as admitted to the Quadruple Alliance at the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle. A number of conferences were held-viz. at Aix-la-Chapelle (1818)’ Troppau (1820) Verona (1822). However, thiş experience did not last long and the arrangement collapsed after the withdrawal of Britain. this marked an end of the first experiments at international government, which lasted for less than a decade. A notable feature of this experiment was that it was dominated by the great powers, the minor powers were not able to play any significant role.
Despite the failure of the Holy Alliance, it cannot be denied that it was a significant step in the direction of evolution of international government. Friedrich Gentz has highlighted the significance of Holy Alliance thus :
“The system which has been established in Europe since 1814 and 1815 phenomenon unheard of in the history of the world. The Principle of equilibrium or to put it better, of counterweights formed by particular alliances, a principle which has governed and too often also troubled and covered Europe with blood for three centuries has been superseded by a principle of general union, uniting the sum total of state in a federation under the direction of the major powers…
The second, third, and fourth-rate states submit in silence and without any previous stipulation to the decisions jointly taken by the preponderant powers, and Europe seems to form finally a great political family united under the auspices o an areopagus of its own creation.” Even Morgenthau. concedes that the though a number of international Congress for the settiement of current international affairs. It was “an international government in the true sense of the term.
An incomplete list of the issue on the agenda of the Congress of Aix-la-Chapelle will illustrate the range of its government activities the claims of the German mediatized princes against the abuses of their new sovereigns, the petition of the Elector of Hesse to exchange his title for that of king, the request by Nepoleon’s mother for the release of her son, the’ grievances of the people of Monoco against their prince the claims of Bavaria and the House of Hochberg to the succession of Baden, a dispute between the Duke of Oldenburg and Count Bentinck about the lordship of Knupenshaussen, the situation of the Jews in Prussia and Austria, the rank of diplomatic representatives the suppression of slave
trade and of the Barbary pirates and the questions of Spanish Colonies.”
League of Nations
The next important step in the direction of the evolution of international government was taken in the wake of the first world war when the League of Nations was formed. The League had àn organisation and legal personality. It worked through the Assembly the Council contained representatives of all members states and took decisions by unanimity.
But actually the permanent members of the Council exerted influence upon the werk of the League out of all proportions. According to Morgenthau though “in the League of Nations the small nations enjoyed a greater opportunity for influence and independent action than they ever did before or since in modern times, yet the international government of the League of Nations, at least in the sphere of high politics was a government of the great powers.”
The League of Nations however, failed to prevent wars of effectively. maintain international order on account of three defects. Firstly, it did not outlaw war and permitted the members of the League to go to war under certain conditions. Secondly, the League suffered from structural deficiency. While the structure of the League was predominantly European the main factors of international politics at that time were not predominantly European.
Further their leading members of the League either by choice or by necessity, followed policies so completely at odds with the actual distribution of power in the world, which rendered the successful working of the international government doubtful. Thirdly, the League suffered from certain political defects. The members of the League generally could not act in union on matters of major importance and persuade antagonistic policies which rendered the League infective. The principle of unanimity of members of League, except parties to dispute, prevented the members
from taking collective action. Further the various states tried to offer ideological justification for their separate policies which greatly contributed to international anarchy. In the words ot Morgenthau “The inability of the League of Nations to maintain international order and peace then was the inevitable result of the ascendancy that the ethics and policies of sovereign nations were able to the maintain over the moral and political objectives of the international government of the League of Natións.”
The United Nations
The formation of the United Nations, in the wake of the second world war represented the next step in the direction of the formation of international government. The constitutional organisation of the UNO greatly resembles the organisation of the League of Nations. Like the League it also has three political agencies-the General Assembly, the Security Council and the Secretariat. However, the General Assembly and the Security Council differ from the Assembly and Council of the League. Whereas the Assembly of the League was an international parliament which could take action in political matters the General Assembly of the UNO can only make recommendations in political matter either to the parties concerned or to the Security Council. Further the Security Council can disregard the advice of the General Assembly. On the other hand, the Council under the League did not enjoy such dominant position and possessed only concurrent jurisdiction with the Assembly. Comparing UNO with the earlier international organisations Morgenthau says “The Holy Alliance, was frankly an international government of the great powers. The League of Nations was an international government of the great powers with the advice and consent of all member nations. The United Nations is an international government of the great powers which resembles in its constitutional agreement the Holy Alliance and in its pretenses the League of Nations. It is the contrast between pretense and constitutional actually, between the democratic expectations. roused by the words of the Charter and the autocratic performance envisaged by the actual distribution of functions which characterizes the constitutional provisions of the United Nations.
Development after the Second World War.
More serious attention was given to the idea of evolving an international government after the Second World War on account of the discovery of nuclear weapons which posed a threat of complete annihilation of the world. The growing social, economic and technological interdependence of the nations also
encouraged the leaders of various states to work seriously for the creation of a world government. It was felt that since of the reforms within the international society has failed, more radical transformation of the existing international society of sovereign nations into a supra-national community of individuals was needed. The movement for world government gained momentum.
In 1945 A Committee to Frame World Constitution was set up at the University of the Chicago. This committee conducted studies arranged a number of Chicago. This committee conducted studies, arranged a number of conferences and even prepared a preliminary draft of a world constitution. In 1946, a World Movement for World Federal Govenment was organised in Luxembourg with a view to work for the attainment of the goal of world government in the post world war II period.
Need of World Government. In view of the enormous destruction wrought but he two world war which may be fought with nuclear weapons, there is a growing realisation among scholars and statesmen that only through government this destruction can be avoided. The world government is also desirable to put an end to the anarchic conditions prevailing in the. present day international society.
These anarchic conditions have arisen because each stale tries to promote its national interests and does not hesitate to violate the principles of international law-if its national interest so demands. The world government alone would be able to keep the sovereign nations in their respective jurisdiction and promote world peace.The world government shall ensure world peace by preventing war and diverting the.funds, at
present used for the conduct of war, for the moral and material upliftment of the people all over the world.
How the World State can be Created?
It has been argued that the world state cam come into being in two possible ways. Firstly, though conquests and world domination by one power, and secondly through the world federation which would preserve the national freedom of the states and ensure benefits of a vast world government. The creation of world state through conquest run the risk of revolt and irredentist separatism.
As Morgenthau has observed “if the conqueror can muster overwhelming strength no danger to peace may arise from conflict of two national societies living within the same state. If, however the strength of the conquered people is not out of all proportion to the conqueror’s a potential state of civil war between the conqueror and the conquered will sap the strength of the state even though under the modern conditions of warfare it may not endanger its existance.”
He further says that a world state created by conquest and lacking the support of world community has chance to maintain peace. with its aers only if it world community has a chance to maintain complete discipline and loyalty among the millions of soldiers and policeman needed to enforce its rule over an unwilling humanity. Such a world state would be totalitarian monster resting on feet of clay, the very thought of which stables the imagination.”
The other methods suggested for the formation ol a world government is the federation on the pattern of Switzerland and USA was argued that the Federation of Switzerland was formed by a number of, sovereign nations with different languages culture, history and loyalties. Similarly, the various nations of the world can join hands to form the world federation.
However, the proponents of this view ignore the fact that the formation of the Swiss federation was the result of combination or peculiar and unique circumstances. Even alter the formation of the Swiss federation the member states of the federation Were involved in a number of minor and five religious wars. Therefore, we.can say with Prof. Rappard “In so far as the Swiss experience of five centuries of collective security can suggest a lesson to the present generation, this lesson is clearly negative. It confirms at the same time the observation drawn from the most recent past and the teaching of Simple commonsense. As long as the security of the international society depends only open the:{rec co-operation of fully sovereign states, it remains necessarily fragile.”
Again it has been suggested that a would federation can be created through a constitutional convention on the pattern of USA. But. the example of USA only proves that the formation of a world government depends on the pre-existence of moral and political community. Further, Prof. Morgenthau has observed at the time of the Constitutional Convention of 1787, the “thirteen states were sovereign in name rather than in political actuality.
They did not constitute thirteen separate sovereignties about to merge into a single one. After they had declared their independence from Britain in 1776, sovereignty remained in, suspense. By establishing the United States they exchanged one sovereigty-that of British Crown-for another. All the while they retained the same language, the same culture, the same national heritage, the same moral conviction the same political interests that bad just been tested in a revolutionary was fought in unison under a single command. The thirteen colonies formed a moral and political community under the British Crown, they tested il and became fully aware of it in
their common struggle against Britain and they retained that community after they had won their independence.”
Prof. Friedman also does not consider any plan for world federation worth serious discussion because the present generation is still not prepared to work out such a plan. Establishment of a world government would demand the surrender of sovereign, right of the state to maintain armies to an unlimited extent and to resort to war for redress of their grievances. It is doubtful If may state is ready to make such sacrifices.
Likewise Prof. Organski also says that “the creation of a world government through the voluntary agreement of existing nations is so unlikely that we can say flatly that it will never happen.” Prof. Morgenthau also does not consider the present conditions favourable for the creation of a world state. He says “in no period of human history was civilization more in need of permanent peace and hence of a would state and that in no period of modern history were the moral social and political conditions of the world less favourable for the establishment of world state.” Prof. Schumann also considers the concept of world federation as ‘impracticable’. However he concedes that a federation world federation of the sovereign state “is a more promising than the abolition of multiplicity of states through the universal domination of a single.”
Again it has been suggested that the present state system must be replaced by effective supranational institutions to which the nation states would surrender their sovereignties. As Morgenthau has put it “What is needed is not limitation of the exercise of national sovereignty through international obligations and institutions, but the transference of the sovereignties of individuals nations to a world authority, which would be as sovereign over the individual nations to a world authority which would be as sovereignties of individual nations to a world authority, which would be as sovereign over the individual nations as the individual nations are sovereign with in their respective territories. What is needed is radical transformation of the existing international society of sovereign nations into a supranational community of individuals.
Factors Retarding the Realization of Goal of World State
It is quite evident from the above discussion that the prospects of a world government do not seen quite brighl at present and thcre are a number of factors which stand in the way of the realization of this goal. In the first place, the existing nation state system based on nationalism and sovereignty stands in the way of reàlisation of the goal
