Chapter 7 Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs), Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs), and International Law (IL)

Theoretical Perspectives Liberalism –IGOs, NGOs, and IL matter Realism –Skeptical  anarchy –States act in self-interest; self-help mechanisms; prefer weak IGOs; NGOs not independent –States comply with IL when in self-interest; won’t rely on collectivity to protect national interests Radicalism –Skeptical  stratification –Serve interests of dominant states

IGOs: Various Theories Federalism –War = military competition among sovereign states –Peace = states give up sovereignty, invest it in federal body Functionalism –War = economic deprivation and disparity –Build and expand cooperation into political and military affairs Collective Goods –Tragedy of the commons = individual rational attempts to maximize private gain leads to collective suffering, eventually individual suffering –Market mechanisms break down; alternative forms of management necessary –Solutions Coercion Restructure preferences (rewards/punishments) Alter size of group

Roles of IGOs (Table 7.1, 168) International system –Cooperation –Information-gathering, surveillance –Dispute settlement –Activities –Bargaining –International regimes = rules, norms, and procedures States –Foreign policy –Legitimacy –Information –Punish/constrain states Individuals –Socialization –Education

United Nations (UN): Principles Sovereign equality; legal equality –Veto power (five permanent members of Security Council = China, France, Russia, UK, US) –Weighted voting (WB and IMF) Jurisdiction = International problems –Charter doesn’t authorize intervention in domestic jurisdiction; distinction weakening globalization, interdependence human rights, civil wars viewed as international Maintain international peace and security –States should settle disputes peacefully –Notions of security now include human security

United Nations (UN): Structure Security Council –Peace and security, enforcement General Assembly –Debates; admits states; elects members Secretariat (headed by Secretary General) –Gathers information; coordinates and conducts activities; power dependent on occupant Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC) –Economic and social welfare programs, specialized agencies (WHO, UNESCO) Trusteeship Council – oversaw decolonization processes

United Nations (UN): Key Issues North-South conflict Peacekeeping –Traditional peacekeeping (Table 7.4, 176) –Complex peacekeeping (Table 7.5, 177) successes (Namibia) and failures (Rwanda) Enforcement and Chapter VII –US invasion/occupation of Iraq (2003) without UN approval Reform –Amending the charter (requires 2/3 of members and 5 permanent member of SC) –Security Council reform (highly controversial)

European Union (EU) Premier regional IGO (Tables 7.7, 7.8, 184-5) Union of 27 European states –Originally economic integration (1950s); expanded into closer economic and political unit –500 million people; EU passport; $13.4 trillion economy –Many (13) use common currency (euro) Tension = support for economic and political cooperation and concern for diminution of national sovereignty Principle institutions –European Commission, Council of Ministers, European Parliament, European Council, Economic and Social Committee, and European Court of Justice More policy areas; conflicts over foreign policy issues and expansion

Nongovernmental Organizations (NGOs) NGOs = private associations of individuals or groups that engage in political, economic, or social activities usually across national borders Diverse in organization/scope, support base, membership and functions Functions/roles of NGOs –advocates for policies –channels for participation –mobilizing mass publics –distributing critical assistance –monitoring (e.g., human rights)

NGOs Increasing influence, numbers –Global issues require transnational and intergovernmental cooperation –Global conferences (networks) –End of Cold War (political openings) –Communications revolution Soft power = credible information, expertise, moral authority –Resources, flexibility, independent donor bases, links with grassroots groups –Politically independent; participate at all levels; influence state behavior; versatile Limits of NGOs –Lack traditional forms of power; no military or police forces –Cannot command obedience –Many with limited economic resources

International Law (IL) Body of rules, norms regulating interactions among states, IGOs, and individuals Sets expectations, provides order, protects status quo, legitimates use of force by government to maintain order Mechanism for settling disputes, protecting states from each other Aims to be fair and equitable; norms demand obedience and compel behavior –State level: structures for making, enforcing law; widespread compliance; punishment –International system: no authoritative structures (international executive, legislature, judiciary) with compulsory jurisdiction

Sources of IL (Figure 7.1, 196) Treaties –Explicitly written agreements among states; legally binding Authoritative bodies –UN International Law Commission Courts –International Court of Justice Relatively weak = few cases, noncompulsory jurisdiction; few major cases; states initiate proceedings –National and local courts (universal jurisdiction)

Expansion of International Judiciary Individual responsibility for war crimes and crimes against humanity Ad hoc tribunals (International Criminal Tribunals for Former Yugoslavia, Rwanda) International Criminal Court (ICC) (under UN auspices) –Compulsory jurisdiction, jurisdiction over individuals genocide, crimes against humanity, war crimes, crimes of aggression –Essential for establishing international law, enforcing individual accountability –US, China, India, Turkey critical of ICC US refused to sign treaty; military personnel, president subject to ICC jurisdiction “Exceptional” international responsibilities -- military and leaders should be immune from prosecution Infringes on US sovereignty

Why states obey IL Weak authoritative structures at international level Liberal: right thing to do; states want to do what is right and moral; international law reflects what is right –States benefit from doing what is right, moral –States want to be viewed positively, respected by world opinion; fear being labeled pariahs, losing face and prestige –Collective action, security Other members have recourse if states disobey –Diplomatic protests –Reprisals –Economic boycotts, embargoes –Military force Realist: emphasize self-help mechanisms