Lack of Democracy in International Organization - Essay Example

Lack of Democracy in International Organization: The United Nations Involvement in Rwanda and Other Nations Author Last Name University Affiliation [Course-Date] Lack of Democracy in International Organization: The United Nations Involvement in Rwanda and Other Conflicts The rise in prominence of international organizations has resulted from increased interdependence of states coupled with technological developments, globalization, and new issues requiring joint solutions. In addition, International organizations have gained increased legitimacy due to their wide membership and their increasing importance in providing effective solutions to problems that face more than one state. Major theories assert that international organizations are created in response to barriers of Pareto efficiency and welfare improvement among members (Barnett and Fennimore, 2004). However, research on actual behavior of many international organizations indicates that due to various reasons, such as political interests, bureaucracy, lack of clear autonomy in financing among other issues contribute to international organizations increasingly becoming undemocratic and often straying from these goals. The United Nations is one such organization that has increasingly gained legitimacy due to an almost universal membership and due to its role in almost all major issues. Peacekeeping and humanitarian issues are two of the most important issues that the United Nations is mandated to address. However, peacekeeping efforts have met with mixed success in Sierra Leone and Bosnia among other states and apparent failure in some states such as Somalia and in the 1994 Rwanda genocide. In Rwanda as in most other failures, clear lack of democracy by the United nations as evidenced in the interference by political interests of states on the Security Council, lack of autonomy, bureaucracy among other elements constrained the ability of the DPKO (Department of Peace-keeping Operations) in peacekeeping efforts. The 1999 report of the independent inquiry into the actions of the United Nations during the 1994 genocide in Rwanda indicated that over 800,000 individuals were killed in the 100 days genocide pitting mainly Hutus against Tutsi population and moderate Hutus (United Nations Security council, 1999). The international community and especially the United Nations were criticized for not only failing to prevent the genocide from occurring but also due to their inability to stop the ongoing genocide. The report further analyzed the role played by various actors in the United Nations and found out that the United Nations and in particular, the secretariat, the secretary general, the member states of the United Nations and the Security Council failed the Rwandese. The then Secretary general admitted that the United Nations and its various organs had failed in preventing and stopping the genocide. In what was apparently one of the extreme failures of the United Nations systems, the genocide brought into fore various issues such as political interests, commitment, bureaucratic system and resources in influencing major decisions and specifically in decisions regarding to peacekeeping effort and consequently indicating clear absence of democracy in the running of the United Nations. Lack of independence is one of the major indicators of lack of democracy in an international organization. Independence is one of the most important factors contributing to the success of International organizations. Independence is defined as the ability to act with a degree of autonomy and neutrality in specific spheres (Haas, 1990). Such independence is especially important in allowing the International organizations such as the United Nations to act as trustees, arbiters, neutral providers of information and even managers of enforcement activities among others. The United Nations lacked the independence necessary in the Rwanda genocide in its role of peacekeeping due to varying political interests, lack of political goodwill amongst member states, and lack of resources. Lack of political will influenced Secretariats response and making of decisions of the Security Council (United nations Security Council, 1999). Additionally, it was evident in the inability of the United Nations to acquire the necessary troops for the United Nations Assistance Mission for Rwanda (UNAMIR). An evident case of lack of lack of political good will was the failure to protect the Rwandese who had sought shelter at the Ecole Tecnique Officiele (ETO). The Belgian UNAMIR forces and the French forces among other forces evacuated the expatriates in the process leaving over 2000 civilians at the compound who were consequently massacred by the Militia. The Foreign minister of Belgium sought withdrawal of Belgium troops and lobbied for withdrawal of the UNAMIR troops citing that the situation warranted withdrawal of the troops. This was clearly undemocratic. Subsequent lobbying by Belgian government to the Security Council members was intended to influence the council members to suspend the UNAMIR operation. The United States stated that it would only accept a decision to withdraw UNAMIR believing that no useful role of peacekeeping was possible in the circumstances following failure of the peace negotiations. Russia and the United Kingdom preferred immediate reduction of UNAMIR troops and maintenance of political presence of advisers and military observers. Nigeria pressed for an increase in the number of troops. On April 21, 1994, an unanimous vote sought to reduce UNAMIR force to only 270 and to change its mandate further indicating clear lack of political goodwill among political players. New proposals to shift mandate and mission of UNAMIR forces form being a neutral mediator to recognition of the need to end the massacre were mooted only after over 200,000 people had been killed (United Nations Security council, 1999). The political interference in this case meant that the international organization were not truly democratic. The need for forceful action and commitment of human as well as material resources were asked for by the Secretary General. Secretary General Kofi Annan noted that such commitment as well in availing both human and material resources was required on a “scale that member states have so far been reluctant to contemplate” (United Nations Security council, 1999). Later, these differences continued with the United States drafting a proposal recommending explicit reference for consent of parties, and postponement of deployment awaiting further Council directions. France and New Zealand opposed such moves. The decision to increase UNAMIR troops were made on 17th may, 1994, two months after the onslaught including decision to increase troops and imposition of arms embargo. Rwanda itself a principal member of the Council voted against the decision for arms embargo. Efforts were now made to find troops. Whereas few African countries were willing to send troops, one of their requirements was that they be given logistical and financial support. The United State was particularly slow to respond considering its earlier involvement in Somalia. Consequently, the United Nations and the United States had adopted a model of non involvement in direct internal conflicts. Coming after the aftermath of the Somali involvement, only 500 troops had been amassed against the backdrop of the required 5,500 troop’s two months into the genocide clearly indicating lack of political goodwill amongst member nations and indicating a largely bureaucratic and undemocratic process (United Nations Security Council, 1999). In explaining how international organizations end up straying from their mandates and ending up as undemocratic outfits, Barnett and Finnermore (1999) in an apparent scrutiny of International organizations posited that many international organizations many times strayed from efficiency goals. In addition, the duo sought to explain this phenomena and especially the power of international organizations and their apparent propensity for dysfunctional behavior using a constructive approach rooted in sociological institutionalism (Barnett et al, 1999). A major issue within international organizations was the issue of principal-agent relationship. Of importance in determining how organization ended up being undemocratic was a consideration of whether agents acted as delegates of their principles, building on the theories of representation and rational choice. The influence of the principles in making decisions in international organizations such as in the case of United nations involvement in Rwanda was especially visible where the United States used its position to influence decisions on UNAMIR troops. Belgium similarly used its representatives to influence decision to withdraw the UNAMIR troops. The Rwandese used its position in the United Nations Security Council (UNSC) to influence decisions on arms embargo and to exercise advantage in the negotiations being privy to the on goings of the council. All such instances indicate clear lack of democracy. Such instances further represented incidences where dysfunctional behavior occurs in International organizations. Bannet et al, 1999 point out how such dysfunctional behavior apparent in the Rwanda case occurs using sociological institutions. The authors drawing from sociological institutionalisms and several bodies of theory argue that sources of bureaucratic power can cause dysfunction behavior. The dimensions involve whether the cause of dysfunction is from within the organization or from outside the organization and whether the causes are cultural or material forces. The best known theory describing the undemocratic nature of international organizations is Bureaucratic politics which involves bargaining along hierarchies (Bennet eta al, 1999). Such bargaining is based not on rational decisions nor on democratic principles but on the basis of budgets, staff benefits among others through a competitive process of bargaining. Bureaucratic in international organizations largely become irrational when they are taken too far. Bureaucracy involves procedures and rules. In addition, bureaucracies may also tend to interfere with democracy in decision making in an international organization. Use of rules that are strongly embedded in the organization may be an end to themselves consequently interfering with democratization of international organizations. A good case in point is involvement of United Nations in most reconstruction and peace efforts. The United Nation has used UN mandated elections as an end in troubled areas while promoting principles of democratic states even in situations that it is clear that either the elections are immature, counterproductive and undesirable at those particular instances. However, since the United Nations uses elections as a measure of the success of an operation, In a case such as in Bosnia, decision making using bureaucratic rules resulted to early elections that ended up ratifying ethnic cleansing, an outcome that they were meant to intervene against in the first instance. Bureaucratic universalism is also considered as another source of pathology in International organization. Universalism of bureaucracy occurs where an international organization in generating rules that are universal and non contextual promote generalized transfer of knowledge on the basis that technical knowledge can be transferred across various circumstances. The results in such a case may be disastrous in some circumstances. The effort of peacekeeping in Cambodia illustrated such a scenarios, where those who were working as peacekeepers in Cambodia were later transferred to other stations such as Bosnia and Somalia on the basis that knowledge obtained from such a location would be transferred to other areas. This potentially resulted to failure in some circumstances due to the contextual differences in various locations. Such a rule as neutrality as was utilized by Akashi, a UN special envoy to Cambodia was unsuccessful in Bosnia. Another cause for failure in democracy in International organizations is the issue of normalization of deviance. Barnett and Fennimore (1999) used Vaughan’s study on how various rules exceptions become the rules over time. This element is also related to the issue of Bureaucracy. Although bureaucracy involves establishing rules that become routine over time thereby providing a predictable response to the environment, in some cases deviance may exist due to some particular circumstances. When such deviance becomes established, it ends up being routine and part of the policy and procedures of an international organization and therefore impinging on the principles of democracy. A point in case where deviance became normalized and also as normal procedures was the case of the change in the way of handling refugees by the UNHCR. Whereas before 1980 repatriation was viewed as one of the most reliable long term solution in the refugee crisis, was meant to be voluntary and safe since use of was thought to be against international legal principles. However, changes that have occurred since then has made repatriation to be increasingly involuntary and facing lower barriers. Another reason for dysfunctional behavior is material forces outside the organizations (Bennet et al, 1999). These are evident through state preferences and constraints, which were evident in the Rwanda case with the Belgium, United States among other players requiring withdrawal of troops and Nigeria requiring additional troops. The UN as with other international organizations are forced to chose between options which may not be appropriate or optimal policy due to conflicts among member States. In the case of the United Nations in Rwanda two earlier options pitting immediate reduction in force or a slow reduction of forces were both significantly inappropriate policy options in the light of the Rwanda genocide. Cultural theorists on the other hand point out the role of environment and especially material power and resource constraints in shaping the organizational culture (Bennet et al, 1999). At this level concerns for legitimacy may influence policy decisions. Contradictory behavior as evident in ambiguous missions, result to functional, legitimacy and normative imperatives such as lack of clear polices in the role of the UNAMIR troops leading to dysfunctional of organizations and which contributed to dysfunctional in the United Nations Rwanda involvement. Finally the nature of bureaucracies in formulation of either formal or informal rules as a form of rationalized means to reach various ends can result to a disposition towards dysfunctional and self defeating behavior (Bennet et al, 1999). The rules are meant to indicate the appropriate action in reaction to various stimuli, demands or request. In the Rwanda case, the United States was wary of sending its troops in the conflict especially considering the aftermaths of the Somali peacekeeping efforts (Hirsch, 2001). Consequently, it’s clear that In Rwanda as in most other failures, the political interests of states on the Security Council constrained the ability of the DPKO in peacekeeping efforts. In addition, various theories successfully attempt to explain such phenomena. The UN among other International organizations must be aware of such forces in order to come up with policies and guidelines that would be more effective in such scenarios. More autonomy and access to resources among other options should be explored. References Bannett, Michael and Finnemore, Martha. (1999). The Politics, Power and Pathologies of International organizations. International organization 53(4): 699-732. Massachusetts: Massachusetts Institute of Technology. Haas, E.N. (1990). When knowledge is Power. Berkeley: University of University Press. Hirsch, J. R. (2001). Somalia and Operation restore. Reflections on peacekeeping and Peace Making: Washington D.C: USIP Press. United Nations Security Council. (1999). Report of the independent inquiry into the role of the United Nations during the 1994 Rwanda genocide: United Nations. Read More