I do not think that the One-World government advocates are actually very concerned about the current state of affairs in the world. Along with the failing economies of the West and the proliferation of methods for states to invade the privacy of the citizen, failed "governance" and terror groups may well be exactly what they want. They want the system to break down so that they can justify their next move.
Mavericks such as Edward Snowden are though the ones that they fear as it is by their efforts that people are becoming aware of the looming threat of totalitarianism.
It is interesting that the writer, Harlan Ullman, is referring to the system of national government established by the Treaty of Westphalia to illustrate the One-World argument that the nation-state is failing. In Mein Kampf, Hitler railed against that treaty as another attempt to keep the German people disunited and unable to realize their potential. I would think that writers of his ilk would prefer to cite the work of the Congress of Vienna, later developments in the 19th century, and WWI as these had more of a permanent effect on the map of modern Europe.
The building of the official consensus that the nation-state is a failed concept has been active for a long time. Sovereign nations have long been labeled as being as obsolete as the city-states of ancient Greece since at least the early 1970's. Groups such as the Trilateral Commission, The Bilderberg Grpup, the Council on Foreign Relations, and others with major support from the Rockefellers et al have made it their mission to convince public that worldwide governance is the only viable option.*
The term "governance" is a loaded one. It refers not so much to the type of order that should be maintained by national governments, but more so of the worldwide type and includes policy-making influence of non-governmental organizations (NGO's). In their world, nations - or what is left of sovereign nations, will have to surrender much of their decision-making (including on domestic issues) not only to a worldwide governing body, but also to private groups that are financed by oligarchs, plutocrats, and governments like China who are posed to be the wealthiest.
He does make his point clear; the final implementation of the New World Order may not be a cakewalk, and the catalyst that may be needed for the goal to be brought to fruition is a catastrophe of epic proportions:
"Unspecific warnings last week about an al-Qaida terrorist plot were taken very seriously.
With the anniversary of September 11th looming and the tragic killing of U.S. diplomats in Benghazi, Libya, last year still open political wounds in Washington, it was unsurprising that the United States, Britain, and France ordered the closing of a score embassies and posts throughout North Africa and the Middle East and issued travel warnings for the region. In the United States initially, there was general bipartisan support for the closings.......
In simple terms, al-Qaida is symptomatic of far greater changes in the structure of the international system. The major enemy and adversary are no longer states bent on disrupting or dominating the system despite those who see China as a future foe.
Instead, the more immediate danger rests in the dramatic empowerment of individuals and groups, for good and sadly evil, often lumped together as "non-state actors."
[Note that Snowden and others are compared to people who send anthrax in the mail to harm people]
Edward Snowden, Bradley Manning, countless "hackers" and anonymous people mailing anthrax-filled letters whose actions have indeed constituted real threats and systemic disruptions are among the former. Al-Qaida and other radical groups reflect the latter.
In essence, the 365 year-old Westphalian system that placed sovereign states as the centerpieces of international politics is being tested and in some cases made obsolete by the empowerment of individuals and non-state actors. As former national security adviser Brent Scowcroft observes, global politics has entered a post-Westphalian era. But very few have taken note and fewer have acted on this realization.
The fundamental cause of this empowerment is the diffusion of all forms of power writ large commonly called "globalization," accelerated by the information revolution and instantaneous global communications and the real and perceived fragilities and weaknesses of states to intervention, interference and disruption by non-traditional actors.
September 11th could become the demarcation point of this new era much as 1648 and the Treaty of Westphalia marked the beginning of the state-centric system of the international order.
While the analogy is loose, it won't take centuries for the effects of globalization and the end or at least the transition of the Westphalian era to take hold.
Beyond this inflection point in international politics, still unabsorbed and misunderstood by most governments and people, a second reality complicates taking effective action in what could truly be a "new world order," the description coined by U.S. President George H.W. Bush after the implosion of the Soviet Union more than two decades ago.
Failed and failing government from Afghanistan to Zimbabwe with Brussels and Washington in between is the largest collective impediment to the betterment of mankind.
Without an extraordinary crisis, little is likely to be done to reverse or limit the damage imposed by failed or failing governance. The United States is Exhibit A although there are far too many competitors for that title.
However, the changing Westphalian system can and must be addressed if there is to be any chance of success in containing, reducing and eliminating the dangers posed by newly empowered non-state actors...........
The first step as the Westphalian system faces profound redefinition is understanding and recognizing that these shifts are under way. From that appreciation, specific concepts and ideas can be fashioned to help guide us on this journey.
The path will be difficult and tortuous. Politics and ideological preferences will confuse and distort clear vision. The tendency to overreact, as occurred after September 11th and the Snowden and Manning leaks, will collide with budget realities in which a great deal less will be spent on national security. And because of the pernicious nature of the U.S. system of government [This is striking as he specifically targets the US system of government] , finding institutions with the objectivity, courage and perseverance to chart this new unknown won't be easy.
Yet this must be done."