1. Theoretical Foundations Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

2. Among the multitude of theories explaining GG we will concentrate on the 4 main theories that discuss the nature and role of individuals, state, sovereignty and the interactions of those: LIBERALISM Functionalism, International Regimes, collective goods REALISMCONSTRUCTIVISM Rational Choice, Hegemonic Stability MARXISM Dependency theory Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

3. It stems from the principle of human nature being GOOD Instead it is the inadequate social institutions and misunderstanding of leaders that created INJUSTICE, AGRESSION and WAR Being inevitable these vices could be minimized through multilateral action and institutional reform And that is where democracy and market capitalism become pillars of HUMAN FREEDOM Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

4. Enlightenment: Humans are rational and they can continuously improve their conditions by just societies 19 th century L: Modernize via scientific and industrial revolutions to come to a democratic society and free trade 20 th century L: collective security, self-determination, no power politics and prevention of war This has shaped the LIBERAL thought dwelling on the belief that cooperation is possible, peace could be achieved through interdependence, knowledge, democratic values and international organizations do work. Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com Hugo Grotius worked as a jurist in the Dutch Republic. He is one of the founding father of international law (where the subjects are states) based on natural law.

5. The aftermath of WWII was characterized by realism 1970s increased interdependence of states revived the liberal thought Prisoner’s dilemma was used to justify that states are bound to cooperate in a long run Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com Prisoner B Stays Silent Prisoner B Betrays Prisoner A Stays Silent Each serves 6 months Prisoner A: 10 years Prisoner B: goes free Prisoner A Betrays Prisoner A: goes free Prisoner B: 10 years Each serves 5 years

6. The fundamental principle of F is that states and individuals have basic or functional needs Fs see economic and social international cooperation as prerequisites for peace and security, in this context the special agencies of UN are explained (exp. WB, UNICEF, etc.) Promotes a web of activities that would bring to more interconnectedness and thus, interdependence Key role of experts and their identity loss, loyalty vs. trust F stands behind the drive of IGOs and not surprisingly most of them sprung after WWII, both regional and global F fails to explain why the wars remain? How to separate technical and political issues? Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

7. 1970s legal thought dwelled not only on the formal arrangements, but also on informal rules and norms that could be standardized and codified (think of Bologna process as an example) Here hegemonic states play a role and realism counts as much as liberalism IGOs playing a major role in creating and legitimizing the rules (exp. Convention on Crimes against Humanity) Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

8. Common grazing are for herds Collective Goods tangible and intangible such as peace, environment, financial stability, Internet, quality, etc. Collective goods asks for interwoven action and interdependent activity, here market fails to provide mechanisms for CG, so other arrangements are needed Mutual trust developed and built via monitoring (exp. ENQA) CG theory is used when explaining the Ozone layer and high seas cooperation and arrangements and justify the need for UN and other multilaterals Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

9. Individuals seek to maximize their power and pursue their interests R centers the action around the state which acts through balance of power International Organizations are tools to be used by states for their own interest, so the tools cannot transform the actors as R believes R does not rule out the IR, but has doubt about the NGOs and MNCs, much less the independence of IGOs Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

10. Unlike Rs NRs emphasize the international structures and explain the GG by the absence of global authority and the power of states Structural constraints over agent’s motivations Security Dilemma, i. e. two or more states conflict even though none wants it Balance of power drives states to forge alliances with others Anarchy (caused by international system) leads to insecurity and war IGOs roles are exaggerated and they are not apt to promote stability Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

11. States have objective and material conditions State’s action is a function of utility, which explains its engagement in any multilateral activity States don’t rely solely on their power States use the international system to advance their national interests What RC theorists fail to understand is that state’s action is not only a function of utility but of INFORMATION, which is not always there… Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

12. H is a hybrid of liberal, public goods and realist theories Hegemonic states use their power in certain ways HS believes that open market is a public good that needs a strong state to be the guardian It is the propagator and hence the driver behind the free trade and democratic values as tenets of piece and security Examples of Great Britain and the US after WWII Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

13. Fairly new concept that explains the role of norms It is a behaviouralist approach, in which all the players of IR have certain beliefs, socially constructed rules and cultural practices C core is embedded with identity and interests that form behaviors locally and globally For Cs state interest is socially constructed Sovereignty and its evolution redefines the identity Examples of “poverty” agenda of the WB and humanitarian rules of ICRC Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

14. Resulting from an uneven economic development COLONIALISMNEOCOLONIALISM Sought to maximize material Sought to maximize the dependence gain through power control of ex-colonies on the surplus of domestic goods GG is based on power, process of production and class relations For Ms the IGOs are dominated by a group of powerful states that drive the agenda and have higher gains, WB and IMF are seen as vices that perpetuate this International System Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

15. Unequal trade between developed and developing states IGOs and MNCs based in developed nations help to perpetuate this inequality 1970s (mostly in Latin America and Africa) witnessed un upsurge of import substitution, which collapsed in 1990s and asked for structural adjustments The inequalities of power and wealth should be redistributed via new global order Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com

16. Periphery- underdeveloped Cs Semi periphery- NICs Core-developed Cs Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com IGOs are but tools to a status quo of imbalance Widening gap between the poor and rich states and people has fueled the interest in WST

17. So far the discourse and theory was more centered around the states, but the organizations have their roles and influence as well, which is being studied: Organizational Culture -bureaucracies shaping state policy, IGOs shaping? Organizational Adaptation and Learning - how the change occurs? Inter - organizational Relations - how the cooperation evolves? Exp. WB from sole player to a partner like institution Networks - what are they, how they get formed? Universities as gate keepers? Nvard V. Manasian manasian@arminco.com