Is this a step towards One-World Government?
We're not in the least bit interested in One-World Government or anything of that sort. In our experience, government is effective in direct proportion to its closeness to the people being governed: many domestic problems in many countries today are caused by nations and populations being simply too big to govern, and central governments making policy from a position that’s simply too remote from the daily needs, concerns and cultural specificities of citizens. To try and replicate such a system at the global level is too horrendous to contemplate.
Our day-jobs have shown us very clearly that "global government" is a pipe-dream, and that government only works when it's intimately acquainted with citizens and their needs and desires. Cultural difference is a reality, and a good thing too: it's one of the best things about humanity. It's something we need to work around, and work with, not erase or ignore.
But just because we're against the idea of World Government doesn't mean that we're against the idea of the United Nations, or the other international agencies either. On the contrary, we think that most of them do an essential job admirably well under extraordinarily difficult circumstances. We certainly need administrative and organisational structures like these if we're to avoid a continual 'tragedy of the commons', and they need to have a certain amount of power or they can't operate. But they could never, and should never, be able to dictate to people how they live their lives around the world.