1. The UN organization should be viewed as impotent and incapable. This was proven again and again by practice and few can doubt it anymore. The reason for the failure of the UN idea: the pre-cold war syndrome. The UN is supposed to be a world-wide forum representing humanity as a whole and therefore includes all countries, whether democratic or not. This concept is, however, plagued by self-contradiction, as the leaders of the totalitarian countries rule through tyranny, mass-brainwash or (as it is in most of the cases) both and thus cannot represent their countries’ people. This concept made some sense during the cold war when the UN was necessary to uphold the fragile peace between the democratic and the communist blocs, but, however, no longer applies. Neither does the NATO concept apply, as the later is a solely military organization designed as the military facet of the democratic block during the cold war.
2. An organization with world-wide power and authority is nevertheless necessary to influence the course of global politics and promote peace and freedom. This organization has to include solely the truly democratic countries of the world and shall henceforth be called the Alliance of Free Nations (AFN) in this document. No pathos or radical views underline the notion “democratic” as it appears here, and to date the list would definitely include the USA, Russia, European Union, Canada, Australia, India, Japan and more. The intent is countries with a more-or-less normal democratic election procedure and real protection of the human rights including freedom of speech.
3. History teaches civilizations and cultures exist in an ever-lasting battle for survival. Stronger cultures swallow and absorb weaker ones, nations perish and new are formed from those cultures that prevail. This process is an intrinsic characteristic of human society and remains key to global politics. The modern age signifies the remarkable rise of humanism and liberalism, possibly for the first time in the history of mankind. However, every action has a counter-action, and the counter-action of today’s primitive societies is (primarily Islamic) terrorism and development of methods to take advantages of the weakness of liberalism in its present form. This includes the applications of the criminal terrorist organizations to human rights in self-defense and the presentation of their bloody war as a freedom struggle.
4. Until now, the free, sane nations, haven’t acted against the terrorism plague in a competent manner, the same true for most other global political issues. The reason is the lack of cooperation and the incompetent cold war approach. The solution might lie in the formation of AFN and the direction of its action against the spread of extremism and for the promotion of liberalism and humanism. This means that the free nations shouldn’t disarm themselves by the false principle of equality of all sovereigns, whether democratic or not, but conform with the principles governing human society and attack the tyrannical regimes breeding extremism of all kinds including meaningless war and bloodshed and terrorism. Here “attack” doesn’t stand for military action only, though military action with minimal risk to civilian population also has to be a part of the concept. The attack is a cultural attack, full scale propaganda warfare meant to convert the primitive society into such that is modern and liberal. This would mean military takeover first in some of the cases and psychological warfare through all available media second (a step necessary in most of them).
5. The unison of all free nations is crucial to the success of the goal. The free nations have today (in contrast to the cold war period) reached a critical mass sufficient to move the global situation in the right direction. Mutual interference would destroy most chances of completing this mission. The decisions as to what action is the most appropriate should be taken in a democratic fashion by AFN and considered mandatory for all member nations. The guidelines should be the principles of humanism and liberalism together with the realizations that cultural / political aggression is necessary and that harm done to innocents has to be minimal (even if minimal harm is sometimes unavoidable, unfortunately).
6. It should be clear some totalitarian nations, such as China, posses great military might including nuclear weapons and cannot be taken over by force. Hopefully these nations will succumb to their own people’s will of freedom in the future, as – in many cases – it is precisely in those nations that free-market economics and uncontrollable media such as the internet are available.
7. A necessary condition of the implementation of those principles is the commitment of every member of the AFN to them. An Alliance whose actions would be incoherent, purposeless and inappropriate (as are those of the UN) would be to no advantage, even if the Alliance had, in principle, more real power than the UN has today.
8. Some, after reading this document, might decide the cultural aggression notion presented here stands in direct contradiction with the principles of liberalism. This, however, is not true, as democratic nations have the right (and indeed the duty) to impose their perception on the non-democratic nations. This is so because the people of the non-democratic nations have no real chance to form a perception which is really of their own. This is so because they deserve freedom and human rights as well as those that already have it. The ideology presented here aims to promote the best interests of the whole human-kind in the true spirit of liberalism and humanism. We who realize liberalism and humanism stand for the only moral and sane way of life have the right and duty to protect and promote it across the globe.
A Citizen of the World
03/08/2003