Social Justice in an Open World: The Role of the United Nations
sion and guardian of the sovereign equality of States, an which the contemporary understanding of international relations is based. The Charter also acknow-ledges that the world is characterized by a very unequal distribution of power, and therefore of responsibility, and it is from this fact that the concept of international equity emerges. The principles of equality and equity at the international level have also guided United Nations efforts to promote development, which is defined in the Preamble of the Charter as "social progress and better standards of life in larger freedom". The presumption is that international cooperation is a moral imperative, necessary for the reduction of inequalities between States. In this context, equality demands the participation of all States in the debates and negotiati~nsrequired for effective international cooperation, while equity requires that the more affluent members of the international community express their solidarity through the provision of assistance, first through multilateral channels, to the poorer members. Equity further demands that international cooperation be built upon on processes, rules and agreements that give preference and advantages to the weakest, and not based on the "equal" treatment of partners that are, objectively speaking, very unequal. Recalling these essential principles of international equality and equity embodied in the culture and mandate of the United Nations evokes the difficulties and uncertainties the Organization is currently facing. Each Member State still has one vote, but the General Assembly does not have much influence on decisions shaping world affairs. When critical issues are raised within this forum, the practice of securing a consensus-prevalent since the beginning of the 1980s--gives de facto veto power to the most influential members. The Security Council has become the only '"visible" arm of the Organization; reforms that would establish a more equitable composition and decision-making process have long been pending. Contempt for international law and the conviction that violence and war are legitimate and effective ways to pursue interests, resolve differences and maintain security have resurfaced with formidable strength. The related idea that raw competition between all players in all domains is a good and workable organizing principle for the world economy and polity has also gained considerable ground in recent decades. Those voices on the international scene calling for an open world market and for the integration of all countries in the global economy through free trade and the free movement of capital have been louder and more effective than the voices arguing for a more prudent, orderly and participatory construction of an open and interdependent world community of nations. Solidarity among unequal members of the international community tends to be considered a "soft" "social" value that should motivate humanitarian actions but certainly not be a factor in the development of an efficient and dynamic world economy. Within the United Nations itself, forces representing narrow national and class interests and views have precluded demo-