World Government

October 17, 1951 — The Cairns Post (letter)


The Mossadegh Project | August 3, 2024                    


Letter to the editor of The Cairns Post newspaper in Cairns, Queensland, Australia.

Australian media archive




CORRESPONDENCE
WORLD GOVERNMENT

(To the Editor, “The Cairns Post”)

Sir,—May I once again be permitted to take up some space in your columns and venture to express some personal opinions regarding the concept of a “World Government,” that is, the eventual establishment of such a supra-national government to bring the people of all the world closer together and, above all, prevent war by substituting law and order in its place.

It is a tragic story we are reading everyday about the oil complications in Persia, the place of British troops in Egypt, the Sudan and so on, but the general pattern of world trends would suggest that strong forces are afoot favouring the gradual establishment of far greater sovereignty in parts of the world least expected to be moving in this direction. It also does look as though very little can really be done about it, as the complex international situation is so opportune for the establishment of national independence in various corners of the world and “righting” so-called “wrongs” which certain countries could all conceivably “righten” at any other time, bar periods of international instability, such as now. Perhaps what we are witnessing today is merely part of the historical development of the world in which we live and even “showing the flag” or “rattling the sabre” will, unfortunately, make but little difference.

The Persian crisis offers an interesting example of how uncivilised the world still is in its international relations. There is such a thing as the International Court of Justice; it is recognised by Persia and by Britain. But at this particular time the Persian Government decided that the International Court of Justice had not jurisdiction when Britain put the oil case before it, and, without in any way wishing to enter into the discussion relevant to the merits or otherwise of Persia’s claim and national right in not recognising the International Court of Justice in this matter, one has not to be an expert on international affairs to wonder just why there is such a body known as the International Court of Justice if its authority is not respected.

What is the point in having law courts if the conflicting parties can please themselves whether they recognise the findings of such a court? It would indeed be farcicial if our own courts of law in the Commonwealth were placed in a similar position and had no means of enforcing their findings, but leaving it to the parties concerned to accept verdicts given. It would obviously lead to chaos, because every modern society, no matter how democratic, must have its code of law, for such a code is for the benefit of the community at large and every society must obviously have ways and means of enforcing law and order.

This argument can be contracted to the smallest local club or entended to nations, for underlying points are still the same and in quite a like manner the argument can be extended to international affairs and if such a view is accepted, then we must clearly have means of ensuring that international rulings are enforceable if need be. To do this we necessarily have to surrender some of our international rights, by creating an international police force, on a worldwide basis, to ensure that international, just like national, law and order are kept.

It is the aim of the “World Movement for World Federal Government” to work toward this end, so that potential aggressors will at least have no doubt ahead that the world will stand against them, not necessarily because the world happens to disagree with the political philosophy held by the aggressors, but because it would be a breach of international law with all its consequences, to take the law into ones own hands.

The United Nations is, unfortunately, handcapped in that it consists of political power blocs, which are subject to changes, with political changes in national governments and it is quite possible for one government in certain country to be on one side of the fence, whilst the succeeding government happens to follow another policy and decide that national interest make imperative for the country to be on the other side of the fence. Consequently, politically elected national governments control the destiny of the United Nations, whilst to my mind international law and order, and what is right or wrong, is hardly a political issue.

At least, succeeding governments in this country do not appear to interfere in our justice system, necessary for the maintenance of law and order. Perhaps one of these days it will be accepted by the people of the world that a code of ethics is not only applicable to ourselves as individuals, but also to individual nations in the world at large, for a crime is still a crime, whether committed by an individual or a nation.

Yours, etc.,
K. R. FLEISCHMAN

Herberton, October 11.


Mossadegh & Arbenz & Lumumba & Sukarno & Allende... shirts

Mossadegh & Arbenz & Lumumba & Sukarno & Allende... t-shirts

Search MohammadMossadegh.com



Related links:

Dangerous Oil | The Daily Mercury (Queensland), Oct. 2, 1951

Free Nations Need ‘Court’ To Settle Own Quarrel | Edgar Ansel Mowrer, Oct. 4, 1951

Last Call for Britain? | Pittsburgh Post-Gazette, Oct. 13, 1951



MOSSADEGH t-shirts — “If I sit silently, I have sinned”

Facebook  Twitter  YouTube  Tumblr   Instagram