN or International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Additionally, in exchange for massive economic, food supplies, and agricultural development, the North Korean government should agree to cease all exports of advanced missile technology. For this, the US and world community should fulfill the earlier pledge to build two light-water nuclear power plants for North Korea’s energy needs. In effect, the proposed reassimilation of North and South Korea, along with general amnesty for the current North Korean regime, should remove the impetus for such weaponry.
....Now, to answer your larger question: What are the options? Well, below are exerts from the final chapter in my book. Numerous recommendations are found throughout the book, but this should give you some perspective on the macro challanges that are involved from my perspective...
(
Petrodollar Warfare, pages 212-216)
In order to save the American experiment and stop the slide toward an authoritarian state, Americans must elect an enlightened administration in 2008 and create revolutionary changes in the current political establishment. Both of the major political parties have failed the American people, as the main constituencies of the current governing body are simply different factions of the richest two-percent of the population (the elites who run the military–industrial–petroleum–banking complex). This is a function of our structurally flawed campaign finance system that renders both Congress and the president incapable of voicing the concerns and interests of the other 98 percent of Americans.
There is no easy way out, and I do not envy the arduous journey that awaits the 44th president, who will likely face a combined economic and energy crisis. Global monetary reform and a compromise with the EU ultimately means the US will have to forfeit its hyperpower status and revert to being a realistic nation as one among equals. Many Americans do want to hear this message, but the US’extraordinary economic imbalances will ultimately unwind. Americans believe the myth that the other G–7 nations’ living standards would somehow be unfulfilling if we lived “their way.”
In reality their living standards are all excellent relative to the global community, and each of the citizens in those privileged nations should be thankful. Perhaps many of us will have to give up our irrational attraction to gas-guzzling SUVs, but do we really want these excesses to define our “values?” Regardless, we may not have the luxury of choice for much longer, as the dictates of the global economy and physics will soon come to the forefront.
The only solution is international cooperation, real leadership, global monetary reform, and sacrifices by the American citizenry to reduce energy consumption. US politicians are not interested in being truthful with the people, as both parties are more or less in the pockets of the military–energy conglomerates. The US media conglomerates are not serving the public’s interest. Consequently, real campaign finance reform and the comprehensive rejection of corporate personhood may be the only way for the US to possibly enact the required energy reforms with the onset of global Peak Oil.
In order to save the American experiment from the shared destiny of all empires — military overextension and subsequent economic decline — I recommend the following suggestions. While these proposals are bold, imperfect, and contentious, it is obvious that adjustments will be required to begin rebalancing the global economy and preparing the world community for the challenges presented by global Peak Oil.
Disavow the Preventative War Doctrine
The unrealistic neoconservative goal of global domination must be quickly discarded by any new US administration if it seeks to reduce current and future geopolitical tensions. The concept of the US openly violating international law with unilateral “preventative wars” in the oil-rich regions of the world will simply not be tolerated by most industrialized nations. Hopefully one of the first official acts of the 44th president will be to officially disavow the “Bush doctrine” and state a desire for a multilateral approach to international terrorism. Such a gesture would allow the world community to breathe a collective sign of relief and extend to the new administration much needed political capital. Multilateral cooperation will be needed for the following issues/reforms.
US Fiscal Discipline
We must restore some semblance of fiscal responsibility in this country if we want to save the dollar. The Iraq conflict had cost approximately $300 billion by the end of 2004, and estimates of current military expenditures are approximately $1 billion per week. US taxpayers (and their children and grandchildren) will pay for the 2003 Iraq War, unlike the 1991 Gulf War. The credit worthiness of a currency is based upon the ability of the government to collect tax revenue from its citizens. The devaluation of the dollar in 2002–2004 reflected the world community’s lack of faith in US economic policies.
International Energy Projects
Washington should propose to the UN that it form an international consortium of energy scientists and researchers to develop alternative fuels for transportation. IHS Energy has stated that least 85 percent of the world’s total oil deposits are already in production. The most recent findings of worldwide oil “mega projects” going online from 2004 to 2010 suggest an “unbridgeable supply-demand gap [for oil] opening up after 2007.” If alternative fuels for transportation cannot be developed and implemented over the next decade, disastrous consequences will beset the global community. Ideally, the US and UN would immediately advocate investments totally hundreds of billions to be spent annually on
simultaneous, international Manhattan Project/Apollo-type energy programs pursuant to global energy reconfiguration.
• Ultra-fuel-efficient gasoline and diesel engines (as a “bridge technology”)
• Clean coal technology with mitigation of carbon dioxide emissions
• Geothermal power (retrofitting commercial and residential buildings)
• Hydrogen/Ammonia Fuel cells for mass transit (land, sea, and air)
• Small-scale solar retrofitting of residential and commercial buildings
• Large-scale solar power plants (e.g., 200-megawatt solar “Power Tower”)
• OTEC (e.g., fleet of 100-megawatt floating plantships producing liquefied ammonia/hydrogen fuel and potable water)
• Biomass and biodiesel for localized, agriculture-based farm production
• Wind power (rapid deployments in both small and large-scale settings)
• Thermal deployermization (new technology that warrants more R&D)
• Nuclear fusion (still unproven technology but warrants more R&D)
Advanced Manufacturing to Reduce US Trade Deficit
Alan Greenspan, the chairman of the Federal Reserve, has given Americans the peculiar impression that is does not matter where American products are made, just so long as people can continue to buy them. This is simply not true. The demise of over 2.8 million US manufacturing jobs since 2000 has led to decreased income, growing levels of personal debt, and new records of personal bankruptcies.
A superpower that loses its manufacturing base will not be a superpower for long. One of the most outspoken observers of this truism is Eamonn Fingleton, whose 1999 book
In Praise of Hard Industries: Why Manufacturing, Not the Information Economy, Is the Key to Future Prosperity was somewhat derided during the “New Economy” frenzy. Following the dot-com/technology bubble, it appeared that he was right: there is no “New Economy paradigm,” and real wealth creation requires manufacturing and production.
The US must substantially reinvest in sustainable energy technology, advanced manufacturing, and various other export sectors in order to gradually but earnestly move the economy from a trade account deficit position back into a trade account surplus position. This will take decades, but on a positive note, the imperative for large-scale “energy reconfiguration” and development of alternative energy technologies provides the US workforce with an opportunity to makes gains in its advanced manufacturing base, while also enhancing long-term security.
Energy Allocation Accords
The UN should form an international group of scientists and engineers to study energy depletion stemming from global Peak Oil. Under UN supervision, the global community should devise a methodology and formal agreements regarding the distribution of hydrocarbons based on the global depletion rate (i.e., Upsalla Accord). Successful implementation of such a worldwide treaty would undoubtedly be a modern miracle. The incentive to abide by such an accord is the inescapable fact that the alternatives are either oil depletion warfare in the Persian Gulf and/or economic warfare in the international foreign exchange markets. These adverse events can be avoided, but only if the international community can agree to an energy treaty that reflects oil depletion, while also transforming the current economic/monetary system and implementing strict measures to control population growth.
It is essential that the US uses less energy and immediately improves its infrastructure before the full effects of Peak Oil make any energy reforms excessively painful and expensive. Given that Americans consume 25 percent of all hydrocarbons, we have the most to both gain and lose if energy reforms are not implemented during this decade while we still have the capability to pursue a gradual
Powerdown scenario.
Global Monetary Reform
The main problem with the current global economy is that excess levels of credit creation (i.e. a credit/derivative bubble) have facilitated the building of supply capacity that is well beyond the requirements of global aggregate demand. As a general rule a period of deflationary contraction would permit a decline of supply capacity until such time that growth in demand initiates a new expansionary cycle.
Economists, such as Richard Duncan (author of
The Dollar Crisis), have argued that excessive growth of global credit and subsequent structural problems of the US dollar may unleash a deflationary contraction of the global economy. A depression could occur with a significant devaluation of the dollar, and the downturn will be very long-lasting unless global aggregate demand increases, particularly in the EU and East Asian economies.
Therefore it seems imperative that the US government begins discussions with the G–8 nations (plus China) to reform the global monetary system, ideally, to allow for a controlled expansion of markets in Europe and East Asia. The global economy will be more balanced and better off with three engines of global growth: the US, the EU, and Asia. The great challenge will be to implement a gradual, controlled decrease in the US money supply, while attempting to minimize dislocations in the US and global economy. The first reform should be the euro as the second International Reserve Currency, at parity with the dollar, thereby allowing a dual-OPEC oil transaction currency standard. This should join the US with the EU as two equal “co-hegemons.”
While this rebalancing is necessary to create sustainable long-term growth, any broad transition from a dollar to a euro standard or euro/dollar standard with subsequent enormous capital market reorientation will be forcefully opposed by the American elite of the political and business establishment.
Regardless, the ascendance of the euro and ultimately the yuan has likely been fortified given the structural debt, trade, and fiscal imbalances in the US economy. The US consumer cannot go into indefinite debt as the single engine for global growth, nor can the Federal Reserve continue to reinflate bubbles indefinitely.
Both the EU and East Asia will have to recognize that the party is over and they cannot ride the American consumer in perpetuity. Whether or not they wish to confront the challenges of this transition, they will find these imposed by brutal economic realities.
***
(If I post anymore of my book, I'll have to charge you for it...
)
I am glad you found my recommendations for a "more sane" world hopeful, even if somewhat fleeting...
but I think many of the answers to your questions are in Chapter 1 and 7.
