Re: The court process as a resolution

Dear Peter and All,
i both agree and disagree

On 31 Mar 99  Peter Grimes <p34d3611@jhunix.hcf.jhu.edu> wrote:
> 
> 	I completely support an effective world court which could have
> both real enforcement power and jurisdiction over matters of civil wars.
> ...> 	But the failure of that initiative is only a symptom of a broader
> problem: we cannot have a real court unless it has a monopoly over the use
> of LEGITIMATE violence (Weber was right on this one), which requires the
> prior formation of a truly global state.  Pending such a new global
> empire, we will remain victims of and hostages to sectarian national
> interests and efforts at hegemony.

a real court with real legal decisions is possible  before and 
without monopolization of violence.  it is also possible in principle 
to persuade conflicting sides to stop fighing and to be obedient to 
the court decisions, not under the fear of violence by on the basis 
of international status, honor, dignity, values and similar reasons

i also see not absolutely impossible that in this or some other 
situation G7 as one side and Russia-China-India-Ukrain-Brazilia from 
another as another can guarantee all possible support for promotion 
any future decision of an international court if both sides 
believe in its fairness. 

the real cricial problem will emerge AFTER a court  decision, which 
probably would be inappropriate to both opponents of a conflict and 
guarantee- sides would have no sufficient power to enforce the 
decision. There it would be a problem, a kew civilizational problem 
to be solved.

I don't think that the only solution can be a Global State with 
monopoly of power, as you Peter suggest. Three years ago i have 
argued in wsn that the idea of global state is extremely dangeorous 
(leave aside its impossiblility), and must be substituted by the idea 
of Global Legal Order. This Order composed of solidary strenth of 
current world power partner centers (if you like - oligarchs) would 
serve as a source of the Weber's monopoly of legal violence that 
Peter rightly appeals to.

my point is that without making attempts like in this case of Kossovo 
(when really there are still NO sufficient factors for 
transformation) humanity certainly NEVER will come to the next 
civilizational stage with international legal order, which means new 
and new uncontrolled bloody conflicts and probably even devastating 
wars in the coming century and further - just in parallel with 
deterioration of planet resources and with global population 
pressing.

comments?

Nikolai Rozov