International Organizations - Essay Example

International Organisations Table of Contents Thesis ment 3 0. Are International Organizations doing Good or Bad? 3 2.0. Do All Members Benefit Equally? 8 3.0. Which Members Benefit the Most and does it Matter? 11 4.0. Have They Been Successful in Making International Peace? 13 References 17 Thesis Statement The essay is based on arguing about the effectiveness of international organisations, taking examples of different organisations and countries. The objective is to evaluate if international organisations have been successful in ensuring peace and satiability in the world or have failed in maintaining the same. 1.0. Are International Organizations doing Good or Bad? The development of international organisations is regarded as one of the remarkable efforts for the accomplishment of global peace and mutual progression that the world has ever observed. After the end of the Second World War, various international organisations were apparently noted to administer global economy and power. These institutions comprise European Union (EU), United Nations (UN), North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), World Trade Organisation (WTO), World Bank (WB) and International Monetary Fund (IMF) among others. It is strongly believed that the promotion of global peace eventually contributes in developing the economies of varied nations throughout the globe at large. Thus, in this regard, the aforesaid international organisations have not only continued their respective operations over five decades, but also have prolonged their commands, transformed their missions and increased the number of memberships. Yet nowadays, the international organisations have become highly challenged in order to fulfil their objectives. Criticisms arrive from various political spectrums, where some believe that in the global arena, international organisations are performing well whereas others believe that they are conducting badly (Milner, 2005). After the end of the Cold War, followed by the downfall of Soviet Union, stagnant yet extremely affluent Japan, the reconsolidation of Germany and the rise of China in the internal market had a major influence on the international relationships. Furthermore, changes originated from prior eras, comprising technological revolution related with computer and information economy and restructuring of economic power had influenced the activities of international organisations from trade to maintenance of international peace during and immediately after the Cold War. In subsequent period, the developments imposed significant consequences for the lives of the people in both developed and developing nations. For instance, with the end of the Cold War, national priorities shifted towards international security. The economic conflict further facilitated the introduction of international organisations in order to maintain global governance. Several international organisations played assorted roles in order to make the world more stable and influence the operations of the international organisations to be more equitable. These international organisations influence the behaviour of governments in order to ensure peace (Sandbrook, 2011). From historical times, several deliberate efforts have been made by diverse international organisations in order to promote international peace. Till now, the most notable international organisation is noted to be the UN, which has made striking efforts towards accomplishing this objective. However, other important international organisations such as IMF, WB and Group of 20 (G20) also attempt to make the world peaceful in the form of supporting economic stability, collaboration and growth. International organisations are progressively important, however, they are not always successful. One such example of the success and failure of an international organisation is the UN. The UN presently possesses in excess of 190 member states, which signifies that almost every independent nation in the world is affiliated to the UN. One key example of effectiveness of UN is its intervention in Mozambique in the year 1992. In the year 1977, civil war broke out in Mozambique in order to oppose the existing Frelimo government. About 900,000 individuals died in the historical event of civil war. The conflict ultimately ended with the interference of the UN in the year 1992. In this particular year, about 7500 soldiers were deployed by the UN to Mozambique in order to supervise the transformation of democracy in the nation (Crockett, 2011). The intervention of the UN delivered an important example of the method in which peacekeeping assignment should be undertaken on behalf of international organisation. The UN has provided financial inducements in order to dismiss the old leadership. Finally, a ‘General Peace Accord’ has been reached in order to make a sustained commitment towards promoting peace in the nation. However, arguments also rose against the intervention of the UN with respect to its effectiveness in Mozambique. Irrespective of the United States (US) intervention, there exists a number of cleavages that jeopardised the democracy of Mozambique. As much as it is believed that the intervention of the UN was successful, the nation was found to be still unstable. Thus, it can be stated that the UN is unable to instil steadiness and peace in the nation. Moreover, it is also argued that international organisations like the UN are too large to be effective in order to prevent conflict in the entire global system (Crockett, 2011). The other important example of effectiveness of international organisations is NATO, which has played a bigger part in dealing with conflict in Kosovo. In the year 1998, there was open conflict between Serbian military and Kosovar Albanian forces, which led to death of above 1500 Albanians. The international organisations became highly concerned regarding this conflict and the humanitarian outcome. Furthermore, the risk of conflict was also started to spread in other neighbouring nations. Thus, in the year 1998, at the conference in North Atlantic Council, it was decided to deploy NATO in order to deal with the crisis situation. In the year 1999, NATO started military campaign against ‘Federal Republic of Yugoslavia’ in order to inhibit ethnic cleansing of Kosovar Albanians. However, the decision of NATO to initiate an intervention was highly controversial to be effective (NATO, 1999). Whilst liberal scholars argued that the intervention of NATO in Kosovo possessed certain level of moral legitimacy, adversaries from several theoretical schools claimed that the intervention of NATO was a humanitarian intrusion. According to solidarist viewpoint, intervention of international organisations is regarded as fair, under three circumstances. First is in the case of ultimate emergency, where the extent of threat is quite large that commandment of wars becomes invalid in the act of self-defence. The second circumstance is during supreme humanitarian emergency, where the use of external intervention becomes the final resort and thus any international military intervention can be regarded as proportionate to the threat generated. The third circumstance is high possibility of accomplishment of positive outcome, i.e. if intervention of international organisation can possibly deliver positive outcome then it can be regarded as fair. Since the intervention of NATO was based on these aspects, its activity was regarded as effective and successful. However, a counter argument can be made against the action of NATO in Kosovo. In this regard, it is strongly believed that the use of forces across national borders by international organisations, without permission of any specific nation causes severe violation of human rights of the citizens. It is also argued that the intention of NATO in Kosovo was self-centred in nature, wherein the US was the key sponsor of the operation. Additionally, it was believed that the intervention of NATO was to exploit the humanitarian crisis and asserted influence in Europe through legitimising Western authority (Wise, 2013). Finally, it can be concluded that although the intervention of NATO in Kosovo was flawed, such intervention helped to develop the norm of accountability for a nation in order to protect people. The issue of Middle Eastern countries, particularly Libya, was another disputed aspect among international organisations. In the year 2011, political protests arrived in order to end the 41 years leadership of Muammar Gaddafi. During the protests, Libyan citizens became the victims of mass massacre at the hand of Gaddafi’s armed forces. Thus, international organisations acted in order to protect the population from various political and military actions. Most of the resolutions, regarding Libyan revolution were critical, which called for action from NATO. NATO has been credibly supportive towards the infiltration of Libya in order to strike the forces of President Muammar Gaddafi, in an attempt to restore peace in the region (Sandbrook, 2011). The other important example of international organisation is EU. The most aspiring initiative of the EU was its provision in ‘African Peace Facility’, which was recognised in the year 2004, in response to the request made in Maputo conference. The EU has provided about €250 million from European Development Fund in order to render solutions for the African crisis. The money support was intended to assist African operated intermediation initiatives, rather than offering exclusive military intervention (Cameron, 2004). Thus, from the above examples, it can be affirmed that international organisations influence the relationship within and between varied nations. However, it is also apparent that the interventions of international organisations are not free from flaws. On the other hand, international organisations cannot be blamed for the failure to provide benefits to the member nations. Even there lay certain faults in the operations conducted by international organisations. They also possess huge potentialities in addressing any adverse situation with or between nations. Thus, it is unwise to conclude as to whether they are doing good or bad for the nations. 2.0. Do All Members Benefit Equally? At the most basic level, international organisations assist member nations to cooperate for ensuring greater peace and alliance. Presently, there exists a huge figure of international organisations that are active in the global arena. There is no doubt that multilateralism has replaced bilateralism, which is a key contributing factor for increased dominance of international organisations. Currently, various nations evidently prefer to manage their relationships principally through international organisations. International organisations help member states to take advantage of informal discussions to reach an agreement on matters of common interest, to resolve disputes, to enhance cooperation and most vitally to develop transient alliances among others. However, the extent of such benefits is shared between diverse member states, which differs significantly (Magliveras, 2012). Several researchers believe that international organisations are formed for serving the interests of large and rich nations. They were established due to the initiatives undertaken by the western world during their supremacy of Second World War. Furthermore, the American and European supremacy in the international organisations had been wrapped by their sizable power and control over various operations. The developed nations possess high per capita income, which translates into strong influence in the negotiation process organised by international organisations. Thus, in this viewpoint, international organisations have not benefitted equally for every member as they are often based on promoting the interests of developed nations. For example, it has been believed that the support provided by World Bank in African region has not been distributed proportionately i.e. the flow of support is not appropriately allocated to the neediest member nations. However, there are exceptions when international organisations are also able to resolve conflicts between two nations. For example, the entrance of Taiwan in WTO can be highlighted which has facilitated to end the disputes between Taiwan and China. Before the membership in WTO, there was a troubled relationship between Taiwan and China. There was increased conflict between Taiwan and China, regarding whether Taiwan is a sovereign state of a portion of China. In the year 2002, Taiwan became a member of WTO and it resulted in increased political relationship with China. However, such membership has weakened the relationship between the US and Taiwan. Thus, it can be stated that the benefits of membership of international organisations are uneven where at times one nation gains the advantage at the cost of the other (Carnegie, 2013). However in most circumstances, the policy recommendations provided by international organisations also reflect the experiences and the interests of the affluent member nations. There lay a huge secretariat bias within dissimilar international organisations and in most of the times, these organisations make the decisions in favour of rich member nations. It has also been apparently recognised that from initiation, the Director Generals of international organisations such as IMF or WTO is mainly appointed from the affluent economies comprising Canada, Europe and America. Furthermore, decisions taken by these international organisations are based on voting where rich nations such as the US have a greater share in votes. International organisations basically collect finance from developed nations and provide the developing nations under a variety of terms and conditions (Milner, 2005). Therefore, it can be affirmed that the affluent nations might reap benefits provided by the international organisations by a considerable extent. However, it has been ascertained that member nations that belong to developing economies are engaged to their individual national problems like political instability, corruption, civil war, low level of regulation and governance. Hence, according to this viewpoint, international organisations assist the developing member nations to reform the national foundation and promote sustained growth. Without the assistance of international institutions in safeguarding the private property rights for extensive segment of population, member nations cannot reap significant benefits. In this context, it can be stated that the benefits of member nations from international organisations mainly rely on the level to which they make national changes in the political or economic system. International institutions are more epiphenomenal in nature and whatever influence they have on member nations is derived from the affluent nations (Milner, 2005). International organisations can exert constraints on the underlying anarchy of global structure. They use the force and authority by various member nations in order to accomplish the goals and while doing so, at times, they replace the national interest. Most importantly, international organisations help to encumbrance the behaviour of the powerful nations. They develop a set of norms and regulations which other member nations accept voluntarily. Nevertheless, critiques state that developing nations have not benefitted much from international organisations. It is also suspected that international organisations allow the developed nations to take advantage of developing nations by involving them in partial agreements, therefore safeguarding the interests of advanced nations. 3.0. Which Members Benefit the Most and does it Matter? As stated above, international organisations assist members to collaborate in various global issues. However, these international organisations do not provide benefit to the member nations equally, as can be apparently observed from the above discussion. The level to which member nations benefit the most depend on whether those nations find maintaining collaboration challenging without the interference of international organisation. For instance, there are several member states facing challenges to perform cooperatively in the absence of a specific set of guidance for international organisations. Various global issues necessitate members to select competing viewpoints, wherein supporting one member may result in countering the other member involved in the conflict. Hence, it can be argued that by providing more support to one member, international organisations thus disburse less support to others. In the similar context, in a conflict between two members, a third party requires supporting either of the parties involved. Accordingly, by definition, international organisations often imply increasing benefit for some nations while reducing the benefits for others (Carnegie, 2013). One key example can be found with respect to the entry of Saudi Arabia in WTO. Saudi Arabia has historically maintained close political and economic associations with Pakistan. Due to various political problems, business and foreign investment between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan had been quite strong, while the business and foreign investment between India and Saudi Arabia was considerably low. However, with the membership of WTO in 2005, these trends in business have reversed. Due to the intervention of WTO, Saudi Arabia and India became more related from economic and political viewpoint. Accordingly, due to political rivalry between India and Pakistan, the third parties required to select only one member to support, e.g. either India or Pakistan. Thus, it can be observed that from international organisation such as WTO, at times India has benefitted the most in comparison with Pakistan (Carnegie, 2013). The other key beneficiaries from international organisation can be found from the entry of Mexico in General Agreement of Tariff and Trade (GATT). Before obtaining membership in GATT, Mexico and Cuba frequently performed cooperatively in order to overcome the dominance of America. Constantly worried regarding the attempt of America to curb the dominion of Mexico, the nation restricted business and investment with America and increased political and economic relationship with Cuba. However, after the entry of Mexico in GATT, the nation signed the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) trade agreement. Consequently, the business and investment between Mexico and America increased. Furthermore, Mexico also started to support and to accept similar political position as America, which has often generated disadvantaged association with Cuba. On several global issues, Mexico has had to choose between America and Cuba, while due to the influence of international organisation, such as GATT and UN, Mexico has increasingly taken the side of America, rather than Cuba. Thus, it can be stated that the members of international organisations do not acquire the benefits equally. Such inequality often facilitates political cooperation between conflicting nations. Furthermore, activities of international organisations also at times result in nations with unequal abilities and political differences to strengthen the relationship (Carnegie, 2013). Several scholars argue that it is a matter of high concern that every member nation should be benefitted from international organisations. Nations rationally decide to join international organisations if the benefits are more than staying outside of the membership. In this context, it can be stated that the benefit derived from international organisations can be more or less, but if nations find themselves benefitted from outside of the membership of international organisations then it would be a failure of these institutions to maintain proper relationship and peace. As it has been defined that in international organisations, the powerful nations define the alternative routes for the less powerful nations, it might be much disadvantageous for them. Due to this reason, less powerful nations particularly in developing economies find themselves comfortable by joining in international organisations, rather than staying outside of it. Overall, it can be stated that the performance of international organisations is flawed. However, they cannot be considered as a complete failure. In some circumstances, the international organisations are also been able to resolve disputes between nations. Since the interests of every member nation differ, it is hard to develop such a strategy which can provide equal benefits to every member nation of international organisations. 4.0. Have They Been Successful in Making International Peace? After the Second World War, there has been hardly any large war among the powerful nations of the world. However, at present, the threats towards global peace are different than the past times. Presently, the destructive ability of technologically advanced nations along with excavating democracy of global business has made the citizens of powerful nations much safer from invasion. However, the technological development has also created new security threat which will eventually increase as scientific knowledge enlarges. These problems are indirectly related with the activities of international organisations. Today, international organisations are formed in order to deal with the threats of war and maintain peace along with harmony between nations (Fearon, 2005). The present period of globalisation calls for international synchronisation and cooperative action. It is in this context that the continuous expansion of global markets has resulted in deepening independence of economies and increasing demands for coordination in a variety of regulatory areas. The international environmental problems are also a protruding aspect for cooperative action on the global level. As the prosperities and destinies of individuals across the world become more closely associated, constant international actions will be required in order to address an assortment of international problems (Coglianese, n.d.). Efforts to deal with international problems related to peace are often the key to create varied forms of international organisations. Contextually, the growing concentration and extent of international communication bring with it a variety of challenges for governance in today’s globalised economy. In such circumstance, international organisations, if adequately organised, can overcome such common problems. The other significant problem comprises safety of core and supreme values. Moral principles incorporating impartiality, freedom and democracy are believed to excel present political practices, principled with claims regarding the right to treat with dignity and respect. Thus, certifying a minimal level of respect towards human rights is an international problem. Furthermore, the present era of globalisation might form a situation under which, vital social values are becoming extensively accepted across the world (Coglianese, n.d.). To an extent, with these problems increasing throughout the era of globalisation, the requirement for international actions and global governance is also expected to increase simultaneously. However, there have been arguments and counterarguments regarding the actions performed by international organisations to maintain peace in the international paradigm. The realists, who believe the world as an anarchic place, consider international organisations as dependent replication of contributing governmental power. In this context, arguments have been centralised on consideration that governments of different states can establish coalition and choose to cooperate, having the capability to alter their approaches when it seems suitable to retain better productivity. Arguably, realists believe that every nation is obsessed with gaining profit, while they can only cooperate if they gain benefit, making long-run cooperation a challenging task. Thus, according to realists, international institutions cannot make the world a peaceful place being driven by individual benefits (Garib, 2005). On the other hand, liberal institutionalists argue that international organisations cause stability and peace among nations. They believe that international organisations create a strong instrument and persuade different nations to establish long-run cooperation, rather than short-run achievements. The effectiveness of international organisations, hence, can be determined by their capability to coerce the member nations and refrain from misbehaving in various global problems (Garib, 2005). Real world examples herewith demonstrate the viewpoint of both realists as well as liberal institutionalists. By supporting the argument of realists, it can be stated that international organisations, such as UN, having greater role to maintain global peace, was unable to prevent the invasion of America in Iraq. Other international organisations, such as European Union, also at times, have been witnessed to fail to control the behaviour of powerful nations, for example, Germany among others (Garib, 2005). Thus, judging from the real life examples, it can be stated that international organisations are at times unsuitable for resolving conflict between super powers. However, it can also be stated that international institutions prevent conflicts from arising within the short run. Judging from the historical viewpoint, the establishment of EU is often regarded as the most peaceful era in Europe. Furthermore, with the establishment of UN, large-scale military battle was observed to have minimised substantially, between the member nations. Hence, it can be argued that international organisations assist in facilitating communication and business between nations and increase the barrier for war like conditions. Therefore, it can be stated that international organisations are likely to maintain peace. However, it is uncertain to determine the level up to which these international organisations can influence global relationships. Correspondingly, in today’s globalised era, they are the most favourable component in order to encourage peace and stability. References Crockett, S., 2011. Can International Institutions Help Make The World More Peaceful? University of London. [Online] Available at: http://www.e-ir.info/2011/03/22/can-international-institutions-help-make-the-world-more-peaceful/ [Accessed June 07, 2014]. Carnegie, A., 2013. Who Benefits? International Institutions and Interstate Political Relations. Princeton University. [Online] Available at: http://ncgg.princeton.edu/IPES/2013/papers/S1015_rm2.pdf [Accessed June 07, 2014]. Cameron, F., 2004. The European Union and Conflict Prevention. United Nations Institute for Disarmament Research. [Online] Available at: https://www.cimicweb.org/cmo/compapp/Documents/European%20Union/The%20European%20Union%20and%20conflict%20prevention.pdf [Accessed June 07, 2014]. Coglianese, C., No Date. Globalization and the Design of International Institutions. Harvard Kennedy School. [Online] Available at: http://www.hks.harvard.edu/m-rcbg/research/c.coglianese_governance_globalization.and.design.pdf [Accessed June 07, 2014]. Fearon, J. D., 2005. Reforming International Institutions to Promote International Peace and Security. Stanford University. [Online] Available at: https://www.stanford.edu/group/fearon-research/cgi-bin/wordpress/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/Reforming-Internationa-Institutions-to-Promote-International-Peace-and-Security.pdf [Accessed June 07, 2014]. Garib, A., 2005. Questioning the Realist Critique of International Institutions. Philosophy 347: Global Justice. [Online] Available at: http://saveandrewgarib.com/writing/essays/05.05.10-realismcritique-miller.pdf [Accessed June 07, 2014]. Magliveras, K. D., 2012. Are International Organizations Effective? Some Criteria for Determining Their Efficiency. [Online] Available at: http://www.academia.edu/3824106/ARE_INTERNATIONAL_ORGANIZATIONS_EFFECTIVE_SOME_CRITERIA_FOR_DETERMINING_THEIR_EFFICIENCY [Accessed June 07, 2014]. Milner, H. V., 2005. Globalization, Development, and International Institutions: Normative and Positive Perspectives. Perspectives on Politics, Vol. 3, No. 4, pp. 833-854. NATO, 1999. NATOs Role in Relation to the Conflict in Kosovo. Historical Overview. [Online] Available at: http://www.nato.int/kosovo/history.htm [Accessed June 07, 2014]. Sandbrook, D., 2011. The End of the Twentieth-Century Tyrants, And the Dawn of the Multinational Giants. Mail Online. [Online] Available at: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/debate/article-2052035/Gaddafi-dead-End-20th-century-tyrants-dawn-multinational-giants.html [Accessed June 07, 2014]. Wise, L., 2013. Was NATO’s Intervention in Kosovo in 1999 ‘Just’? Aberystwyth University. [Online] Available at: http://www.e-ir.info/2013/06/21/was-natos-intervention-in-kosovo-in-1999-just/ [Accessed June 07, 2014]. Read More