I'm a writer and painter and this is my thing.
Published on April 4, 2011 By cassiangrey In International

I've had far too many thoughts roaming around in my head lately.  Most of them are useless, in so far as that I can't do anything with them.  The terrible part is that they're driving me crazy; keeping me up at night or just breaking my train of thought.  A few nights ago I couldn't sleep at all because I was busy writing my Presidential acceptance speech.  Then when I was through with that I developed a revolutionary international law.

Here's how it goes (remember I'm neither a politician, lawyer or well versed in international law):

The basic idea is that each country should be responsible for the actions of those citizens who act outside of government sanctioned activities.  In more basic terms UN member nations who's citizens cause, enable or through speech inspire violence in another country should be required to police those citizens.

The intended result would be to hamper terrorist activities that are launched on foreign soil.  While the actually locating of said criminals would be more theory than fact, it's more about governments being required to stop such activities.  One of the bonuses would be that speech calling for criminal activities against foreign governments.  It would cause the ideas to go "underground" but at the same time seriously limiting the number of people who are reach but such speech.  This law could be extended toward the drug trade as well.

To help with these situations the UN would institute a police branch the works somewhere between the military peace keeping force and investigators.  The interference of this branch would not be compulsory at first but an aid that governments can call on if needed.  If the UN finds or believes that the law is not being properly kept then the police branch would be sent in.  Now the initial reaction would most likely be that no country should be governed by any one but itself.  While this may be true the positive ramification out weigh the patriotic angst.  When you're the leader of a country filled with millions of people you find it hard to trust anyone else.  There is to much at stake.  But a law like this would serve as a stepping stone.  As a leader I would feel much more open to any country who promised to stop any of it's citizens who threatened or acted against my country in a private war.  Not only that but the prevention of these activities in my own country serves my purposes as well.  We can not hope to unite the entire planet under one rule and on law but we can work to function as a cohesive system that supports, gives and gets when needed.

With all this said one of the draw backs would be some government abusing this law.  Using it to silence victims or dissidents who speak out against ruthless dictator.  The solution would be in the police branch investigating the situation.  That however wouldn't be enough the UN would have to take a larger part in overseeing governmental abuses in its member nations.  That is something I don't think they are willing to do seeing as how they most often prefer sanctions rather than intervention.  Then again this (to any non-American) sounds exactly like what all the other countries are complaining about, America starting wars everywhere it walks.  The thing about it is that we as a global community are required to maintain a certain level care for people all over the world.  Just as we lend aid to countries damaged in natural disaster we intervene in political affairs with equal destructive capabilities.


Comments
No one has commented on this article. Be the first!
Meta
Views
» 243
Comments
» 0
Category
Sponsored Links