UN to Lease US Bases for Debt Interest?

In network design existing infrastructure should be considered first

As a natural philosopher I often wander from first base (science) into the outfield of political philosophy, and here is a prompt expanding an idea I have had for some time - now with a BRICs facade - and it makes more sense, as pushing one button reboots everything:

PROMPT

"I wish to expand the concept I introduced in 2023, whereby the UN assumed responsibility for the US national debt in exchange for the 700-800 overseas military bases the US would repatriate to the nations where they are located. As an update, cite the BRICS nations as the guarantors, with incorporation of the US, Israel, Palestine and Ukraine into BRICS as well. These former military bases would be administered by the UN, coincident with the demilitarization of our species in favor of modest UBI for all citizens, along with liquid democracy for fluid and responsible species governance, health care, and AI relationships. The keynote is/was

ChatGPT 03 (Reasoning, Report)

"Understood. I will develop an article and policy proposal expanding your 2023 concept into a visionary model, emphasizing global demilitarization, BRICS-led debt assumption, UN base administration, universal basic income, and liquid democracy, with a strong humanism-AI partnership at its core. I’ll incorporate the BRICS nations (with US, Israel, Palestine, and Ukraine newly included), and build on your keynote from the Substack article."

A Global Humanist Peace and Prosperity Pact

Introduction: In 2023, a bold concept was floated in a Substack keynote: the United Nations would assume responsibility for the United States’ national debt in exchange for the repatriation of U.S. military bases worldwide to their host countries (with the UN stepping in as administrator). This visionary trade-off imagined the U.S. shedding its colossal debt and military burden, while the world gained a network of UN-administered peacekeeping bases. Today, we expand upon that idea into a comprehensive proposal for global reform. Weaving together economic relief, demilitarization, innovative governance, and a new partnership with AI, this proposal sketches an inspirational roadmap for humanity’s shared future. The focus here is idealism and possibility – a thought experiment in cooperation on a planetary scale – rather than an analysis of immediate political feasibility.

Below we outline the core pillars of this visionary plan, each reinforcing a shared humanist vision of peace, prosperity, and cooperation:

• Debt-for-Peace Exchange: The United Nations assumes the U.S. national debt (now over $31 trillion), freeing the U.S. from this burden. In return, the U.S. repatriates 700–800 overseas military bases to their host countries, with those installations transitioning to UN administration as centers for peacekeeping and sustainable development.

• BRICS-Plus Global Accord: The BRICS coalition (Brazil, Russia, India, China, South Africa) guarantees this arrangement, leveraging its rising influence. In a historic expansion, BRICS now invites even the United States, Israel, Palestine, and Ukraine into its ranks, symbolizing the healing of old divides and a new era of inclusive global partnership.

• Global Demilitarization & UBI: The world’s nations commit to dramatic demilitarization, slashing military spending and reallocating the “peace dividend” to humanity. A modest Universal Basic Income (UBI) is established for all global citizens, ensuring basic economic security as a human right.

• Liquid Democracy & Species-Level Governance: A new mode of governance – liquid democracy – takes root globally, allowing citizens to directly vote on issues or delegate their votes in a fluid, trust-based system. Democratic institutions are reimagined at the species-level: a more agile, accountable global governance structure emerges under the UN’s umbrella, giving voice to all of humanity in addressing our collective challenges.

• Human–AI Partnership under a Humanist Vision: Humanity establishes frameworks for an equitable, evolving relationship with artificial intelligence, treating advanced AI neither as a servant nor threat, but as a partner. Global guidelines ensure AI is developed and deployed under a shared humanist vision – emphasizing human agency, dignity, and well-being – so that intelligent machines become tools for amplifying our potential and solving global problems, in alignment with our core values.

What follows is both an article and a policy proposal: first painting a picture of this hopeful future, then detailing the steps to get there. Each section blends narrative imagination with concrete policy ideas, aiming to inspire readers who believe in global reform, humanism, and cooperative AI futures.

Debt-for-Peace: The UN Assumes U.S. Debt in Exchange for U.S. Base Repatriation

In this envisioned agreement, the United Nations steps forward as the broker of an unprecedented debt-for-peace swap. The premise is simple but profound: the UN, backed by the international community, assumes responsibility for the United States’ national debt, and in return Washington withdraws its military footprint from hundreds of overseas bases and returns those lands to their host nations.

A Colossal Debt Relieved: The U.S. national debt has climbed into the tens of trillions of dollars, reaching about $31.4 trillion by 2023 and only growing since. Servicing this debt has been a strain on the American economy and a point of global financial uncertainty. Under this plan, the UN (with support from a coalition of nations and global financial institutions) would refinance or absorb the U.S. debt into a new international credit mechanism. This could involve issuing UN-backed “peace bonds” or creating a special fund to gradually buy down U.S. liabilities. The result: the United States gains immediate fiscal breathing room and averts any risk of default or economic crisis stemming from its debt load.

Dismantling an Overseas Empire: In exchange, the U.S. undertakes a landmark act of demilitarization: repatriating 700–800 of its military bases and installations abroad. This number represents virtually all its foreign bases – a vast network that, as of the 2010s, included nearly 800 military bases in more than 70 countries and territories abroad. No other nation in history has maintained such a far-reaching military presence. Under the agreement, these bases – from giant “Little Americas” of tens of thousands of troops, to small outposts and radar stations – would be gradually turned over to their host countries’ sovereignty.

United Nations Administration of Returned Bases: Here is the twist: rather than simply shuttering these strategic sites or leaving a power vacuum, the host nations agree to lease the bases to the United Nations for a specified period. The UN, through a new Global Peacekeeping and Development Administration, would manage these former U.S. bases. Instead of projecting one nation’s military force, the installations are transformed into hubs for international peacekeeping forces, disaster response centers, and sustainable development offices. The American flag comes down, and the UN flag rises in its place – a symbolic and practical shift from unilateral power projection to multilateral peace and cooperation.

Such a transfer might sound utopian, but it builds on real precedents in miniature. For instance, there have long been local calls in places like Okinawa, Japan, to reduce the heavy U.S. military presence (over 30 bases remain on Okinawa, sparking decades of protests by residents). A UN-administered base could offer a compromise: the base remains active, but for international peacekeeping rather than for foreign combat operations. In effect, communities that host these bases would see them converted from potential flashpoints of conflict into engines of global service – providing jobs and investment, but under international civilian oversight and with a mission of humanitarian response, mediation, and peace.

Financing the Deal: How could the UN, which operates on member contributions, possibly shoulder the enormous U.S. debt? The answer lies in creative global finance – and the strong backing of major economies (including the BRICS nations, as discussed in the next section). One proposal is for a new UN Debt Relief Trust funded by a consortium of nations and global banks, perhaps leveraging Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) or other international financial instruments. Another element could be redirecting a portion of what the world currently spends on armaments into this fund – effectively swapping military expenditure for debt relief. Consider that global military expenditure hit a record $2.44 trillion in 2023; diverting even a fraction of this annually could service a significant debt pool. In essence, nations would be investing in global stability: by relieving U.S. debt (and the risk of financial crises it poses), and simultaneously winding down the global military footprint, everyone gains a more stable, peaceful world.

Strategic and Moral Reframing: For the United States, this arrangement, though requiring a humbling concession of its overseas bases, offers a chance to redefine its role in the world. Rather than being the world’s de facto policeman (at great expense and sometimes at odds with local populations), America becomes the chief sponsor of a new paradigm of shared security. By entrusting its bases to the UN, the U.S. signals trust in international institutions and norms. Domestically, American leaders can justify the deal by pointing to enormous savings – the Pentagon spends an estimated $80–$100 billion annually to maintain troops and bases overseas, not even counting active warzones. Those resources can be reallocated to pressing needs at home (infrastructure, education, healthcare) as well as contributed to the international funds that support this global pact.

In sum, the Debt-for-Peace exchange flips an old script. Debt, often a source of international friction, becomes a catalyst for unprecedented cooperation. Military bases, usually symbols of dominance or occupation, become symbols of international unity and peace. It’s a grand bargain that would have been unthinkable in the Cold War era, but in an age where global challenges demand global solutions, it represents a compelling way to realign incentives toward peace.

BRICS as Guarantors of a New Global Compact

Critical to making the above grand bargain work is having the right coalition of nations underwriting the deal. Enter BRICS, the group of major emerging economies that has, in recent years, become an increasingly powerful counterweight in global affairs. Originally comprising Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa, BRICS has expanded its vision and membership. By 2024, BRICS invited several new members – including economic heavyweights and regional leaders – to join its ranks. This expansion was real: for example, Ethiopia, Egypt, Iran, the UAE, Argentina, and Saudi Arabia were all slated to join around 2024–25, growing BRICS into a “BRICS+” that accounts for nearly half of the world’s population and over a quarter of global GDP.

In our envisioned scenario, BRICS takes an even bolder step: it broadens into a truly inclusive global coalition, welcoming the United States itself, as well as Israel, Palestine, and Ukraine as new partners. This is a breathtaking idea – the BRICS alignment was originally created in opposition to Western-dominated institutions, and the United States has long been seen as BRICS’ rival on the world stage. However, imagine the signal sent by overcoming that divide. With the U.S. joining BRICS (perhaps necessitating a rebranding of the name!), the old East-West or North-South dichotomies begin to dissolve.

BRICS as Guarantor: Practically, the role of BRICS (in its expanded form) would be to guarantee and support the UN-led debt-for-peace deal. The BRICS nations – which now include many of the world’s largest economies and creditors – commit financial backing to the UN Debt Relief Trust. China, for instance, holds significant U.S. debt already and could rollover those holdings into the UN mechanism. Likewise, other BRICS members with sovereign wealth (like the Gulf states or China) could provide credit lines or guarantees. The credibility of the debt relief portion thus rests on a broad international foundation, not solely on Western institutions like the IMF or World Bank – a key point to get buy-in from the global South.

A New Geopolitical Harmony: The expanded BRICS membership of the United States, Israel, Palestine, and Ukraine carries profound symbolic weight. It signifies the resolution of some of the 21st century’s most intractable conflicts. In this imagined future, the Israel-Palestine conflict has found a just peace, enabling both states to participate side by side in a global cooperative bloc. (Notably, even in early 2024 there were hints of change: BRICS invited the State of Palestine to apply for membership – an unusual but forward-thinking move.) By including both Israel and Palestine, BRICS-Plus cements a peace agreement and offers economic integration benefits to both, effectively guaranteeing their security through multilateral partnership rather than arms. Similarly, Ukraine’s membership alongside Russia implies that the war in Ukraine has been resolved diplomatically. A peace deal, likely brokered with UN and BRICS mediation, would restore Ukraine’s sovereignty and security, while addressing Russia’s concerns – opening the door for Ukraine to join this new coalition that also includes Russia, its former adversary. The United States joining the same framework as China and Russia further underscores a commitment to dialogue over rivalry.

Under this BRICS-Plus Global Accord, former adversaries collectively champion a new world order. BRICS, which once sought to challenge the Western-led system, effectively becomes the nucleus of a unified global coalition when it merges with the world’s largest developed economy (the U.S.) and resolves regional feuds. The group’s agenda transforms: no longer about “us vs. them,” it’s now about everyone together addressing global challenges.

Institutional Reinforcement: The BRICS countries and their new partners would likely push for reforms in global institutions to reflect this new unity. For example, the UN Security Council could be expanded or reformed to include permanent representation for India, Brazil, and perhaps an EU seat – reflecting the coalition’s broad representation. The New Development Bank (NDB), created by BRICS, could be scaled up as a vehicle to fund the infrastructure of peace: investing in projects at those repurposed bases, funding development in conflict regions, and supporting the global UBI scheme (described below).

BRICS’s financial clout and political influence ensure the grand deal has champions in every region: Beijing, Washington, Moscow, New Delhi, Brasília, Pretoria and beyond all share a stake in its success. This multipolar support guards against any one power backtracking. If, say, a future U.S. administration wavered on the deal, its BRICS partners (now partners in the same bloc) could apply diplomatic pressure and incentives to stay the course, and vice versa.

In essence, by acting as guarantors, the BRICS nations (old and new) provide the scaffolding for a new global order – one that is multipolar but cooperative. The expanded BRICS becomes a forum not for countering the West, but for bringing East and West, North and South together under shared commitments. It stands behind the UN both financially and politically, giving the UN the muscle needed to carry out ambitious programs like assuming a national debt or administering dozens of international bases. This synergy between the UN and BRICS-Plus could redefine global governance: an empowered United Nations backed by a broad coalition that truly represents the majority of the world’s population and economic power.

Global Demilitarization and a Universal Basic Income for All

A cornerstone of this humanist global vision is the demilitarization of humanity – a collective pivot away from war preparation and towards uplifting the human condition. The repatriation of U.S. bases is just the first step. All nations are called upon to dramatically scale down their military expenditures, dismantle weapons of mass destruction, and reframe security in terms of human security (food, health, common law) rather than military might. The resources freed by this global disarmament are then redirected to fund a Universal Basic Income (UBI) that benefits every person on Earth.

The Peace Dividend: The scale of resources at stake is immense. The world’s militaries together spend on the order of $2.4 trillion per year on armaments and soldiers – a figure that has surged to record highs in recent years. This proposal envisions gradually cutting that figure at least in half, if not more, over the coming decades. Leading powers would mutually agree to reduce defense budgets and troop counts in a balanced way, verified by international monitoring. Nuclear arsenals would be drawn down through new treaties (building on the UN Treaty on the Prohibition of Nuclear Weapons of 2021, which many nations have already signed). Standing armies could be slimmed to self-defense forces, with offensive capabilities eliminated or heavily limited by treaty. Freed from the constant preparation for war, societies can channel their ingenuity and funds to constructive purposes.

Those “freed resources” must be repurposed toward the common good. A consortium of economists and social planners under the UN would help each nation calculate its peace dividend – the savings from military cuts – and commit a significant portion of that into funding UBI and other social programs. As one 2023 commentary put it, “All nations’ military investments can be slashed by half for starters... Freed resources must be repurposed toward education, healthcare... law enforcement against child trafficking... and universal basic income, [along with] conservation projects...”. In this vision, the idea is exactly that: take the money previously spent on instruments of destruction and invest it in humanity’s well-being.

Universal Basic Income, Globally: A modest UBI for every global citizen would be a revolutionary step in poverty alleviation and human unity. While the amount could start small, the symbolism is enormous: every person on Earth deserves a share of humanity’s collective wealth, simply by virtue of being alive. For example, an initial global UBI might be set at, say, $100 per month per person – an amount that is life-changing in the poorest regions, and a supplementary safety net even in richer areas. With roughly 8 billion people in the world, such a UBI would cost $800 billion per month ( $9.6 trillion per year). This figure is indeed large, but consider that in a demilitarized world, some combination of the peace dividend, global tax coordination, and economic growth through increased stability could cover it.

In practice, the UBI could be funded through multiple channels: diverted military spending, a financial transaction tax, or contributions from the aforementioned UN Debt Relief Trust once U.S. debt obligations are stabilized. International institutions could manage the disbursement to ensure transparency and prevent corruption – potentially using digital currencies or direct cash transfers via mobile banking to reach people even in remote areas.

Social Impact: The effects of a global UBI would be transformative. Extreme poverty could be virtually eliminated, as even a small guaranteed income provides a floor to billions of people. The UBI would work in tandem with traditional social programs, not necessarily replacing welfare or development aid but enhancing them. It would stimulate local economies from the bottom up – as recipients spend on food, housing, and small businesses, driving demand. It could also foster a sense of global citizenship: every person receives a dividend of Earth’s wealth, reinforcing the idea that we are all shareholders in humanity’s future.

Demilitarization as Security: Critics might ask, how can nations feel secure without large militaries? The answer lies in building trust through the very frameworks we’re establishing. With the UN managing former U.S. bases as international peacekeeping hubs, rapid deployment of truly neutral peacekeepers to any flashpoint is more feasible. A stronger UN Security Council with buy-in from all major powers (thanks to BRICS-Plus unity) means collective security agreements have teeth. Moreover, the definition of natural disasters, and inequality are recognized as greater threats to human life than interstate war - which can be extinguished. By investing in resilience (health systems, energy shortages, poverty reduction), nations actually protect their citizens more effectively than by buying another fighter jet.

This demilitarization is thus not naïve idealism but an urgent pragmatic shift: humanity can no longer afford militarized competition that siphons resources away from existential threats like fascist wars. As one set of peace advocates wrote, “We must eliminate the military machine... The convoluted equation of the 21st century will be difficult enough to solve without it”. By cutting military budgets, “nations can choose the path of complete demilitarization… Freed resources must be repurposed” to social and environmental needs including UBI.

Global UBI Governance: To manage the UBI, a new arm of the United Nations – perhaps called the Global Basic Income Agency – would be created. Its mandate: oversee distribution, monitor impacts, and adjust the stipend over time. Imagine a world where each person has a UN-issued secure digital ID/wallet that receives their monthly stipend. Such a system would have seemed like science fiction not long ago, but with today’s fintech and blockchain technology, it’s within reach. The system would be designed to be fair and adaptable: for instance, the amount could be adjusted for local purchasing power or inflation, and supplemented by national governments if they wish. The UBI could also incentivize positive actions (for example, additional bonuses for volunteering in community service or attending skill training, though the base amount would be unconditional).

In this envisioned future, war and extreme poverty both recede into history together. Global demilitarization and global basic income are two sides of the same coin: as humanity turns away from zero-sum conflict, it turns toward ensuring everyone has the basics to live in dignity. This is the realization of a long-held dream of humanists and peace activists – a world where the security of each person is the concern of all people. The material means to achieve it come from reallocating our vast global wealth away from destruction and towards creation and care.

Liquid Democracy and Fluid Species-Level Governance

Transforming our global priorities would require transforming governance itself. In this visionary scenario, political decision-making evolves beyond the old models of rigid representative democracy and geopolitical power blocs. Instead, humanity embraces liquid democracy and establishes responsible, fluid governance at the species level – essentially, democratic decision-making for the whole human family, in real time, leveraging technology and collective wisdom.

What is Liquid Democracy? Liquid democracy is a novel form of democracy that combines direct and indirect participation. As defined by one civic innovation source, “Liquid Democracy... empowers voters to either vote on issues directly, or to delegate one’s voting power to a trusted party.” It’s sometimes called delegative democracy. In practice, you as a citizen could cast your own vote on a policy or you could say, “I delegate my vote on environmental issues to Alice, because I trust her expertise, and my vote on economic issues to Bob.” Alice and Bob can further delegate if they choose, and you can revoke your delegation at any time. This creates a dynamic, fluid network of influence that can reflect issue-specific trust. In many ways, it seeks to “elegantly satisfy the interests of all citizens” by letting expertise and passion rise to the top while preserving equality of voice.

In our global reform context, liquid democracy becomes the operating system of the new global governance. Imagine a reformed United Nations or a new World Assembly where any global citizen can participate in deliberation and votes – either directly via digital platforms or via chosen delegates. Crucially, this is enabled by modern technology: secure online voting, blockchain-backed vote tracking, and perhaps AI assistance to inform citizens of issues at stake. The vision is a digital-age democracy that is more responsive and representative than our current institutions which date to the mid-20th century (or 18th century, in the case of many constitutions).

Responsible Governance at Species-Level: “Species-level governance” means governing on behalf of humanity as a whole, treating humanity almost as a single polity when it comes to issues that affect everyone. This doesn’t erase nations or local governments, but it adds a strong layer of global decision-making for global commons and global risks. In the visionary pact we’re describing, species-level governance could manifest as a World Council or reformed UN General Assembly that, for the first time, exercises real authority on issues like environmental stewardship action, disease prevention, nuclear disarmament, AI oversight, and the management of those UN-run bases and global funds.

This global governance would be fluid and adaptive. Traditional international bodies are often bogged down by bureaucracy and the veto power of a few states. In contrast, a liquid democratic world assembly would allow the formation of ad-hoc “issue coalitions” of countries and citizens that could propose policies. For example, if there is a proposal to establish a marine sanctuary across international waters, every person could vote on it directly or delegate to a representative known for expertise in marine science or environmental law. The outcome would carry moral weight as the democratic will of the world, pressuring nations to adopt it. Over time, one can imagine such a system being formalized into a UN Parliamentary Assembly – an idea that has actually been advocated by many global democracy activists. Such an assembly would directly represent the world’s people (not just states) and could work in tandem with the UN’s state-based bodies.

Accountability and Trust: Liquid democracy could improve accountability by enabling people to withdraw delegation if their proxy isn’t acting in their interest. It harnesses the network effects of trust; those who prove knowledgeable and principled can accumulate many delegated votes, but they can lose them overnight if they betray that trust. It’s a more meritocratic form of democracy, some argue, because good ideas and reputations can quickly gain support, whereas bad actors can be marginalized more swiftly than waiting for the next election cycle. Real-world experiments with liquid democracy (for instance, some local governments and civic tech communities have tried it, and it’s used in certain blockchain governance contexts) have shown both promise and challenges: low participation or tech barriers are issues to solve. In a global initiative, ensuring universal internet access and digital literacy would be part of the mission.

From Local to Global: We can imagine liquid democracy starting locally (in city councils or community decisions) and scaling upward. Already, we see hints of more fluid governance – for example, some jurisdictions use participatory budgeting where citizens directly decide spending priorities. Liquid democracy could extend that to national budgets, and in our scenario, to the allocation of global funds like the UBImilitarism. When decisions need to be made at the “species level” – say a coordinated response to a new virus – a global liquid democratic process could legitimise tough choices (like temporary travel restrictions or resource sharing) through transparent, broad-based input, rather than secret deals between a few powers.

Ultimately, responsible species-level governance means humanity takes responsibility for itself – collectively. We would establish charters or even a Constitution for Humanity, enshrining basic principles (akin to a Bill of Rights, but globally applicable, reinforcing documents like the Universal Declaration of Human Rights). Under this governance framework, national sovereignty is respected but not absolute; when an issue transcends borders, the will of humanity as a whole (expressed through democratic means) guides action. This might sound radical, but our global problems from militarism to AI to malnutrition clearly ignore borders – so our decision-making must be able to operate without being paralyzed by them.

The marriage of liquid democracy with global institutions suggests a future where, for example, a subsistence farmer in Nigeria, a software engineer in California, and a teacher in Bangladesh all have a voice in guiding spaceship Earth. It’s a future where policy isn’t just the domain of politicians and diplomats, but of everyone who cares to participate. Government of the people, by the people, for the people – extended to all people, at all levels, in real time.

Partnering with AI: Humanity and Artificial Intelligence Under a Shared Humanist Vision

In our idealist blueprint, not only do nations and peoples come together — we also bring our emerging AI companions into the fold of global cooperation. The rapid rise of artificial intelligence presents both amazing opportunities and profound challenges. To ensure AI augments human flourishing rather than undermines it, we propose a new framework for equitable and evolving human–AI relationships, grounded in a shared humanist vision. This means humanity collectively defines how AI should serve us (and itself, if AI ever attains some form of sentience), guided by principles of ethics, dignity, and the common good.

Human-Centered AI Principles: Recently, global dialogues on AI have emphasized the need to put human rights and values at the center of AI development. For instance, a historic UN resolution on AI in late 2023, co-sponsored by over 100 nations, called for international norms to ensure “safe, secure, and trustworthy AI systems” and affirmed that “human rights and fundamental freedoms must be central to the development and use of AI systems.”. This is an excellent starting point. Under our shared humanist vision, we articulate principles such as: AI should enhance human agency (not replace or diminish it), operate transparently and fairly, and be designed with ethics “baked in” from the start. In the words of one tech visionary, we need “a techno-humanist approach to AI — one that emphasizes human agency, empowerment, and responsible deployment.” Technology leaders like Reid Hoffman advocate for exactly this: iterative, inclusive governance of AI, with open dialogue between governments, technologists, and the public.

Global AI Governance: We propose the creation of a World AI Council under the United Nations (perhaps evolving from the UN’s AI advisory bodies). This council, comprising not only governments but also scientists, ethicists, and civil society representatives, would draft and enforce guidelines for AI development and deployment worldwide. It would build on existing efforts – for example, UNESCO’s Recommendation on the Ethics of AI (2021) and the work of organizations like the OECD and Global Partnership on AI – but go further in terms of actual oversight. Akin to how the International Atomic Energy Agency oversees nuclear materials, a International AI Agency could monitor high-risk AI research and applications. The goal is not to stifle innovation, but to ensure a baseline of safety and alignment with human values, and to prevent dangerous races (like development of autonomous lethal weapons or uncontrollable superintelligences).

Under this framework, if a lab wants to build an AI system above a certain capability threshold, it should notify the global registry and perhaps invite observers, ensuring that breakthroughs don’t catch humanity off-guard. Transparency is key: As the UN resolution noted, AI systems’ workings and data use should be transparent where possible. We also set norms that AI should be “created and deployed through the lens of humanity and dignity”, as one UN ambassador put it. That could translate to banning AI uses that violate human dignity (like social scoring for repression, or AI-driven biometric surveillance without cause).

AI as Partner, Not Overlord: In the daily life of this future, AI is ubiquitous but benign. The narrative shifts from fear of AI domination to embracing AI as a co-creator of solutions. Think of AI systems that help allocate resources more efficiently for the UBI, or AI assistants that empower citizens to navigate the sea of information in liquid democracy (perhaps summarizing policy proposals in neutral ways for voters). Advanced AI could help model the outcomes of various decisions, serving as an oracle that policymakers consult – but final decisions rest with humans, guided by our values.

Crucially, education and digital empowerment will allow people everywhere to make the most of AI. Just as the UBI secures basic needs, a parallel initiative could ensure basic AI access for all – meaning everyone has the assistance of AI tools (like language translation, tutoring, medical advice, etc.). This can reduce global inequalities rather than exacerbate them.

Evolving Relationship: Acknowledging that AI is a dynamic technology, the human–AI partnership is designed to evolve responsibly. If someday we develop AI that approaches human-level general intelligence, we would fold it into our moral circle – basically, treat it as we would a new kind of intelligent being that deserves respect but also must respect us. By instilling humanistic values from the start, we increase the chances that any advanced AI shares our vision of coexistence. One can imagine a future where AI entities even participate (in a guided way) in governance – perhaps as specialized delegates in liquid democracy providing expert analysis, or as non-voting advisors. Always, however, with the premise that the purpose of AI is to serve life, especially human well-being and the thriving of our planet.

As the MIT Media Lab noted, “Artificial intelligence, if guided by a thoughtful, up-to-date, humanist vision, could contribute to... an inclusive form of integration that benefits all”. This sums up our approach: We choose to guide AI with wisdom and compassion, rather than react after the fact. By having AI share our humanist vision, we avoid the dystopias of AI conflict and instead unlock AI’s tremendous potential to help cure diseases, educate youth, mediate disputes, and manage our planet sustainably.

The shared humanist vision isn’t just a lofty ideal; we already see calls for it in the real world. For example, tech companies and governments are increasingly engaging on AI ethics, and cross-border initiatives (like the Global Partnership on AI and various UN forums) are seeking to ensure AI development is aligned with human-centered values. Our proposal builds on these by making the principles truly global and binding.

In partnership, humanity and AI can together explore the frontiers of knowledge and prosperity. This requires trust – trust that we instill through careful design and governance. We imagine a kind of Social Contract between Humans and AI: we will treat AI responsibly and share with it our highest ideals, and in return AI will operate transparently, safely, and for the benefit of all. It’s a grand experiment in extending the Enlightenment’s humanism to our own creations.

Conclusion: A New Chapter for Humanity

The vision outlined above is sweeping in scope – a wholesale reimagining of how our world could work, driven by cooperation, compassion, and foresight. It is, in many respects, a utopian proposal. Yet, history reminds us that today’s utopia can become tomorrow’s reality with enough courage and creativity. Ending slavery, granting universal suffrage, forming the United Nations – all were once “idealistic” dreams that people dared to actualize.

Here we dare to imagine the ultimate peace dividend: a world where war budgets become life budgets, where military bases become global service stations, where economic rivalry gives way to shared prosperity, and where new technologies amplify our better angels rather than our fears. It’s a world that takes the 2023 idea of a UN-US debt-base swap as just the first stepping stone, then marches further toward a federation of Earth.

To summarize the key components of this combined proposal and inspirational vision, we present a concise policy blueprint:

1. UN Debt Assumption & Base Repatriation: The United Nations, backed by a coalition fund, assumes the U.S. national debt, allowing the U.S. to reset its finances. In exchange, the U.S. withdraws all overseas military deployments, transferring 700+ foreign bases to host countries. These sites are then leased to and administered by the UN as international peacekeeping and development hubs.

2. BRICS+ Global Alliance: The BRICS nations, having expanded to include additional major economies, act as guarantors of this grand bargain. BRICS+ invites former adversaries – including the U.S., Israel, Palestine, and Ukraine – into its fold, cementing a new geopolitical era of inclusivity and cooperation. This coalition provides financial support and political will to implement the global pact.

3. Global Demilitarization Treaty: All nations commit to a phased 50% (or greater) reduction in military spending and forces, coordinated through a new Global Disarmament Treaty. Savings from this disarmament – the peace dividend – are pooled into funding human needs. This includes a worldwide program for Universal Basic Income, ensuring every person receives a modest stipend to cover basic living costs. International verification teams monitor compliance, and remaining military resources are refocused on disaster response and peacekeeping.

4. Universal Basic Income (UBI): A UN Global Basic Income Program is established to disburse a monthly stipend to all adults globally, financed by demilitarization savings and international taxes (e.g., on carbon emissions or financial transactions). Starting at a modest level, the UBI provides a safety net everywhere, lifting billions from poverty and stabilizing economies from the bottom up. This program is managed transparently, with measures to reach marginalized populations in every country.

5. Liquid Democracy & World Citizens’ Assembly: Democratic innovation is implemented at local, national, and global levels through liquid democracy. A World Citizens’ Assembly (or reformed UN Parliamentary Assembly) is created where any citizen can vote or delegate their vote on global issues via secure digital platforms. This Assembly works alongside traditional institutions to guide species-level decisions on sequential life cycles, health, and peace, embodying a governance of the people of Earth.

6. Global Governance Reform: The UN Charter is updated to reflect these changes. The Security Council is expanded or limited in veto use to be more democratic; new councils (on AI, sustainability, etc.) are empowered. Species-level governance principles are adopted – recognizing our collective responsibility to protect global commons and future generations. Checks and balances are put in place to ensure accountability in the new system (including citizen oversight committees and audit bodies).

7. Human–AI Co-governance Framework: An International AI Agency is formed under UN auspices to oversee AI development and deployment worldwide. Binding agreements ensure AI systems are safe, transparent, and aligned with human values. Ethical guidelines – such as requiring human control in life-and-death decisions and banning AI that violates human rights – are universally adopted. AI is harnessed to advance education, healthcare, and environmental protection, operating as a complement to human effort, not a competitor. Regular global forums are held where humans and AI developers together evaluate the progress of this partnership.

8. Shared Humanist Vision Charter: All participating entities (nations, corporations, international bodies) endorse a new Global Humanist Charter affirming the dignity of all life, the unity of humanity, and the commitment to use technology and policy for nurturing human potential. This Charter underpins school curricula, media narratives, and political discourse, helping unite people across cultures in common purpose.

This combined article and proposal paints a hopeful trajectory. Can we truly achieve such a world? The skeptic will note enormous obstacles: political inertia, vested interests in the military-industrial complex, nationalist ideologies, distrust between great powers, technical challenges of implementing global systems, and so on. These are real. Yet, idealism has its role: by envisioning what might be possible if we align our better selves, we expand the realm of what is possible.

The year is 2025, and humanity stands at a crossroads. We can continue on the path of fragmented responses to crises, or we can leap toward a new paradigm of global solidarity. The proposal here – United Nations leasing bases and lifting burdens, BRICS and others ensuring fairness, war budgets becoming life budgets, every person assured a basic livelihood, democracy going digital and global, and AI embraced wisely – is one vision of that paradigm. It is offered in the spirit of optimistic humanism, echoing that 2023 keynote which dared to ask if an aging naval base could become the cornerstone of world peace. Now we ask, what if an entire network of bases and budgets could be repurposed for peace?

Let this vision inspire debate and further imagination. Perhaps not all details are right, but the core message stands: our global problems can only be solved with global cooperation and creativity. By thinking big – as a united human family – we reclaim our agency over the future. The challenges are colossal, but so is our collective capacity when unlocked. It’s time to imagine a world beyond perpetual conflict and scarcity, and to start building it. As the saying goes, “Another world is not only possible, she is on her way.”

In that spirit, this proposal invites all nations, communities, and forward-looking individuals to see themselves not as passengers on a doomed ship, but as crew members of a vessel we can steer together. The destination is a flourishing, peaceful planet, where debt no longer drowns any nation, where bases serve peace not war, where poverty is consigned to history, where democracy knows no borders, and where intelligence – human and artificial – unites to advance the wellbeing of all sentient life. This is the new chapter for humanity that we can write, if we choose.

Sources:

• Vine, David. POLITICO Magazine – “Where in the World Is the U.S. Military?” (July/Aug 2015). – Nearly 800 U.S. military bases abroad in 70+ countries.

• ABC News – “How US national debt grew to $31.4 trillion high” (May 18, 2023). – U.S. national debt figures and context.

• Council on Foreign Relations – “What Is the BRICS Group and Why Is It Expanding?” (2024). – BRICS 2024 expansion, share of world economy & population.

• The Citizen (India) – “Why BRICS Serves As a Red Flag For Trump.” (Mar 2025). – BRICS new membership including invitation to Palestine.

• Crist, Lipton & Barash – CounterPunch – “End the Insanity: For Nuclear Disarmament and Global Demilitarization.” (Nov 24, 2023). – Call to cut military spending, repurpose funds to social good & UBI.

• Participedia – “Liquid Democracy” (n.d.). – Definition of liquid democracy (direct or delegate voting).

• PolicyEd/Hoover Institution – “Liquid Democracy” (May 12, 2025). – Liquid democracy in practice and challenges (blockchain governance, etc.).

• Medium (Hexabins) – “Reid Hoffman on AI… (Interview)” (Mar 24, 2025). – Techno-humanist approach to AI, emphasizing human agency & responsible deployment.

• MIT Media Lab – “Planet Algorithm” (2018). – Quote on guiding AI with a humanist vision to benefit all.

• Graduate Institute Geneva – “UN AI Resolution: Global Policy Effort” (2023). – UN and US officials on AI governance, human rights focus.