slide 1 © 2006 by default! pols4503 international organizations gregory c. dixon [email protected]...

126
Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon [email protected] www.westga.edu/~gdixon

Upload: jessie-mccormick

Post on 11-Jan-2016

214 views

Category:

Documents


1 download

TRANSCRIPT

Page 1: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 1

© 2006 By Default!

POLS4503International Organizations

Gregory C. Dixon

[email protected]

www.westga.edu/~gdixon

Page 2: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 2

© 2006 By Default!

Who am I?Dr. Gregory C. DixonSpecialty – International RelationsAreas of interest / research:

– International Institutions– Conflict Management– Globalization and Global Governance

Page 3: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 3

© 2006 By Default!

Office Hours and ContactOffice: Pafford 125Office Hours:

– MW 11am – 12:30pm 1:45pm – 3:30pm– T 1 – 3pm– and by appointment

Email: [email protected]

Page 4: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 4

© 2006 By Default!

Course Web Page

CourseDen

Public site:

http://www.westga.edu/~gdixon

Under “current courses” pick pols4503

Page 5: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 5

© 2006 By Default!

Required Texts Weiss, et al. The United Nations and Changing

World Politics, 6th Edition Diehl & Frederking The Politics of Global

Governance: International Organizations in an Interdependent World, 4th edition

Braveboy-Wgner Institutions of the Global South Goldstone & Smith International Judicial Institutions Pease International Organizations, 4th Edition Kratochwil and Mansfield International Organization

and Global Governance: A Reader, 2nd Edition

Page 6: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 6

© 2006 By Default!

Learning Outcomes

Survey the history of the international state system and trace the rising need for governance beyond national borders

Discuss the major problems of cooperation in international relations according to various theoretical approaches

Discuss how domestic and international political institutions affect cooperation

Examine governance structures in different issue areas

Compare and contrast governmental and non-governmental solutions to the problem of global governance

Page 7: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 7

© 2006 By Default!

AssignmentsExams (3) 30% each

– The lowest exam score is dropped

Group Project:– Background Paper 5%– Final Project Paper 35%

Page 8: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 8

© 2006 By Default!

ExamsTake-home essay exams

– A selection of five questions from which you will answer two

– Each answer should be 800-1200 words for a total of 1600 – 2400 words per exam

Page 9: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 9

© 2006 By Default!

Group Project

Solve a problem in contemporary global governance– 5 – 7 page background paper– 25 – 35 page final project paper

Peer grades used to punish free riders

Page 10: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 10

© 2006 By Default!

Group Project Topics Design a framework agreement on the

environment for the Durban Conference Design a reform plan for the Nuclear

Non-Proliferation Regime Design a Global Financial Governance

Regime Design a social entrepreneurship

organization for poverty reduction in a country of your choice

Design a model system for international enforcement of disputed election results

Page 11: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 11

© 2006 By Default!

Group Project Students may form their own groups

– Lists must be submitted by Jan 26 Final say on group assignments lies with

the professor Groups will be matched with

assignments on Jan 26 in class Groups may propose alternate

assignment

Page 12: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 12

© 2006 By Default!

Assumption of Adulthood

All students are assumed to be adults and will be held to adult standards of accountability and decorum.

You are expected to familiarize yourself with the requirements of the course.

You are expected to meet the requirements of the course without having to be reminded of such clearly posted things as exam due dates.

It is expected that you will do the required reading for the course.

It is expected that you will complete all required assignments.

Page 13: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 13

© 2006 By Default!

Class Participation

It is expected that students will participate in class

Education is not simply a one-way process The subject matter in this course is

complex at times and may require clarification

Students are encouraged to ask questions

Page 14: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 14

© 2006 By Default!

Late or Missed AssignmentsLate assignments will suffer a penalty of one

letter grade (10 points on 100 point scale) for each business day late

The exams are take-home, so extensions will be extremely rare

Absolutely no extensions will be given for the final exam due date

Page 15: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 15

© 2006 By Default!

Special NeedsStudents with special needs as identified by

the University will be accommodated in accordance with University policy

Please inform the instructor no later than January 23, 2009 of any special needs that will require accommodation

Page 16: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 16

© 2006 By Default!

Attendance

Attendance will not be taken and is not required as part of the course grade

Attendance is vital to success in this course

Students are forewarned that missing lectures may significantly reduce their chances of passing the course

It is the responsibility of the student to get the notes from that day of class from another student in the class

Page 17: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 17

© 2006 By Default!

Acts of the Gods

On very rare occasions truly terrible things happen

If such an event happens, don't wait until the last day of the semester to deal with it

While the professor is strict, he's not inhuman

Page 18: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 18

© 2006 By Default!

Privacy and FERPA

FERPA is vague regarding emailNothing related to grades, exams, or any

other course information specific to a student will be discussed via email - period

Grades and related information will only be discussed in person during office hours or after class

Page 19: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 19

© 2006 By Default!

Classroom Decorum

Please arrive on time Please turn off any device that makes noise Please do not read the newspaper, sleep, send

text messages, or work on material for other courses during the class time

Mutual respect and politeness is required in the classroom at all times

Violations of appropriate classroom decorum will result in penalties in accordance with the syllabus

Page 20: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 20

© 2006 By Default!

Academic Honesty All students should be aware of the University rules

regarding academic honesty. Cheating, fabrication, and/or plagiarism of any kind will

not be tolerated. Any student caught committing any violation of the

Honor Code on any assignment will receive an F in the course and will be reported to the University for further action as per University policy

The professor reserves the right to seek the harshest possible penalty for any and all violations of the University of West Georgia Honor Code regardless of the value of the individual assignment

Page 21: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 21

© 2006 By Default!

Academic Honesty

If you are unsure as to what constitutes academic dishonesty, please consult the University of West Georgia Student Handbook

Ignorance of the Code will not be accepted as an excuse for violations of it

Many things which are perfectly acceptable in high school are considered cheating in college

If you have a question about cheating, ask, don’t just assume that you are ok

Page 22: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 22

© 2006 By Default!

POLS 4503International Relations

History of the international system

The Good Parts Version

Page 23: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 23

© 2006 By Default!

Globalization in History

Globalization is as old as humanityGlobal governance is not

Page 24: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 24

© 2006 By Default!

Global Interconnectedness

• Mongol conquests create a system of trade in central Asia that links east and west by land

• Chinese and Arab traders have extensive sea trade routes that link Africa, the Middle East, and Asia

• By 1400, there is a trade system that links Eurasia and Africa

Page 25: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 25

© 2006 By Default!

The Age of Discovery

• Europeans explore the world in desperation: find allies against a powerful enemy• In the process they accidentally find the

Americas• They also establish a global trade system

• Americas integrated into pre-existing trade system on European terms

• Europeans displace local traders throughout the world

Page 26: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 26

© 2006 By Default!

Colonialism

• Global governance takes off in the age of colonization

• Colonies form the first real attempt at global governance• Global governance had been a dream for many,

but had never been possible• Colonialism will make it possible, but at a terrible

price to local groups

Page 27: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 27

© 2006 By Default!

The Emergence of Sovereignty

• 1648 – Peace of Westphalia ends the Thirty Years’ War• Religion was the excuse for war, but “reasons of

state” quickly took over

• The legal principle of sovereignty emerges by accident• The result was a legal principle of non-

intervention• This becomes the foundation of international law

Page 28: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 28

© 2006 By Default!

The Colonial System

• By 1870 the world is as integrated as the world of 2000• Globalization has come at the point of the gun in

many places• European cultural practice assumed a

hierarchy of peoples• Colonialism depended on force

• Leaves bad memories of global governance

Page 29: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 29

© 2006 By Default!

Impact of Colonialism

• Local economy and society is reorganized on European lines• Local production is displaced by European

production• Local social structures are altered at best,

crushed at worst• A very painful transition in many areas under

colonialism• Spreads nation-state system and European

political norms to whole world

Page 30: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 30

© 2006 By Default!

Colonial Empires – 1754

Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Colonisation_1754.png

Page 31: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 31

© 2006 By Default!

Colonial Empires – 1800

Source: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:Colonisation_1800.png

Page 32: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 32

© 2006 By Default!

Colonial Empires – 1885

Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Colonisation_1885.png

Page 33: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 33

© 2006 By Default!

Colonial Empires – 1914

Source: http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/Image:Colonisation_1914.png

Page 34: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 34

© 2006 By Default!

Informal Governance

• The colonial governance architecture was informal• There were no treaties• There were no agreed upon rules• The system depended on perceptions of

common interest and shared norms

Page 35: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 35

© 2006 By Default!

Great Power Governance

• Council of Europe• Post-Napoleonic era

• League of Nations• Post WWI

• United Nations• Post WWII

Page 36: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 36

© 2006 By Default!

Council of Europe

• A century of relative peace follows the Napoleonic wars

• Great power conflict is rare and low-scale• The Council of Europe keeps the system

working• Informal meetings of Great Powers• Colonial system kept conflict out of Europe

• But peace is fragile

Page 37: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 37

© 2006 By Default!

The World of 1913

• 100 Years of Peace• Positive vision of the world was accepted by

most people in Europe and the US• Colonial system seemed strong• The vision of the future was bright

Page 38: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 38

© 2006 By Default!

WWI

• WWI changes the world• Tears apart social, economic, political, and

military assumptions about the world• Creates massive uncertainty in its wake• Kills people at a rate not even imagined in

past wars• The entire system of global governance is

torn to shreds

Page 39: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 39

© 2006 By Default!

Wilson’s Moment

• Woodrow Wilson wants to save the world from itself

• He will do this through a radical new concept:• Institutionalized Global Governance• A formal organization to coordinate the actions of

states

• The League of Nations

Page 40: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 40

© 2006 By Default!

Wilson’s Vision

Wilson was a political scientistHe wanted to do for the world what the

Founding Fathers had done for the US– Create new institutions to make the world better

If you can institutionalize governance, you can prevent conflict

Page 41: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 41

© 2006 By Default!

The League of Nations

Collective Security– Make war unthinkable– All nations will punish aggressors– The strong will protect the weak

The League becomes the core of Wilson’s vision for the Versailles Treaty Talks– This weakens his diplomatic position– This weakens his standing at home

Page 42: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 42

© 2006 By Default!

Seeds of Failure

Wilson’s idealism meets harsh reality– France and UK wanted to punish Germany– Had to place blame for war on the losers– Wilson excludes the US Senate from the Treaty

talks– Wilson underestimates isolationist sentiment in

USEuropean leaders take advantage of WilsonThe US refuses to ratify the Versailles Treaty

Page 43: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 43

© 2006 By Default!

The Interwar Years

Globalization collapses in WWIThe 1920’s see some recovery, but it is

precariousThe Great Powers do not work together to

coordinate policyThe 1929 Crash wrecks the system

– Very bad policies pursued by all– Lack of coordination dooms everyone to the

Depression– Failure of collective security leads to WWII

Page 44: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 44

© 2006 By Default!

WWII

WWII opens a doorUnconditional surrender means the outcome

is known long before the war actually ends:– In 1943 it is clear that the Allies will win– This leaves nearly two years to plan for “after the

war”

Page 45: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 45

© 2006 By Default!

An Open Door

The US decides in 1943 to rebuild the worldA group at the State Department gets the job

of remaking the world orderThis group will design a new governance

architecture– Bad peace = more war– Lack of cooperation = collapse– US Isolation doomed the interwar years

Page 46: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 46

© 2006 By Default!

Post-War Governance

The Bretton Woods Organizations for cooperation in economics– IMF– World Bank– GATT will join this in 1947

A new collective security organization– The United Nations

• A Security Council to provide teeth

Page 47: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 47

© 2006 By Default!

Collective Security Redux

The UN System– General Assembly

• One state, one vote– Security Council

• Rotating membership for all members• Permanent membership for the “Big 5”• Enshrines the 1945 world order

Page 48: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 48

© 2006 By Default!

Economic Coordination

Keynesian management of the international economy

“Embedded Liberalism”Global Economic Governance

– Prevent collapse of economic system

Page 49: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 49

© 2006 By Default!

Impact of the Cold War

System fails to work as designedSecond Wave of globalization is divided

along Cold War lines– 1st World: The West– 2nd World: The East– 3rd World: The Rest

1973: economic changes1989: political changes

Page 50: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 50

© 2006 By Default!

The Post Cold War World

The world changes radicallyThere is no hegemon to rebuild the systemThe West wins, so the West’s organizations

survive

The system we have today is basically the 1945 system

50 years of ideological conflict have shifted how the system works

Page 51: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 51

© 2006 By Default!

POLS 4503International Relations

The Architecture of Global Governance

Page 52: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 52

© 2006 By Default!

What is Architecture in GG?

Global Governance Architecture– The institutions that provide global governance– Multiple types of institutions

• Formal• Informal• Governmental• Non-governmental

– Focus depends on theoretical approach

Page 53: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 53

© 2006 By Default!

Why Have Architecture?

The international system is not ordered like domestic political systems

Anarchy rules the international system– No legitimate world government– All states are technically equal in status– No means of enforcing agreements– There are no rules inherent in the system– This devolves into “self-help”

This is a form of collective action problem

Page 54: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 54

© 2006 By Default!

Collective Action Problems

We are in a group– There is some thing that will make us all better

off– No one of us can create it alone, it requires a

group to create it– If we act together, we can get it done

But in these cases, we almost never act together

Page 55: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 55

© 2006 By Default!

Collective Goods

If the good gets created, then we all benefit from it regardless of our contribution to creating it

Everyone in the group benefitsThink of clean air

– We are all better off without air pollution– But we cannot control who breathes our air– Say clean solar power costs twice what coal

power costs– You can’t deny the coal purchaser cleaner air

Page 56: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 56

© 2006 By Default!

The Free Rider Problem

Creating a collective good is costly– If we don’t pay the cost, but everyone else does,

the good is created and we benefit– But we don’t have to pay– This is the “free rider problem”

Page 57: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 57

© 2006 By Default!

International Problems

IR is full of collective action problems– Collective security– International trade– Environmental treaties– Fisheries protection– Human rights treaties– The Laws of War– Etc.

Page 58: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 58

© 2006 By Default!

Global Governance of CAP’s

Global governance is about solving collective action problems– There are lots of ways– They all have their trade offs– There is no perfect system

The governance mechanisms varyThat’s what the course is about

Page 59: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 59

© 2006 By Default!

Thinking Theoretically

Social scientific approach to global governance

We create theoretical models to explain the world

These models include assumptions about many aspects of IR

They also include their own vocabularyThe theoretical assumptions impact how you

see the problems and the solutions

Page 60: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 60

© 2006 By Default!

Theory in IR

The world is complex, too complexWe simplify it by creating theoretical modelsThese models are based on assumptions

about what is importantDifferent models lead to different conclusionsThis matters a great deal in global

governance

Page 61: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 61

© 2006 By Default!

The Major Theoretical Approaches

Realism / NeorealismLiberalism / NeoliberalismSocial ConstructivismMarxism / StructuralismCritical Theory

– Post-modernism– Post-structuralism– Identity Theory– And more

Page 62: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 62

© 2006 By Default!

Why do we care about this?

The authors you are reading come from these schools

The assumptions they make are part of their arguments about global governance

Theory colors how we think about these issues

Theory leaks into policy in many waysTheory and practice are in constant tension

Page 63: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 63

© 2006 By Default!

A Rogues Gallery

Who are the major players in governance?

The usual suspects– Nation States– Intergovernmental Organizations (IGO’s)– Multinational Corporations– Non-Governmental Organizations– Transnational Civil Society / Epistemic

Communities / Individuals

Page 64: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 64

© 2006 By Default!

Actors In International Relations

Nation StatesIntergovernmental Organizations (IGO’s)Multinational CorporationsNon-Governmental OrganizationsTransnational Civil Society / Epistemic

Communities / Individuals

Page 65: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 65

© 2006 By Default!

Nation States

The major players in IR– Sovereign entities

– Fixed geography

– Monopoly on legitimate use of force

– Wide range of domestic political systems affect behavior

The focus of most mainstream IR theory before the end of the Cold War

Page 66: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 66

© 2006 By Default!

IGO’s

Organizations formed by formal treaties between national governments– Have a formal structure detailed by treaty

– Regular meetings

– Bureaucracy (wide range in sizes)

– Come in many different forms

Mechanisms of governance created by states

Page 67: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 67

© 2006 By Default!

Traditional IGO TypologyMembership

Function: Universal Limited

General

•United Nations •Organization of American States•Arab League•African Union•Commonwealth of Nations

Specific

•World Trade Organization•World Bank•Universal Postal Union•Intl Telecoms Union

•NATO•OECD•ASEAN (originally)•SADC

Page 68: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 68

© 2006 By Default!

NGO’s

Members are individuals, NGO’s, and/or, MNC’s– Are member driven

– Typically are focused on narrow range of issues

– Have wide range of relationships to states

– Incredibly diverse

• Issue areas

• Organizational forms

– Funded by many different sources

Page 69: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 69

© 2006 By Default!

Multinational Corporations

Legal “persons” created to do businessDepend on legal systems of nation statesMay operate in many nation statesAre responsible to shareholders

– Are motivated by profit– Most nation states require “maximizing of

shareholder value”The largest MNC’s have sales that exceed

the GNP of most nations

Page 70: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 70

© 2006 By Default!

Transnational Civil Society

Us!– People who actively participate in global politics– Can do so in many ways

Often most recognized when working through NGO’s

Provides a latent potential for organizing politically

Relatively new as the subject of study in IR

Page 71: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 71

© 2006 By Default!

POLS4503International Organizations

Norms and Governance

Page 72: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 72

© 2006 By Default!

Norms

Norms are shared valuesNorms can impact governance

– Shared norms simplify– Different norms can complicate

Values affect a wide range of calculations by political leaders

Page 73: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 73

© 2006 By Default!

Norms and Institutions

Norms can be embodied in institutions– Human rights norms– Norm of non-conquest– Economic norms

Norms and institutions reinforce one another– World Bank promotes neo-liberal economic

norms– EU supports European concepts of human rights

Page 74: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 74

© 2006 By Default!

Norm Transmission

This is poorly understoodThis is contested territory2 basic models:

– Diffusion– Punctuated Equilibrium

Page 75: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 75

© 2006 By Default!

Norm Diffusion

Norms are transmitted through a complex process of diffusion

Norms may lurk for years before becoming powerful– Norms spread through adoption by more and

more groups– Gradual, tentative, and reliant on individuals

This process is poorly understood

Page 76: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 76

© 2006 By Default!

Punctuated Equilibrium

Dominant norms tend to hold on– Gradual change takes decades

Shock events change norms– Norms may change radically overnight

This process is hard to see coming due to nature of shock events

Page 77: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 77

© 2006 By Default!

Shared Norms

Shared norms have several benefits– Lower cost of communication– Reinforce global governance implementing them– Provide common framework for action

Shared norms can have costs– Blind spots when dealing with others– Institutions may hold to old norms– Can frame non-sharers as threats

Page 78: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 78

© 2006 By Default!

Conflicting Norms

Costs– Raise cost of communication– Increase risk of misunderstanding– Raise chance of conflict– Create competing factions– Creates tension in governance

Benefits– Innovation in governance– Interchange of ideas

Page 79: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 79

© 2006 By Default!

Norm of Non-Conquest

Since WWII wars for conquest are exceedingly rare– China and Tibet– Israel/Arab conflicts

Conquest is not accepted under UN CharterConquest is seen as illegitimate

Imperfect fit in institutions of governance

Page 80: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 80

© 2006 By Default!

Human Rights Norms

General acceptance by most states– UN Universal Declaration on Human Rights

Varied applicationRise of NGO’s

– Amnesty International– Human Rights Watch

Have evolved since 1948 and the UDHRImperfect fit in institutions of governance

Page 81: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 81

© 2006 By Default!

Norms are problematic

Not everyone agreesCan be a source of tensionRhetoric may not match actionNorms ebb and flow in powerNorm diffusion is poorly understood

Page 82: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 82

© 2006 By Default!

Norms in Practice

Mixed impact– Definite rhetorical commitment– Often set aside for “reasons of state”

Norms are hard to measure– Norm of non-conquest– Bounded competition

Norms can be negative– Radical groups have strong norms– Nationalism is a norm

Page 83: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 83

© 2006 By Default!

POLS4503International Organizations

Traditional Collective Security

Page 84: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 84

© 2006 By Default!

Collective Security

Collective Security is the idea that states will form groups in order to deter aggressors

Ideally all states will join togetherIn practice, this never happensMost collective security takes the form of

traditional alliances– Triple Entente– The Axis– NATO– Warsaw Pact

Page 85: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 85

© 2006 By Default!

The Security DilemmaStates cannot provide absolute securityNo single state has the power to overwhelm

all other statesIn seeking security, states make others feel

insecure– If I arm myself, my neighbors get nervous– My neighbors increase military readiness and I

get nervous– All states in the region get nervous as military

spending risesThe result is a dilemma for all states

– Seeking our own security makes all states less secure

Page 86: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 86

© 2006 By Default!

Balance of Power

One way around the Security Dilemma is to balance power

States form alliances as a counterweight to other states– UK in 19th century European conflicts

The idea is that groups will promote security by seeking to keep power in a rough balance

No state or group can be confident of victoryProblem is this can be unstable

– States with an advantage have an incentive to fight

Page 87: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 87

© 2006 By Default!

Balance of Threat

States can also balance threatsIf there is a threat to the state, they can seek

alliances to deter the threatWhile similar to balance of power, this tends

to be less enduringThere is a threat today so threatened states

band togetherAlliances only form when there is a clear

perception of a threat

Page 88: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 88

© 2006 By Default!

Alliance TypesDefense Pacts

– Mutual assistance in the face of aggression from outside powers

– May include a wide range of cooperation within the structure

– NATONon-Aggression / Neutrality Pacts

– Agreements to remain neutral in conflicts involving another state

– Much rarerMilitary Cooperation Agreements

– Diverse forms– Can be aimed at aggression as well as defense

Page 89: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 89

© 2006 By Default!

NATO

North Atlantic Treaty OrganizationFormed to deter Soviet Aggression in EuropeWas the West’s security system for the Cold

War– US was largest state– Western European states made significant

contributionsLed to the formation of the Warsaw Pact on

the part of the USSR

Page 90: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 90

© 2006 By Default!

ECOWAS

Economic Community of West African StatesFormed as an economic organization for

West AfricaIt became clear that economic development

was not possible without securityFormed a Security CouncilFormed a Peacekeeping Command

– Deployed troops to civil wars in Liberia, Sierra Leone, and Ivory Coast

Nigeria is the largest member state

Page 91: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 91

© 2006 By Default!

Changing Collective Security

Challenges to traditional alliances– Reduced threat environment among great

powers post Cold War– Rise of non-state actor threats– Shift in norms regarding “security”– Increase in pressure for humanitarian

intervention

The norms of collective security are changing

Page 92: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 92

© 2006 By Default!

Reduced Threat Environment

Nation states are less likely to fight warsGreat powers do not see immediate threats

from each other– Longer-term threats still matter– Common short-term desire for stability

Reduced role for older types of security alliance– NATO reinvented as nation-building force

Great power wars are highly unlikely in the foreseeable future

Page 93: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 93

© 2006 By Default!

Rise of Non-State ActorsImmediate threats are from non-traditional

threats– Stateless terrorist organizations– Failed states– Contagion effects of civil violence

These cannot be deterred through traditional alliances

Fighting them mixes several elements– Law enforcement– Military action– Nation building

Page 94: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 94

© 2006 By Default!

Changing Norms

A debate is raging over what “security” means– Traditional security:

• national survival through military means via self-help– Traditional collective security:

• collective action to deter aggressors– Expansive collective security:

• Duty of strong states to police the world to maintain stability

– Human security:• Holistic security for all persons in the global

community

Page 95: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 95

© 2006 By Default!

Humanitarian Intervention

Shifting norms include a drive to increase the frequency of humanitarian intervention

Goal is to stop gross violations of human rights

Generally assumes that a collective response can reduce negative impact– Regional: ECOWAS in Sierra Leonean civil war– Global: UN in Haiti

Intervention in two types of disasters:– Human Caused Disasters– Natural Disasters

Page 96: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 96

© 2006 By Default!

Humanitarian InterventionAny intervention faces potential problems

Legal Can the international community intervene under

international law? Logistical

Does the international community have the capacity to intervene?

Moral Should the international community intervene?

Political If it is legal, the capacity exists, and it should be done,

is there the political will to do it?

Page 97: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 97

© 2006 By Default!

Rethinking Collective Security

Collective security is being rethought in the context of humanitarian crises

There is a growing sense that a new model is needed

This is the product of the history of the 20th Century

Page 98: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 98

© 2006 By Default!

The 20th Century ExperienceTwo phenomena shock the world

– Genocide• The systematic attempt to exterminate an entire

people– Democide

• The murder of mass number of people by their own government

The application of technology and organizational science to murder

This leads to a call for a move to break sovereignty and allow for intervention

Page 99: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 99

© 2006 By Default!

The Scale

200 million civilians killed by governments33 million combatants died in interstate war54 million non-combatants were killed in

interstate war

300 million people killed by the deliberate policy actions of government in the 20th century

Page 100: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 100

© 2006 By Default!

Reevaluation

Scholars and activists rethink security in the face of these numbers

Traditional security’s focus on military threats of one state towards another seem inadequate

This leads to a call for a new concept of security

Page 101: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 101

© 2006 By Default!

Genocide

The Genocide Convention is the first attempt to expand security

Comes in the immediate aftermath of WWII– The Holocaust changes how people see war

crimes– The shock is unprecedented– The crime is unprecedented

There is nothing that covers something like this

Page 102: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 102

© 2006 By Default!

Holocaust

13 million people killed– Over a dozen groups singled out for

exterminationIndustrial process technology applied to

mass murder– Efficiency evaluation of different methods– Cost/benefit analysis– “Just-in-time” delivery scheduling

This horrifies everyone

Page 103: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 103

© 2006 By Default!

Global Justice

Nuremburg Tribunal (1945/6)– German officials tried for crimes against

humanityTokyo Tribunal (1945/6)

– Japanese officials tried for crimes against humanity

Genocide Convention (1948/1951)– Creates first “obligation to intervene”

Geneva Convention Updates (1949)UN Charter

– Sets clear limits on “legal” wars

Page 104: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 104

© 2006 By Default!

Key Post-WWII Changes

The creation of international standardsRules regarding security that are

internationally agreed and enforcedA recognition that threats to security

sometimes require force to remedyAn erosion of the sovereignty principle

Page 105: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 105

© 2006 By Default!

Human Security

A new concept of securityBased on the idea that the person should be

the focus– Security of person

• freedom from physical harm– Security of domicile

• refugee related issues

Rejects state based models of security

Wide range of specific versions

Page 106: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 106

© 2006 By Default!

International Intervention

Human security may require international intervention

Intervention is a necessary toolThis requires a shift in international norms

– Intervention no longer a last resort policyThis requires a shift in international law

– Sovereignty must be eroded

Page 107: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 107

© 2006 By Default!

Right To Protect

A new doctrine of international securityCreates a “right” of intervention

– In cases of violations of human security, states have a right to intervene

– Does not currently existInternational law would allow violations of

sovereignty– Requires changes in international treaties

Explicit change of focus of international law– Focus is on protection of individuals

Page 108: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 108

© 2006 By Default!

Problems in Intervention

Sovereignty– Legal obstacles

Communication– Getting agreement on the need for intervention

Coordination– Implementing the intervention

Type of disaster matters:– Natural disasters– Human-caused disasters

Page 109: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 109

© 2006 By Default!

Natural Disasters are Easy Natural disasters make things easier

– No one is to blame– “There but for the grace of the gods go I”– “Fellow feeling”– Most states readily accept aid

Main problem: Logistics– how to deliver the aid

NGO's often lead the effort

Pattern of resource allocation is uneven– Most aid comes in immediate aftermath of the event

Page 110: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 110

© 2006 By Default!

Human Caused Disasters Government may have created the disaster

– Manufactured famine– Deliberate displacement of persons

Sovereignty used to block outside efforts The disaster may be part of deliberate government

policy The government can actively to prevent relief The government can abuse aid as part of this policy

– Food as a weapon in Ethiopia and Zimbabwe

Page 111: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 111

© 2006 By Default!

Questions and ProblemsDo we violate sovereignty to provide relief?

– more a problem for states and IGO's than for NGO’s

If we do provide relief– What are the risks to our personnel?

If we do not provide relief– Are we willing to accept the costs?

Complex cost of relief?– Do we make it worse?

NGO's offer a way around these problems– NGO's must have resources– NGO's must have infrastructure– NGO's must have access

Page 112: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 112

© 2006 By Default!

POLS4503International Organizations

The security-development nexus

Page 113: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 113

© 2006 By Default!

Development Needs Security

Basic security is a necessary condition for long-run economic development– Institutions must provide effective governance– Development requires long-run investment– Capital accumulation requires stability

Economic development is handicapped by the lack of security

Page 114: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 114

© 2006 By Default!

Security Needs Development

Fat and happy people don’t fight– As standards of living rise, people engage in

fewer conflicts– Scarcity breeds tension and conflicts over

resources– Plenty channels competition through institutions

In the long run, development makes society more secure

Page 115: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 115

© 2006 By Default!

Governance Architecture

The UN System– UN Development Program– UN Conference on Trade and Development– Lots of bureaucracy, but not much cash– Disagreement over how to promote development

The World Bank

The global system is weak– Most IGO’s work only through governments

Page 116: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 116

© 2006 By Default!

Innovation in the Global South

1970’s African IGO’s created to promote trade

Leaders soon discovered that RTA’s will fail if there is no security

Security components added to try and cope with these issues

Page 117: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 117

© 2006 By Default!

Why the South Innovated

Southern problems are differentIssues are more complex

– Less economic resources– Less human capital– Less structural “weight” internationally– Legacy of colonial era

Needs are different– Economic development is vital– Institutions are weak– Must compete with much stronger states

Page 118: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 118

© 2006 By Default!

A Potential Answer

Integrate security and development in the same organization– Saves resources– Treats the areas as related– Develops answers that fit the circumstances

Page 119: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 119

© 2006 By Default!

Problems

Lack of resourcesLack of unity over implementationLack of clear modelsLack of effective governanceLack of commitment from national leadersResistance from other organizationsMeddling by other nations

Page 120: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 120

© 2006 By Default!

ECOWAS

Created in 1975 (Treaty of Lagos)Added non-aggression (1978) and mutual

defense pact (1981)– 1981 PMAD Protocol included external and

internal conflict provisionsRevised treaty (1993) formalized conflict

management systemJoined African Economic Community (1998)

Page 121: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 121

© 2006 By Default!

ECOWAS Members

Developing states in west Africa– Relatively poor– Little global influence– Nigeria is largest member

Includes members with significant civil conflict:– Sierra Leone– Liberia– Ivory Coast

Page 122: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 122

© 2006 By Default!

Why Cooperate?

Shared interest in development– Larger market– Larger capital pool– Reduce destructive trade barriers

Shared interest in stability– Burden-sharing– Enforcement mechanisms

Safety in numbers

Page 123: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 123

© 2006 By Default!

Layers and Layers

African Union has a long-term integration plan with regional groups

• CEN-SAD (Community of Sahel-Saharan States)• COMESA (Common Market for Eastern and Southern

Africa)• EAC (East African Community)• ECCAS (Economic Community of Central African

States)• ECOWAS• IGAD (Intergovernmental Authority for Development)• SADC (Southern African Development Community)• UMA (Arab Maghreb Union)

Page 124: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 124

© 2006 By Default!

Innovative Elements in Africa

Development and Security linkageIntegration of NGO’s into IGO institutionsLayered system of IGO’s

– Sub-regional– Regional– Continental– Global

Democracy from the top– Regional organizations promote democracy

Page 125: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 125

© 2006 By Default!

Has It Worked?

Mixed bag of resultsSome successes

– Economic integration– Some peacekeeping successes– Some success at democratization in a few cases– Africa has grown more in the last decade

Some failures– Countries are still poor– Governance is mixed– Some peacekeeping failures

Page 126: Slide 1 © 2006 By Default! POLS4503 International Organizations Gregory C. Dixon gdixon@westga.edu gdixon

Slide 126

© 2006 By Default!