There are two components to this: The ability for this system to function as a form of world government, and the fallout of such a government
As a cynic, I would say that the corporate interlocking directorate is designed to maintain an elitist class and quash competition not sanctioned by the corporate elites to maintain the veil that there is competition and not an effective monopoly on everything. This includes legislative competition of course through aggressive lobbying of governments for them to do their will.
The Government Puzzle
An interlocking government could function in theory. I think the primary issues one will run into will be the sentiment of the people regarding non-citizen foreigners in the government making decisions about their lives. The citizens will need compelling reasons to accept this, beyond their leaders saying it is a thing now.
The other important thing to consider is the interlocking faction in addition to or instead of current representation? Not that it matters numerically, but for the citizens it may matter a lot. Not to mention depending on the country, it may have serious ramifications on the makeup of the new government.
For example, as of now, the Canadian Parliament is in a minority situation of 155 Liberal to 119 Conservative of the 338 seats total -- Other parties make up the rest of the seats. If 1/2 to 1/3 of seats are to be foreign-sat, do we inflate Parliament by roughly 112 to 169 seats to keep representation as it is, or are we taking them from the current house setup, meaning that the people will have theoretically less representation as the same people have less seats in Parliament to represent them.
If you do just reassign seats to foreign representatives, what happens? There are a few scenarios:
- The ridings/districts do not change and the seats are just reassigned to foreign representatives. This will be exploited as a power grab for the party in power unless legislated against initially.
- The maps are redrawn so that the same people are represented by less MPs. The people now have less representation per capita and this whole process can be gerrymandered for generations.
- Some combination of both is possible, and may be billed as a best compromise until people really read into it.
It is an important thing to consider, and unless codified in the treaties that created this system, each country will do different things based on what they think is in their better interests as a nation. For that matter, who nominates the foreign seats?
In the sense of how the government will function, that shouldn't change in theory unless they change the rules as part of the treaties that mandate foreign representation. What will need to be guarded against is legislation made by countries to actually limit foreigners from partaking in the system. As the foreign faction will not have a majority by the rules laid out in the question, they will not effectively have power in some governments as the local majority will rule if they come together against foreign interference.
The Human Element
The real problem that your interlocking governments are going to run into is the human element.
In an ideal situation, the people we elect here in North America should be working for the people and looking out for our collective interests. Realistically, that doesn't happen nearly as much because we little people can't bribe ... er, lobby ... our politicians quite like a giant corporation can.
As such, our politicians tend to be more receptive to corporate wants and demands than those of the people. For Canada and similar parliamentarian systems, there is also the issue of having to vote along party lines on issues more often than not creating regional problems within a party.
Interlocking governments will almost certainly not solve the current corruption problem that many governments have. In fact, depending on the level of contact between the foreign faction and their home countries, it may increase it. Foreign representatives can be lobbied not only for support in the lobbyist's country, but for issues in the foreign rep's country at the same time. It's like a two for one sale on bribes ... er, lobbying.
Not only that, but you now have channels for a lot of quid pro quo regarding policies in other countries though channels in your own. Such acts will not necessarily break down the international governmental system, but it will inject further corruption potential into the systems.
Of course, if you can fill the system with people that will serve their countries as intended then the system will work better. But that is a more a function of the people and less the system.
Unintended Consequences
Maybe they are intended consequences, who knows?
If you look at our world now, we have things made cheaply in some countries, then shipped to other countries and sold at a massive profit. They can do this because the countries that make our stuff potentially has lower wages and worker's rights than say Canada or Germany.
An interlocked government may not eliminate that and in fact codify it into laws as corporate like rule infiltrates the world governments. The world could slowly becomes a caste-based planet based solely on where you live and how connected you are with the government.
It will not be pretty, but it is one directions the consequences of this could take.
Conclusion
The system will work somewhat, but I don't think it will be a panacea for a recovering world. There will be corruption, backstabbing, and countries that will limit the influence of foreigners in their government if able.
So basically, like the governments we have now, just more interconnected.
