Social Justice in an Open World: The Role of the United Nations
and then at the level of the whole. This has not proved an effective way of reconciling the interests of Member States. Rather, it prompts the Assembly to retreat into generalities, abandoning any serious effort to take action."ll One might assert that the previously alleged "tyranny of the majority" has been replaced by a "tyranny of the minority" in the age of globalization.
2.3 The developmentalaspect of internationaljustice: a legitimate concern? The various arguments advanced to support the legitimacy of an inquiry into the developmental aspect of international justice may be summarized as follows: The State is no longer the main actor on the international scene, and its relevance will continue to diminish as the process of globalization gains momentum. Transnational actors-mainly corporations and banks but also international organizations and social and religious institutions and movements-are playing an increasingly important role. Modern information and communication technologies (KT) ignore borders and national sovereignty. National policies, including those aimed at addressing inequalitiesthat contribute to poverty and other social ills, are routinely bypassed and overridden by the decisions of global institutions regulating international finance and trade. The most powerful countries can still impose their views and exert their influence on others, but even they do not seem to be willing or able to control the transnational forces that have been unleashed on the world. Many States are economically, financially and politically weak and consequently have little or no say in international affairs affecting their development. As the Westphalian order is collapsing, there is no point in being concerned with the equality of its members. Those interested in the pursuit of international justice should work on developing processes and institutions that could regulate and balance the interplay of transnational forces rather than remaining preoccupied with inequalities among entities that are destined to be marginalized and ultimately disappear. Along similar lines, it may be argued that there is an inherent futility in working to achieve greater equality between States in terms of development when there is no authority able to enforce measures that would ensure the realization of such an objective. Demands for justice have traditionally been addressed to leaders, Governments and other entities with recognized authority and responsibility for the security and welfare of the groups concerned. The United Nations does not possess such authority. lnternational organizations with greater power and influence in economic and financial matters, in particular the World Trade Organization ( W O ) , the World Bank and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), have different mandates. A world government with an enforceable mandate to ensure equality and justice between its constituents is not on the immediate horizon.