International Organizations in World Politics - Case Study Example

INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS IN WORLD POLITICS Name: University: Course: Tutor: Date: International Organizations in World Politics Introduction International Organizations (IOs) are very necessary and controversial participants in the current political world. Their main objective is to address issues that individual States could not act on individually. Kofi Annan, the former Secretary-General, said that the issues that were affecting the twenty-first century could not be solved easily without the assistance of International organizations. According to him, International organizations played a significant role in conquering challenges that affected the twenty-first century. It is widely assumed that International organizations should take the responsibility of organizing and maintaining international stability and peace in the political, economic and social environment and their interests should benefit the international community (Barnett and Martha 2004, 95). Most political analysts have criticized such organizations to be transparent and that their regulations should reflect more than just the interests of individual States. Therefore, this paper discusses the role of International Organizations in global governance and world politics. Literature Review In 1889, Inter-Parliamentary Union (IPU) was created together with an international forum for the purpose of multilateral negotiations. The IPU which is active to date has 157 active national parliaments, and it replaced the League of Nations which was developed after the First World War in 1919. When the League failed to prevent International conflicts, it was changed to become the United Nations with new International reforms that would conquer world problems. Such International Organizations like the League of Nations, the IPU, World Health Organization (WHO) and other international alliances formed a forum that would help nations to voice their ideas and engage in dialogue that could promote peace and stability. The forum that was formed by the International organizations was one of their achievements because even after the League failed to prevent conflicts, nations still came together to create another institution that could enable them to share their opinions and create an opportunity to settle international issues peacefully. Thus, the creation of United Nations which is also an active institution until today with a universal membership. It is also considered the largest International Organization. According to a neo-realist approach, International organizations will always be termed as ineffective because they can never stop or prevent self-interested nations and States from fighting or engaging in political power. Heisenberg, Dorothee (2005), an international scholar, believes that international Institutions can only access limited political power (Heisenberg 2005, 75). Therefore, the organizations give way for States to engage in power relations. In so doing, International Organizations become a reflection of power distribution in the international system. Holzinger et al. (2008) contest Heisenberg’s theory with their theory that states that “Organizations are created to simply respond to the interests of individual states and their characters are framed and distributed by the prevailing capabilities.” Heisenberg later challenges their theory by arguing that International Organizations promote peace and stability amongst several nations by manipulating the actions portrayed by individual member states. To this day, neo-realist believe that International Institutions are irrelevant because they do not alter the political self-interest of member states. The idea that International organizations are irrelevant in practicing their roles contradicts the argument from various scholars that member states will not embrace the opportunities and constraints presented by the International Institutions. For example, the UN’s regulations allow it to use Military force to maintain peace and stability in nations that experience an international crisis. Most member states embrace such standards because it reduces the costs and risks of having conflicts, but at the same time, the states are voting towards disarmament (Holzinger 2008, 562). Analysis of Case Dynamics World Trade Organization (WTO) built an agreement of flexibilities on Trade-Related Factors of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) which developing countries failed to utilize. TRIPS was developed to overcome patent challenges and in turn allow developing countries to obtain medicines for deadly diseases such as HIV/AIDS. The department in World Health Organization (WHO) that deals with technical, essential and traditional drugs produced several documents to assist developing countries with understanding how flexibilities from TRIPS can be utilized. WHO is an International Organization that has organized several workshops and meetings to mobilize the trade organizations, industry people, patent offices and health ministries encouraging them to work together in establishing a common policy. Jahn and Ferdinand (2010), a health officer in South Africa, says “the main challenge is that health and procurement officers have less information concerning intellectual patents and property.” Therefore, the officers hesitate to act because of lack of adequate information. According to Jahn and Ferdinand (2010), WHO is effective and the activities carried out by small departments in the organization are useful but the organization itself requires assistance from trade, health and patent agencies. In addition, Jahn and Ferdinand (2010), argued that much attention should be focused towards the rights to intellectual property as the top level objective of the World Health Organization (Jahn and Ferdinand 2010, 39). Although TRIPS has provisions in its agreement that permit the giving out of licenses to increase the production of medicines, developing countries that lack local manufacturing capabilities are not able to use the TRIPS flexibility. The reason being, TRIPS prefers that the production of medicines to be done under compulsory license which allows the drugs to be supplied only in the domestic market. The World Trade Organization (WTO) in 2003 supported the export restriction which affects many developing countries. Therefore, it means that lack the capability of manufacturing their own drugs depend on other neighboring countries or companies from other countries to do the manufacturing on their behalf. However, International Organizations like WHO and MSF have argued that the import mechanism is unnecessarily biased because it is focused entirely on a country-by-country, case-by-case and drug-by-drug decision-making strategies. Potential countries were expected to change their national laws that allows the import and export of medicinal drugs such as antiretroviral drugs under a compulsory license. Most problems that affect the world today are characterized by transitional standards that force National States to increasingly depend on International Organizations (IOs) for solutions that may assist in policy amendments. Yet, it has been realized that the IOs’ performance varies extensively because some are highly successful in adopting, enforcing and developing a policy while others are less successful. For example, the European Court of Human Rights is known for its successful, organized activities while on the contrary, the UN Human Rights Commission was banned because of its less successful performance. Another example is the EU Council of Ministers which until now is still responsible for maintaining high-speed decision-making processes while on the other hand, the UN Security Council is famous for not being able to fulfill any set agreements. Global Governance Global governance is a group of related ideas and concepts that describe the best policies to be used to organize international relations of states and non- state actors that believe in global progress, diplomacy, independence and gives support to international political organizations and structures. Throughout the history of international relations, there has been a world full of anarchy where every person acts for themselves especially by use of might (Abbott and Duncan 2000, 433). It has been a world where unethical and immoral behaviour like killing is often justified by the end results. International organizations try to come up with ways on how to stop and bring order to the world of anarchy, and as a result, liberal internationalism can offer a justified solution. According to liberals, globalization is the general condition of world politics. The main idea of International Organizations according to political theorists is the importance of moral freedom. It involves the right to be treated fairly and a responsibility to treat other citizens as ethical subjects and not as objects. Through sharing of commitment to other essential institutions, organizations stressed that citizens were entitled to legal equality and civic rights like freedom of the press and religion (Almond and Bingham 1966, 241). Another idea of International Organizations was that the competent sovereigns of the state were to be representative legislatures deriving their power from the approval of the electorate and inflicting their authority free from all restraint as long as the basic civil rights are preserved. Another idea represented by the organizations was how the economy should recognize the rights of private property. Liberal internationalism also showed that individual acquisition, social utility or social agreement justifies property ownership, but it excludes state capitalism and state socialism but not market socialism. Another basic idea presented by International Organizations is the economic decisions. Economic decisions are free from bureaucracy control and are shaped by forces that involve supply and demand (Hawkins et al. 2006, 22). Immanuel Kant and Giuseppe Mazzini are liberal Republicans who conceptualized internationalism as an institute of peace amongst fellow liberal Republicans. The tradition of liberal Republican argues that in a liberal democracy, the states are at peace with each other, but they leave an international legacy on foreign affairs. John Locke, one of the greatest founder of modern liberal individualism argued that International organizations were developed by the states after deriving rights from individual rights (Haas et al. 1993, 18). In the 20th century, Dean V. Babst (1972) was the first to come up with a statistical report for a hypothesis of Clarence Streit (1938) who pointed out the idea of liberal democracies maintaining peace among themselves. In his second article of Perpetual Peace, Kant foresaw an establishment of peace amongst the liberal Republicans through the means of pacific union. According to Kant, all statesmen and liberal Republicans should strongly reject foreign aggression and imperialism on moral grounds (Gutner and Alexander 2010, 233). Kant and other great thinkers of international liberals had one thing in common, they all wanted to create motivation techniques for International States to promote peace and try with great effort to avert war by using International Organizations. They argued that people were mostly driven by self-preservation and their instincts for survival, and such existence was to be eradicated but the only way was through the formation of International Organizations which could provide global governance to the International States. Political Outcomes In world politics today, International Organizations are believed to have given rise to feminism. An example is Kenya Women Finance Trust (KWFT) in Kenya which has made women depend on themselves and rise in the society. Mary Wollstonecraft, a British philosopher, is believed to be one of the greatest pioneer of feminism by vindicating the rights of a woman in 1792. She included women in the political structure by expanding the boundaries that surrounded global governance. This idea has paved the way for many women to contest for various political seats in the modern world openly. In the current political world, political philosophies that resulted from International Organizations has made social ideas and socialist parties to retain their political force with varying influence and degrees of power on all continents. The foundation for the League of Nations was laid down after the First World War by the President of the United States of America, Woodrow Wilson. The idea of generous gesture by President Woodrow came from the concept of perpetual peace which was in Kant’s three articles (Golub 1999, 752). The first article of Kant stressed that the essential freedom of citizens must be safeguarded by the constitution of a particular country. The second article emphasized on the Pacific Union and the alliance that involved the International States which Kant called a treaty between the nations and themselves. The third article, on the other hand, called on the States of the Pacific Union to be gentle to visitors and civilians from other countries and treat them with respect and dignity and this was later known as the Cosmopolitan Law. The main objective of the League of Nations was to promote peace amongst the Nations and States, but it failed to do so. Despite failing to deliver on promises of peace and criticism, Gilardi (2010) illustrates that the League of Nations reformed a doctrine to shape International Organizations (Gilardi 2010, 658) The League of Nations and the attack on it is seen from two separate views. First, the league is supposed to portray a denial of nationalism and the supporters of this view would willingly embrace the Treaty of Versailles except that it involves the agreement of the League. It becomes a disappointing nature because there would be less peace when a relationship is built between the covenant and the Treaty. Secondly, a plan that involves international cooperation can be termed as a step forward, and the agreement of the League of Nations is a conclusion eagerly to be wished except for the fact that it is associated with the Treaty of Versailles which is vicious (Franzese and Jude 2008, 763). Therefore those in support of this view would willingly oppose the League because supporting it would mean adopting the Treaty and this is a view of liberal internationalism. The United Nations (UN) which was established in 1945 was the second multipurpose organization in the 20th century. Its main aims were to save generations from war, to re-strengthen faith in basic human rights, to develop a social and economic progress and better life standards and finally, to create conditions in which justice and respect were paramount and the international law to be maintained. The UN is the ideal institution to manage state relations and global problems because its main objective is to keep the peace and security among various nations. Other objectives may include, respecting and facilitating the promotion of human rights, achieving worldwide compliance to solve international cultural, humanitarian, social and economic problems. Establishing true connection and bond among countries based on the respect for the morals of human rights and serving as a common place where countries can facilitate their actions and activities (Fiorina and Kenneth 1989, 286). The League of Nations together with the United Nations (UN) formed a continuance in general purpose, functions and structures. Most of UN’s primary organs were selected from similar structures together with related agencies but the UN itself comprised of a different organization with the aim of maintaining international peace and security and facilitating social and economic development (Börzel and Thomas 2011, 12). The decision making of the UN and its responsibilities were modified due to changes experienced in the international relations. Challenges such as cold war tension that erupted between the Soviet Union and the United States affected the security functions of the UN during the first forty-five years. The UN and its agencies tried to put across humanitarian dispute and civil war at the beginning of the 21st century. The UN struggled to fight the panic caused by the spread of the deadly disease called Aids, international terrorism and global financial problems and it proved its worth by solving most of these problems. Despite all these challenges, the UN is still considered an International Organization and a body for keeping peace and security in the world by solving global problems. To conclude, International Organizations aimed at reducing state control over the lives of citizens who were subjected to the authority of a state, and it may involve both political and economic dimensions (Daugbjerg and Kim 2011, 411). Political Organizations were categorized by an expansion of the liberty and rights of an individual, and this included the freedom of speech even against the state authorities and organized with anybody to oppose those in power. In international politics, the world is witnessing great changes after the collapse of the Berlin Wall which also ended the strategic bipolarity. International Organizations are believed to have disintegrated the Soviet Union peacefully hence stabilizing several national states. Bibliography Abbott, Kenneth W. and Duncan Snidal. 2000. “Hard and Soft Law in International Governance.” International Organization 54 (3): 421-456. Almond, Gabriel A. and Bingham G. Powell, Jr. 1966. Comparative Politics: A Developmental Approach. Boston, MA: Little, Brown and Company. 235-281 Barnett, Michael N. and Martha Finnemore. 2004. Rules for the World: International Organizations in Global Politics. Ithaca: Cornell University Press. 87-101 Börzel, Tanja and Thomas Risse. 2011. “From Europeanization to Diffusion: Introduction.” West European Politics 35 (1): 1-19. Daugbjerg, Carsten and Kim Mannema, Sonderskov. 2011. “Environmental Policy Performance Revisited: Designing Effective Policies for Green Markets.” Political Studies. 60 (2): 399–418. Fiorina, Morris P. and Kenneth A. Shepsle. 1989. “Formal Theories of Leadership: Agents, Agenda Setters, and Entrepreneurs.” In Leadership and Politics: New Perspectives in Political Science, edited by Bryan D. Jones. Lawrence: University Press of Kansas. 206-311 Franzese, Robert and Jude Hays. 2008. “Interdependence in Comparative Politics: Substance, Theory, Empirics, and Substance.” Comparative Political Studies 41 (4/5): 742–780. Gilardi, Fabrizio. 2010. “Who Learns from What in Policy Diffusion Processes?” American Journal of Political Science 54 (3): 650–666. Golub, Jonathan. 1999. “In the Shadow of the Vote? Decision-Making in the European Community.” International Organization 53 (4): 733-764. Gutner, Tamar and Alexander Thomson. 2010. “The Politics of IO Performance.” A Framework. Review of International Organizations 5: 227-248. Haas, Peter M, Robert O. Keohane and Mark L. Levy. Eds. 1993. Institutions for the Earth: Sources of Effective International Environmental Protection. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. 12-36 Hawkins, Darren G., David A. Lake, Daniel L. Nielson, and Michael J. Tierney. Eds. 2006. Delegation and Agency in International Organizations. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 09-41 Heisenberg, Dorothee. 2005. “The Institution of ‘Consensus’ in the European Union: Formal versus Informal Decision-Making in the Council.” European Journal of Political Research 44: 65-90. Holzinger, Katharina, Christoph Knill and Thomas Sommerer. 2008. “Environmental Policy Convergence: The Impact of International Harmonization, Transnational Communication and Regulatory Competition.” International Organization 62 (4): 553-588. Jahn, Detlev and Ferdinand Muller-Rommel. 2010. “Political Institutions and Policy Performance: A Comparative Analysis of Central and Eastern Europe.” Journal of Public Policy 30: 23-44. Read More