ABSTRACT: The lack of traditional "consent" has put the U.N. machine in a crisis. After the growth of the period of "decolonization", there has been a series of failures: the only thing that counted was the balance of the "opposite blocs". After the fall of the Berlin Wall everyone expected the U.N. to become the "panacea for all evils". And yet, despite the deceptions, this is the time to affirm the supremacy of a strong "international regulation" with adequate means to intervene. The "Transnational Party" must therefore be created to "operate primarily on these objectives".

(1994 - IL QUOTIDIANO RADICALE, 12 November 1993)

The machine of the United Nations has broken down, and it's hard to start it again because it has been inoperative for too long owing to lack of consent. That was the fuel which the victorious states of World War II had imagined they would put into it to achieve the government of the international community.

Only the period of the decolonization, where almost one hundred new states achieved independence, had generated a surge of democratization for the organization, through the quest for a new International Economic World Order. As we know, this quest gradually subsided during the '70s, and basically remained unfulfilled also because of the failure of the development aid policy.

Peacekeeping interventions in those years were very few, and the political government of the International Community was practically non-existent. The administration of the "international public affairs" was only the fragile point of balance of the opposed blocs and of the crossed vetoes. This, despite the fact that the international characteristics of the common values and interests become more and more evident, was proven by he environmental question.

The end of the Cold War and the symbolic collapse of the Berlin Wall sparked (largely emotional and unmotivated) hopes in the public opinion that this perfect but scarcely used machine of the United Nations could become the panacea of all evils and of all unsolved questions in the various continents.

The delusion that followed these expectations was inevitable. The recent attempts in the direction of an organized intervention of the United Nations for peace maintenance have been badly organized and devoid of any actual influence on inhuman and tragic conflicts. Is it legitimate or desirable for someone to try, out of the consequent frustration, to mothball the only possible government machine for the "international public affairs", renouncing an ideal and expectation of democracy, and entrusting everything to the formation of new balances of force? We think not.

This is the time, in the current dimension of the international problems, to affirm that the sovereignty of a democratic state is meaningless without an international regulation limiting the violations, excesses and incapacity of government. The political action should mobilize in this direction, But, among the disinterest of the political world, the only hope is in the influence operated by a political force that operate primarily on these objectives: a transnational party, which must try to insert both a plan for peacekeeping forces and enhancement of democracy such as the Permanent Tribunal for International Crimes in the empty shell of the United Nations.