David Held lays out a detailed design for an “alternative” global order to the one promoted by the United States. He vigorously rejects the approach to the world of George W. Bush and instead offers a social democratic agenda, which has three main parts: economic, political, and legal. For each part, Held provides both the overarching principles that ought to guide us and a considerable list of specific steps that should advance his design. Readers should not stop reading just because the list of values that Held beseeches us to pursue is as impressive as it is lofty: He calls on us to uphold the principles of equal moral worth, equal liberty, equal political status of human beings, legitimate political authority “on all levels,” and a “deeper” commitment to social justice, among other such values. He buttresses his agenda with a list of measures to be undertaken both in the short and in the longer run, most of which deserve careful attention. It is here that ultimately the rubber does not meet the road.

Regarding the global economy, Held favors first and foremost more regulation of global markets and more help for economic development, as well as the introduction of mandatory standards to protect labor and the environment and accord developing nations “privileged” access to the markets. On the political front, he calls for basic reforms of the existing institutions, in the short order. This would entail making the UN Security Council more representative, strengthening the negotiation capacity of developing nations, and enhancing “parliamentary scrutiny of regional and international bodies” (p. 164). In the longer run, he favors democratization of national and supranational governing bodies, the establishment of a global tax, and a world water court, among other reforms. As far as international law is concerned, Held calls for the convening of international representatives to “reconnect” security concerns with the human rights agenda “through the consolidation of international humanitarian law” (p. 165) and other such measures.

The reader may well have gained by now a sense of both the values that guide Held and the steps he believes we ought to embrace in order to advance these values. Just to be sure, here is one more telling example. He writes that the “the pursuit of impartial, rule-based free trade throughout the current round of negotiations is urgent. The trade round that begun in Doha needs to be a successful development round—one that brings real benefits to poor countries and the least well off” (p. 59).

The book does not seek to provide an analysis of the social and political forces that might bring about the basic changes to foreign policy and the global order that Held so strongly and eloquently favors. While Bush (and his allies) are blamed for following the opposite, misbegotten track, it is never suggested that if he (and Blair) were replaced, say, by John Kerry (and Gordon Brown), this would suffice to keep multinational corporations in check, make people dig much more deeply into their pockets to provide international aid, support international courts, and so on. Take just one of the less controversial suggestions that the author embraces (I am not saying it is not controversial): making the Security Council more representative. It is not accidental that the current structure persists. There are major powers that favor its present form or at least find it vastly more in line with their interests and values than any of the suggested alternatives. Why would France and Britain, for instance, agree to be replaced by a European Union representative? What would motivate or force China to welcome India as a fully equal member?

I do not believe that it is proper to chide an author for a book that he has not written and the reviewer wishes that he had. All I am suggesting is that for those who share Held's values and agenda, another volume(s) is called for—one that draws on a Freudian (or Marxist) analysis. Freud assumed that there are not accidental personal conducts. They are all expressions of a subterranean structure that is not visible to the naked eye and can be changed only through a difficult process. The same, Marx showed, holds for societies. It is not accidental that farm subsidies (which Held wishes to eliminate) continue to persist, for powerful countries pay little mind to weak ones and so on. Those who seek change had better write a companion to Held's book. Its subject would be how to mobilize the forces that would change the subterranean structures, which in turn would allow for the modification of many of the “surface” phenomena. I am not saying that history is predetermined; rather, that if one seeks to alter its course, one first needs to understand what drives it and how it can be deflected or new forces be introduced into the matrix.

Held does suggest that global networks of people could form shared norms and embody them in constitutions, which then would be implemented. How much of a force they can be, as they face all the other forces that are not about to fade away, is a critical question one must ponder in assessing the future of the social democratic agenda he holds out. As I see it, a global governing body is being fashioned, but one that is light years away from what Held—and I—dream about. The United States, propelled by a new force, terrorism with a global reach, has responded by cobbling together a global police authority, which is expanding to include the limitation of nuclear proliferation and also provide a small measure of humanitarian interventions. Many nation-states were initially formed to provide security, but they later expanded their missions and their legitimacy. The question for this new global design is how we can move this authority in a similar direction.

One may argue that by providing a detailed agenda for those who favor social justice, equality, and peace (among other virtues), Held energizes their endeavors. Moreover, it might be said that such social democratic (or liberal, in the American context) exhortations have carried considerable weight in the past. Granted, they are one force that drives the provision of foreign aid (although much of it is deflected to arms purchases), made Bush turn to the United Nations for approval for invading Iraq, and so on. However, these forces clearly do not suffice to move the world anywhere near where Held and his fellow travelers believe it ought to be. And a considerable case can be made that over the last years—especially under the impact of terrorism—they have grown weaker, rather than stronger. For progress to occur, one needs to find the equivalent of the proletariat in Marxist analysis, one or more social groups that can be mobilized (or form new coalitions) on the side of the favored changes. These need not be economic classes; in effect, they often are ethic groups (which were mobilized very successfully in wars of national liberation). And they do need the kind of normative case that Held is making to mobilize them. However, in this book I did not find the needed historical carrier(s).

Finally, as Global Covenant is largely normative, one may ask about the standing of the values it promotes. Should one favor a global government under current conditions? Thus, should one make the United Nations more representative—even if many of those representatives that are to be accorded with much more power represent tyrants and not their people? Should we rather heed a Council of Democracies? What would be an equitable global distribution of wealth—would it be the same for those who work hard as for those who would rather spend their days studying their scriptures?

Held charted an agenda that deserves examination on both levels: first, its normative appropriateness, and second, whether one can identify the forces needed to advance his agenda. The second assessment is, of course, needed only if Held's agenda passes the first test.