Humiliation became the basis of belligerence

Don't dare to confess it changed international system and that was, in any case, left this world called "Westphalian", the name of this peace which ended, in 1648, the thirty years war. The qualifier - whom not always fair to the ears of historians - allowed to designate the apogee of the sovereignty and the peaceful (little) of States for power, with a territory in which emerged a nation not communicating with the outside world that through its rulers. Today, we are there; but do we know where we are when we refer, modestly, to a system "postbipolar", that is aware of his past, but ignoring the nature of the present

What there Interstate today Globalization has thrown us into a world of interdependence, exact antonym of sovereignty; borders always have their symbolic force but less in hardware capabilities: the political act is now worth only if there is concerted and relayed out, and if it fits into the otherness; There are few public policies that can be thought as national, while the security concept fetish is for the destiny of the nations, rebuilt in the overall. The security of a State is more opposed to that of the other: it depends on. Most necessary goods are national, but common to all humanity: environmental issue demonstrates every day.

In this atmosphere, the social trumps the policy. Which surprised In a context of communication easier and more extended, each, group, association, company, individual becomes a more and more autonomous international actor doing fewer twists by the State. In a world for the first time extended to the entire planet, social shifts are only visible as huge proportions, doing the defects of international social integration and welfare contrasts the major issue of our new millennium. When is hunger, every three hours, as many victims as the attacks of September 2001 on the World Trade Center, the centre of gravity of the international regulation change course location. The North-South divide prevails, resentment command further violence international, more intersocial that inter-State, and that it is unthinkable to stop the military instrument. Humiliation became the basis of belligerence. It is already out of time the soldier and diplomat.

What regulation is it, indeed The financial and economic crisis that we currently live reflects a desperate quest for policy. Return of the State and return to the State Yes, probably, as to seal the errors and the neo-liberal illusions; but it's a State that can no longer anything alone, even if it is super-powerful. Re-engagement in regional construction Of course, but it is really that when the context is favourable for regaining its machine to reproduce national egoisms when everything is going badly, as yield to a derisory race to athat retractions

The twentieth century believed invent the multilateral solution and those who thought it probably did not harm. But to ambiguities paid today to the price very; and to hopes ruined! Two schools competed on this project, the last century: liberal and solidarist. The first has prevailed, thinking with Woodrow Wilson that it was sufficient to bring peace and building institutions capable of supporting the generalized Exchange. May it would have been more inspired to listen more to others, those which, autour Léon Bourgeois or Albert Thomas, included that peace build on satisfaction less minimum of this gigantic humanity from social needs. Then, it was thought that the most urgent was to spare the sovereignists susceptibilities and great power ambitions, leaving Franklin Roosevelt reconstruct multilateralism around a Security Council marginalizing social issues and submitting to the club of the great five. The pentarchy did recipe, transferring to the G5 and G7, G8, G20, thus celebrating the Matins still oligarchic control, but skills extended to lock up the game globalized in a census democracy, where only the rich have the right to express themselves, the other winner in the suffering that of is taire

Governance probably absurd, because ineffective: is it out of the G8 and G20 except science to forget his disagreements and its impotence Senseless governance, because if the G20 brings together 90 of the power, it covers only a small part of the suffering and conflict global: yet another brand of globalization is to give low a nuisance and blocking faculty with which it takes now. Derisory governance, insofar as it is not making progress in the regulation of global social issues, is opened only weakly to the social actors, as in the social treatment of world conflict. Today's world resembles our nations of yesterday. At the end of the 19th century, they came in the modern world including that their stability was dependent on a minimum social integration and the working classes access to citizenship: the multilateralism of tomorrow will be the same thing with large global balances and rogue nations.