Hazar Taha Turan
WRITINGS ON INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Early writings about the potential for international organizations to deal with common human problems include Jeremy Bentham’s proposal for a “common legislature” and Immanuel Kant’s advocacy of a “league of peace.”[1]. international organizations began with the creation of the League of Nations after World War I, and was largely descriptive and legalistic. The League was unable to prevent World War II, World War II had a stimulating effect on the development of international organizations, and world leaders again sought to form another general internationalorganization.[2]The Security Councilandthe General Assembly of the United Nations had comparablepredecessor in theLeaguesystem. The UN was also predicated on thenotion that continued cooperation among the victorious coalition in theprevious war would ensure global stability. With the emergence of the Cold War, it seemed quite possible that the United Nations might follow the path of the League. “Realist” scholars criticized earlier “idealists” and began to dominate the discipline of international relations. Whendealingwithinternationalorganizations, the realist approachmust be eschewed in favor of liberalismbytheverygoalthesegroupsworktowards. International organizationsworktowardspeace. How effectivetheyare in doingso is an entirelydifferentmatter. Nonetheless, themarchtowardspeacerequirescooperation, compromise, andtolerance. Realistsemphasizedtheimportance of state sovereignty, military power, and national interests in world politicsand thus were less likely to expect states to delegate important powerstointernationalorganizations.[3]Realistsarguedthatordercouldonly be establishedbytheenlighteneduse of diplomacyandforce. The traditional route of alliances and the balance of power, not some potentially transformative international organizations, would maintain order. Ultimately, the UN survived because it faced a radically different environment than the League. First, the Cold War bipolar alliance structure, while undoubtedly prohibiting superpower cooperation, also provided more stability than the rapid systemic upheavals that characterized the interwar period. The early stages of security interdependence occurred with the threat of global devastation from nuclear war or environmental disaster. The academic study of international organizations during the Cold War attempted to conceptualize what we now call global governance and tried to identify the role that IOs played in that process. Scholars began to study how IOs were part of larger patterns of world politics,particularlyregardingconflictandpeacekeeping.[4]A thirdareaincluded a widevariety of critical, neo-Marxist, andpoststructuralistargumentsaboutinternationalorganizations[5]. also emphasized the role of nongovernmental organizations in influencing the beliefs, norms, rules, andprocedures of evolvingregimes. Realists incorporated this approach with “hegemonic stability theory,” arguing that any stability brought about by regimes is associated with a concentration. The end of the Cold War signaled a new era for the UN and international organizations in general as the superpower rivalry had established many of the barriers that had prevented UN action in the security area. Other international organizations also increased in scope. The European Union took further steps toward complete economic integration, and other regional economic blocs such as the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation and the North American Free Trade Agreement took shape. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization has struggled with the redefinition of its role as the new environment significantly altered its original purposes. While international organizations continue to play a greater role than they ever have, state sovereignty and lack of political will continue to inhibit the long-term prospects of those organizations for creating effective structures of global governance.
world politics are now generated through the interaction of international governmental organizations, nongovernmental organizations, norms, regimes, international law, and even private-public governance structures. international relations explain these changes and the contemporary role of international organizations in different ways. Liberalism argues that international organizations provide an arena in which states can interact, develop shared norms, and cooperate to solve common problems. Liberals
also continue to emphasize regime theory and apply that concept to an increasing number of issueareas.[6]
Realists continue to argue that international organizations have little power over states because states can alwaysleavethoseorganizations.[7]theextentthatinternationalorganizationsareimportant, it is becausetheyareused as toolsbygreatpowerstopursuetheirinterests. They argue that deterrence systems, alliance mechanisms, and the overall balance of power are more effective at maintaining peace than international
organizations. While realists generally dismiss the importance of nongovernmental organizations, international law, and transnational corporations to explain world politics, some aspects of the realist tradition continue to inform the study of international organizations. A great variety of approaches to international organizations exists beyond the classic debate between liberals and realists. Critical theorists
and neo-Marxists continue to argue that global governance is dominated by the logic of industrial capitalism. A more recent approach is social constructivism, which emphasizes the role of social structure norms, identities, and beliefs in world politics. Constructivists have analyzed the potential for international organizations to socialize policymakers and states to embrace certain norms, identities, andbeliefs.[8]
There are two types of international organizations: international governmental organizations and international nongovernmental organizations.IGOs and NGOs exist for a variety of reasons, such as controlling the proliferation of conventional and nuclear weapons, supervising trade, maintaining military alliances, ending world hunger, and fostering the spread of democracy and peace. IGOs form when governments make an agreement or band together. Only governments belong to IGOs, which are sometimes also known by the acronym IO. The United Nations , the North Atlantic Treaty Organization, the World Trade Organization ,and the European Union are all examples of IGOs. The rule of intergovernmental organizations;Some establish regularized processes of information gathering, analysis, and surveillance. Some IGOs, such as the World Trade Organization, develop procedures to make rules, settle disputes, and punish those who fail to follow the rules. Other IGOs conduct operational activities that help to resolve major substantive problems. IGOs also play key roles in bargaining, serving as arenas for negotiating and developing coalitions.The UN is based on the notion of the sovereign equality of member states. Each state is legally equivalent of every other state.Only international problems are within the jurisdiction of the UN. Such problems include human rights, global telecommunications, and environmental regulation.The UN is designed primarily to maintain international peace and security. States should refrain from the threat or use of force and settle disputes through peaceful means.Security has broadened from the classical protection of national territory to human security.
Nongovernmental organizations emerge from communities, civil society organizations, collective activities, religious ,organizations, universities and individual initiatives. NGOs are sometimes referred to as grassroots organizations, voluntary organizations, nonprofits, all names that denote the voluntary, public service, and community orientation that NGOs. The term NGOdenotes an organization that is basednationally .But that raises money and organizational capacity to participate in international relief and development activities.Not all NGOs have a positive impact on global politics. NGOs act as advocates for specific policies and offer alternative channels of political participation, as Amnesty International has done.Although Amnesty International has helped defend human rights . For example, the international terrorist organization al Qaeda has killed civilians in an effort to cripple economies and topple governments. Since the end of World War II, nongovernmental actors have become more important in the global arena.
Since the beginnig of the 20 century, international organizations have become important in internationalrelations. International organization as a field of study has had itsupsanddownsthroughoutthe post-World War II eraandthroughoutthiscenturyfort hat matter. Intheınterwarperiod, thefate of thefieldreflectedthefate of the World it studied: a creativeburst of work on ‘ internationalgovernment’ after 1919, followedby a period of morecautiosreassessmentapproachingthe 1930s, and a gradaldeclineintoirrelevanceif not obscuritythereafter.[9]As a newobjectandsubject of publicinternationallaw.İnternationalorganizationsservedisscussionsanddiplomaticdialogue , promotingcooperationandintegration , stimulatingthelaw-makingprocessandorganisinginternationalhumanitiarianaid.Thusinternationalorganizationfulfil a plethore of task.
REFERENCES
1)Jeremy Bentham, Plan for a Universal and Perpetual Peace; Immanuel Kant, Eternal Peace and Other International, 1927
2) J. David Singer and Michael Wallace, “International Government Organizations and the Preservation of Peace,International Organization
3) John H. Herz, Political Realism andPoliticalIdealism, 1951
4) Karl W. Deutsch et al.,Political Community and the North Atlantic Area ,Princeton: Princeton University Press, 1957
5) Richard K. Ashley, “The Poverty of Neorealism,” International Organization
6)VolkerRittbergerand Peter Mayer, eds.,Regime Theory and International Relations
7) Lloyd Gruber, Ruling the World: Power Politics and the Rise of Supranational Institutions
8) Michael Barnettand Martha Finnemore, Rules for the World: International
Organizations in World Politics
9) Robert G. Gilpin, therichness of thepoliticalrealism
10) John Boliand George M. Thomas, World culture in the World polity: a century of internationalnon-governmentalorganizationss
11)Gayl D. Nessand Steven R. BrechinBridgingtheGap: internationalorganizations as organizations
12)FriedrichKratochwiland John GerardRuggie: International organization: a state of the art on an art of thestate
[1]Jeremy Bentham, Plan for a Universal andPerpetualPeace;Immanuel Kant, EternalPeaceandOther International, 1927
[2]J. David Singerand Michael Wallace, “International GovernmentOrganizationsandthePreservation of Peace, International Organization
[4]Karl W. Deutsch et al.,PoliticalCommunityandthe North AtlanticArea ,Princeton: Princeton UniversityPress, 1957
[5]Richard K. Ashley, “ThePovertyof Neorealism,” International Organization
[6]VolkerRittbergerand Peter Mayer, eds.,RegimeTheoryand International Relations
[8]Michael Barnettand Martha Finnemore, Rules forthe World: International
Organizations in World Politics
[9]FriedrichKratochwiland John GerardRuggie: International organization: a state of the art on an art of thestate
Hiç yorum yok:
Yorum Gönder