Iran's threat to Israel. There is a solution.

As Congress, President Obama, and Israel considers finding a resolution to Iran’s genocidal ambitions, ISIS, Russia’s violent expansion effort, or more nation state failures as a result of US interventions or endorsement of repressive regimes requires, perhaps they should look outside the current foreign policy tool box.  Who can doubt that a new approach is needed in the name of national security and the protection of innocent lives?   A proven workable solution actually exists.  It’s called ‘the rule of law’ instead of the law of force.   Or, more well defined, a world federation.   

Religious extremism or fear of violent extremists appears to play a primary role in each of the threat dilemma’s mentioned above.   From this perspective, establishing a world federation could do most to greatly diminish the misuse of any religion or nationalism to promote violent extremism (or terrorism -- more accurately labeled 'crime against humanity').  By wise definition, a world federation would be fundamentally secularist by:

1.            Maintaining separation of church and state.

2.            Protecting the religious rights of all religious believers, faith converters, AND non believers (Irreligiosity).

3.            Protecting the human rights (including access to primary and secondary education, adequate nutrition, basic health services, economic opportunity and political representation)

Empowering ‘we the people’ with human rights would do most to reduce the number of individuals turning to violent extremism/mass murder.   And it is only the powerful in nation states that stand in the way of this rational solution.

In fact, the primary cause of global violence and abuse of human rights on almost any level is the nation state. The current UN confederation of states essentially cements this abusive dominance of states’ rights over human rights into place.  And it has since the Westphalia treaty over 500 years ago.

The world has changed.  And it’s changing faster.  The power, affordability and global reach of technology has greatly accelerated such change in the last two decades.  Today, more people and nations have access to WMD via an array of dual-use technologies making them capable of unprecedented mass murder (or mass disruption) than at any time in human history.   That access, affordability and empowerment curve will continue to accelerate while our system of global governance remains the same.  And worse yet, our national governments remain focused on national interests instead of maintaining the freedoms and security for all their citizens.   Independent nations and agencies are by definition incapable of dealing with interdependent sources of risk.

In a move to federate the world's nations it’s possible that the only clutches of people drawn to violent extremism would be those individuals and governments that stand firm believing national or religious sovereignty should remain dominant over the protection of all inalienable human rights.

In that context it would be extremely wise to redefine terrorism, as a crime against humanity.  The threatening of ‘we the people’s’ fundamental rights to ‘life, liberty and the pursuit of happiness’, is a form of extremism that should be outlawed globally.   Those individuals, governments, or religions that insist on the status quo essentially endorse mass murderers.   Many have already committed such crimes against humanity in efforts to maintain their nationalist/religious right.  It’s called war.

As long as the UN confederation continues to guarantee national sovereignty (the rights of nation states to do as they please) over the rights of “we the people”  (our inalienable rights to speak and assemble freely, and be free from want and fear)  nation states will persist in imprisoning and torturing the innocent, starting wars, ignoring treaties, committing genocide, enforcing lethal sanctions, polluting our environment and fueling violent extremists with such blatant injustices.   Only a world federation that puts human rights above states’ rights can ensure both freedom and security for all.