Under which conditions should a supranational or international organisation be allowed to possess which operational power?
For private companies, we (don't really but are supposed to) have antitrust laws. For international organisations, we don't have any substantial such law to my knowledge. Feel free to inform me otherwise.
Meanwhile, I see at least one international organisation (IO) building lean and extensive operational capabilities, including from biotech labs to AI to satellites to a computing center to what seems like a global intelligence service to all sorts of technical and quality linchpins, to registries and data collection, in addition to normative and convening powers, as well as a participant-going-concern aspect and newfound authorities such as on rating and market attribution or roles such as strategic consulting. And so on.
We're talking infrastructure, equipment, production and value planning, and potential for coercion.
Meanwhile the digitization and liquification of everything provides a substrate.
An IO may soon be able to operationally "single-handedly" run the world and impose actions top-down onto states rather than convene them.
In addition, the question is up in the air as to whether the financial struggles of IOs in general mean a decisional takeover by private actors rather than a fading.
Hence the question:
"Under which conditions should a supranational or international organisation be allowed to possess which operational power?"
There are many dimensions to the contents of this discussion.
To that end, I'd like to ask for your initial inputs about this important question. You're welcome - states, investors / investment intermediaries, big tech, other private sector, IOs, academia, the military, NGOs as well as others - to comment here or email me at [email protected]
Looking forward.
