There
is a common belief among some diverse communities that God created
earth in seven days. On the other hand, there is one uniform belief
among scientists that earth was created by big-bang theory. The
primary intention of the theory is to deny the very existence of God
as a creator. Consequently, the very simplest form of existence of
humanity on planet earth has created two distinct schools of
thoughts. There are those who have blind faith in God and follow
their scriptures wholeheartedly while there are others who have their
own way of understanding about creation of earth, and use science to
justify their rationality against faithful. The above conflicting of
ideas can be incorporated at any given moment of human history or
unfolding current events. Today's current event is about force of
globalization which has its root in humankind history. It goes back
to seventeenth century, when European nations initiated Peace of
Westphalia and developed system of international relations among
themselves, and establishing secular states. Religion no longer was a
key ingredient in decision-making process of a state. The religious
establishments transformed their identities as political rulers to a
social gathering; such as, Sunday worship, wedding or funeral
matters. Religion was no longer an instrumental element to shape
politics. This window of opportunity opened a new prospective for
Hugo Grotius to think about international relations among European
nations, and became optimistic about future of humanity. He believed
in good nature of humanity minus evil characteristic of humanity. He
assumed human were forming key components of states. Thereby, it
would be conclusive that nature of states would be good and wanted to
build a mutual relationship with other nations for their own
self-interest. It appeared that Dark Age of Europe was coming to a
final end. Hugo Grotius did not share same value as political
philosopher Thomas Hobbs, who deemed nature of a state to be corrupt
and barbaric, and human life to be short lived due to violence, and
was entangled in spider web of ongoing brute force of aggressor.
Indeed, today's world is divided between Hugo Grotius and Thomas
Hobbs vision of humanity, and nature of a state. Today, there are
scholars who are cherishing Hugo Grotius optimistic view of building
consensual international relations among nations, and avoiding war
which can be reinforced by wide spread of Multinational Corporations
around the world, as well as, sub-regional entities like European
Nations would be prime example how Europe nations were leading the
world and rest of the world were lagging behind Europe. However,
there was another dark side in today's humanity and failure of proper
international relations among Africa nations, as well as, Middle
Eastern nations. They were lamenting Thomas Hobbs vision of harsh
reality of humanity. These precious lives are short lived by a sudden
and unexpected violence at hands of their rulers who are puppets of
the West. Once, the Western nations relinquished their support for
these tyrant rulers. These victims do not accept their current living
conditions and are forming their own militia groups to save their
lives from daily degradation of their rulers. Once, these Iron Fist
tyrants are removed as head of states, it creates a power vacuum.
Now, it is blessing moment for corrupt men to fill the vacuum, and
exploit every moment for their own advantage and place others in
disadvantage position. Once again, a nation paid high price for
democratization of its political apparatus; it failed to become a
democratic nation, and falls into category of oligarchy state. The
aim of this paper is to examining international relation theories and
key players of global governance have deep impact in this global
village, exploring the US foreign policy of 'Regime Change' in Iran
back in 1979 unleashed rein of terror to rest of the world, and
discussing how formation of 'Transnational Civil-Society' having
impact on the theocratic regime in Iran.
This
portion of the paper is examining international relation theories and
key players of global governance have deep impact in this global
village. The world that is populated today is not same as the one
economist John Hobson experienced in 1902. Hobson asserted how
European nations exploited weaker nations due to economic reason as
business leaders had surplus, and it was not generating profit. These
business leaders in field of finance, investors, shippers, and
exporters persuaded political leaders to expand geographically to
exploit labors, as well as, raw materials. In this moment, European
nations began to expand themselves on map. Even, Belgium took part
in exploiting African nations, and acquired Congo. The United States
used corporate to exploit unskilled workers in developing nations,
and exploiting raw materials in developing nations like in South
America. Eventually, the Western nations decided to divide lands
arbitrary, which is the reason to see straight line on map. As a
result, tribes that had nothing in common with other tribes and may
had long history of conflict with each other. Now they were forced to
live in one nation. It would be impossible to create a stable central
state. It caused a nation always remain at state of conflict and
never see a light of peace. In addition, Immanuel Wallerstein
(1974-1979) claimed since sixteenth century a 'World System' has been
developing and interwoven nations to each other on premise of
economic and political ties. Wallerstein divided nations in four
groups. Group one were 'Core Nations' that they were first capitalist
like Britain, France, Holland and Germany. Group two were
'Semi-Periphery' nations around the Mediterranean, and their
economies would depend cumbersome to trade with core nations. Group
three were 'Periphery Nations', these were eastern European nations
that they were selling cash crops to core nations. Last group was
'External Area' nations that they were left out of capitalist
economic system in Africa and Asia. According to Wallerstein
capitalist economy system was on pursue of expansion and resulted in
capitalist world economy. The 'Dependency Theory' would support
Wallerstein claim that developing nations were not able to become
developed nations due to lack of industrialization and constantly
being subject to exploitation by core nations. John Kenneth
Galbraith (1979) a social economist would argue developing nations
were en-routed to 'Culture of Poverty' since there was little room
for risk, and remained in notion of tried-and-true. If there was an
error, it would lead to their demise. Plus, religion reinforced
concept of fatalism. The combination of above circumstances made the
developing nations remain as developing nations. On other side of the
spectrum, there was Japan which had fatalism and after World War Two,
Japan lost its colonies. However, today Japan is a success story
which beat all the odds. Thus, dependency theory cannot be deeming as
a final light to illuminate darkness of the developing nations. It
would provide partial explanation for misfortune of developing
nations.
Looking
at a glass half full from window of Hugo Grotius that states were
rational and law-abiding. Grotius could see light at end of the
tunnel that Europe would live in peace and harmony. In addition,
Immanuel Kant asserted democracy and peace were essential ingredients
for European nations to co-exist with another and not to pose
themselves to danger of war. In early twentieth century, Woodrow
Wilson stamped hallmark of idealism that human nature was good, and
social progress was possible. Moreover, Wilson was pioneer of 'League
of Nations' to lead the world in peace. Ironically, World War Two,
Holocaust, and the Cold War occurred and defeat purpose of League of
Nations. The concept of idealism transformed in liberalism which is
focused on spread of universal value; such as, peace, welfare and
justice which can be done by allowing formation of 'Global
Governance' to flourish itself. The Global Governance is composed of
individuals and institutions to interact with one another to manage
their common affairs. There are key player in the Global Governance
system; such as, States, Intergovernmental Organization (IGO),
Nongovernmental Organization (NGO), Experts, Multinational
Corporations (MNC) which are governed by international laws and
rules. The IGO, NGO, and MNC would undermine sovereignty of a nation
by making decision for a nation base on legitimacy issue. The above
entities were not elected by people and did not have consent of
people to act on their behalf. The above entities would provide
expertise and knowledge in a certain areas. In most cases, it can be
claimed that those areas of expertise would benefit them and may not
be beneficial for others. In case of Multinational Corporations that
they set-up plants in developing nations, and exploited workers in
developing nations. The MNC would avoid labor laws, and would pay
extremely low wages to workers and would sell their products at high
price in the West. The MNC would not require following any kind of
rules, as long as, it would satisfy the host country that it was
creating job and reducing unemployment rate in that country. The host
country would protect the MNC. One more time, the West is able to
hold on developing nations and not allowing them to make progress.
There
was theory of functionalism which would be similar to liberalism.
Functionalism explains that governance would be natural to emerge
since there was basic element of needs between state and people. Jean
Monnet “father of Europe” believed nationalism would become less
relevant in Europe and making war against one another would become
unthinkable. The above thought would explain why the European Union
exists. This theory had many fallacies in area of economic and
national security. Still, nations are interested on their own
economic well being. In area of national security, nations would not
share information with one another. It is true that there is Interpol
which is acting as a global police. Still, Interpol requires
information from local law enforcers to act on behalf of that local
authority.
This
portion of the paper is exploring the US foreign policy of regime
change in Iran back in 1979 unleashed rein of terror to rest of the
world. The US may claim that it would like to export its democratic
values to other nations. It was 1978 when former democrat US
president Jimmy Carter besmirched King of Kings Mohammad Reza Pahlavi
for violation of Human Rights. The King in his book “Answer to
History” stated that He allowed International Red Cross to come
to Iran to investigate Human Rights violation. The International Red
Cross came to Iran and investigated plight of political prisoners in
Iran, and made some recommendations with regard to conditions of
prisoners. His Majesty followed those recommendations to improve
quality of prisoners. However, Carter was not satisfy with the
outcome, and pressed hard on Human Rights issue. In addition, these
political prisoners were terrorists that they engaged in bank
robberies, assassination of foreign dignitaries. They were by no
means peaceful. In Guadeloupe summit, France, Britain, and the US
came to a mutual agreement to topple the King/Shah, and replace Him
with Khomeini. The BBC provided platform for Khomeini to foment a
revolution in Iran, and the US Medias bashed the King at every
opportune moment for false charges which did not have merit. In
January 1979 the King decided to live Iran to stop the bloodshed. As
His Majesty was living Iran, He said Iran will become a cemetery. In
February of 1979 Khomeini returned to Iran after 15 years of living
in exile, and when a reported asked him in plane how do you feel
coming back to Iran after 15 years? Khomeini said nothing. He had no
feeling for coming back to Iran after 15 years of exile. He was
puppet of the US. According to author Mike Evans “Jimmy Carter
the Liberal Left and World Chaos” Carter spent $150 million for
Khomeini in order to topple the Pahlavi Dynasty in Iran. From the
time, the King left Iran, Russia invaded Afghanistan, and continuous
unrest in the Middle East. The Western nations are living in fear of
terrorism. Perhaps, the US is so keen about Human Rights and
democracy as Benjamin R. Barber stated in “Jihad vs McWorld”
the US should “Fed Ex the Bill of Rights to Sir Lanka”. Why
should the US stop at Sir Lanka, the US should make an immediate
demand from certain nations to implement this Bill of Rights in their
constitutions and if they fail to do so, there would be a serious
consequences by night fall as NATO airforce and infantry would
delivery them the Bill of Rights and would hand over their countries
to fanatic Muslims which happened in Libya and Egypt.
This
portion of the paper is discussing how formation of 'Transnational
Civil-Society' having impact on the theocratic regime in Ian's
domestic affair. The Transnational Civil-Society means that all
organization and associations exist outside of the state and market.
The regime in Iran is not immune from outside force. As a matter of
fact, it has been proven several times, Iranian diaspora to interfere
with Iran's domestic affairs and prevented death sentence. There were
cases of Nazanin Afshin-Jam and Dr. Ramin Jahanbegloo. In 2005, Ms.
Afshin-Jam became aware of a girl who was living in Iran and was
subject to death sentence by stoning. Ms. Afshin-Jam is an affluent
person, she won Ms. Canada title, and was well known person in media.
She was able to get attention of public, and drafted an online
petition and asked public to sign it. In addition, there were
politicians from Liberal Party, as well as, Conservative Party
decided to support her cause. Eventually, the regime in Iran commuted
the death sentence to no punishment whatsoever. In the final case, it
was Dr. Ramin Jahanbegloo who was writing about civil-disobedience to
topple tyrannical regimes. When he was in Iran, the authority
apprehended him under criminal charge of sedition. In this moment,
one petition appeared online, and people some the petition and asked
for release of Dr. Jahanbegloo from prison. The regime in Iran was
facing pressure from outside world to release Jahanbegloo.
Subsequently, the regime cracked under outside forced and released
him. Currently, he is at the York University and is teaching
political science.
Ending
this paper by summarizing three main body of this essay on area of
international relation theories and key players of global governance
have deep impact in this global village, exploring the US foreign
policy of 'Regime Change' in Iran back in 1979 unleashed rein of
terror to rest of the world, and discussing how formation of
'Transnational Civil-Society' having impact on the theocratic regime
in Iran. There is no one theory which can explain current affairs of
international relations. However, there is one thing certain that the
Western nations apply Liberalism or Functionalism principles, when
time comes to engage with core nations. When core nations engage with
periphery, semi-periphery and external-area nations. The dynamic of
relationship becomes dependency theory. Keeping the above groups in
disadvantage point, and having hegemonic stability on those three
groups. In 1979, the US foreign policy of regime change in Iran
brought rein of terror to the world because it is one way to keep
Middle East weak. This planet is becoming a global village due
advancement of communication. Thus, it is no longer a civil-society,
but transnational civil-society.
