africa.chinadaily.com.cn
BRICS+ Diversity Undermined by Global Conflicts: Call for UN Reform
A BRICS+ seminar in Rio de Janeiro highlighted the cultural diversity of its member nations, but the author warns of the threats posed by global conflicts and proposes UN reforms to empower civil society in global governance.
- How do ongoing global conflicts undermine the value of cultural exchange and cooperation?
- The author connects the cultural diversity of BRICS+ to the fragility of global peace, citing ongoing conflicts like the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, the near-war between India and Pakistan, and the increasing militarization by NATO. These conflicts highlight the urgent need for stronger global governance.
- What is the primary threat to the potential for cooperation among the culturally diverse nations of BRICS+?
- The BRICS+ nations, showcasing immense cultural diversity, convened in Rio de Janeiro. A pre-summit photo exhibition highlighted the unique heritage of these nations, including Russia, India, China, Egypt, Iran, and others, underscoring the potential for cultural exchange and cooperation. However, this potential is threatened by ongoing global conflicts.
- What concrete reforms are proposed to strengthen global governance and promote peace through cultural diplomacy?
- The essay proposes radical UN reforms to empower civil society organizations and marginalized communities in global decision-making. This would shift the focus from military power to cultural diplomacy, promoting peace and understanding through intercultural dialogue and cooperation. The author suggests that the UN should truly represent the "united peoples of the world.
Cognitive Concepts
Framing Bias
The narrative is framed to highlight the dangers of war and the urgent need for global governance reform. The opening description of the BRICS+ photo exhibition establishes a tone emphasizing cultural diversity and the fragility of peace, setting the stage for a subsequent condemnation of US, Israeli, and other actions deemed detrimental to global peace. The emphasis on the suffering caused by violence overshadows any consideration of the potential complexities and justifications behind those actions. The conclusion emphasizes the author's vision of a reformed UN system, reinforcing the overarching message of the need for change.
Language Bias
The author uses strong emotive language to describe conflicts and violence, such as "horrors of a new type of aerial warfare," "brazenly violate international law," and "completely destroy Gaza." These phrases carry strong negative connotations and lack neutrality. The description of various landmarks is also framed in a way to emphasize their cultural significance and evoke a sense of history, implicitly contrasting this with the current global political climate. More neutral alternatives could be employed, such as describing events factually rather than using emotionally charged language.
Bias by Omission
The article focuses heavily on the threats to peace and the need for global governance reform, neglecting a balanced portrayal of the actions and motivations of all involved parties. While the condemnation of Hamas's actions is included, the extensive criticism of US and Israeli actions lacks counterarguments or alternative perspectives. The positive aspects of global cooperation and cultural exchange are emphasized, while potential downsides or limitations are not discussed. Omission of alternative solutions to global conflict beyond strengthening the UN is also notable.
False Dichotomy
The article presents a false dichotomy between 'might is right' and the ideals of peace and cultural understanding. It simplifies the complexities of international relations, portraying a clear-cut conflict between forces of violence and forces promoting peace, ignoring the nuances of international politics and power dynamics. The suggestion of suspending UN membership for Security Council members violating the charter presents an oversimplified solution to complex geopolitical issues.
Sustainable Development Goals
The article highlights numerous conflicts and instances of international law violation, undermining peace and global governance. The weakening of the UN and the rise of unilateral military actions directly contradict the goals of this SDG. The call for UN reform underscores the need for strengthened institutions to prevent such actions.