Institutions, Power and Interdependence - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Loading...

PPT – Institutions, Power and Interdependence PowerPoint presentation | free to download - id: 64e796-N2ExO



Loading


The Adobe Flash plugin is needed to view this content

Get the plugin now

View by Category
About This Presentation
Title:

Institutions, Power and Interdependence

Description:

Title: Institutions, Power and Interdependence Author: Randall W. Stone Last modified by: Sathyan Sundaram Created Date: 4/21/2005 12:20:11 AM Document presentation ... – PowerPoint PPT presentation

Number of Views:5
Avg rating:3.0/5.0
Slides: 32
Provided by: Rand129
Category:

less

Write a Comment
User Comments (0)
Transcript and Presenter's Notes

Title: Institutions, Power and Interdependence


1
International Organizations
2
Actors on the global stage
  • States
  • IGOs
  • UN system
  • Regional (EU, OAS, NATO, ASEAN)
  • NGOs (Greenpeace, Amnesty Intl)
  • TNCs (IBM, Sony, Citicorp)

3
IOs defined
  • Intergovernmental Organizations IOs whose
    members are states, often the locus of diplomacy
  • Nongovernmental Organizations (NGO)
    transnational organizations of private citizens
    they include professional associations,
    foundations, and internationally-active groups in
    different states joined together to work towards
    common interests

4
International institutions
  • Number of international organizations 300
    (IGO) 6,250 (NGO)
  • Membership
  • IMF 184
  • WTO 146
  • IMF resources
  • Assets 339 billion
  • Loans outstanding 188 billion

5
Continent-Wide IGOs
6
Post-Empire IGOs
7
Regional IGOs
8
WTO
9
Diplomacy
  • Archie Bunker Getting someone to do something
    they don't wanna by promising to do something you
    ain't got no intention of doing
  • A more formal definition The total process by
    which states carry on political relations with
    each other settling conflicts among nations by
    peaceful means
  • Includes bilateral and multilateral negotiating
    techniques

10
Early Diplomacy
  • Modern diplomacy's origins may be traced in the
    states of Northern Italy in the late Middle Ages,
    with the first permanent embassies being
    established in the thirteenth century. Slowly
    this practice spread to the rest of Europe. A
    feature necessary for diplomacy is the existence
    of a number of states of somewhat equal power. In
    Asia and the Middle East, China and the Ottoman
    Empire were reluctant to practice bilateral
    diplomacy as they viewed themselves to be
    unquestionably superior to all their neighbors.
    The Ottomans, for instance, would not send
    missions to other states, expecting
    representatives to come to Constantinople. It
    would not be until the nineteenth century that
    the Empire established permanent embassies in
    other capitals.

11
  • The practice was later adopted by the great
    European powers. Spain was the first power to
    send a permanent representative it appointed an
    ambassador to the Court of England in 1487. By
    the late 16th century, permanent missions became
    customary. The Holy Roman Emperor, however, did
    not regularly send permanent legates, as they
    could not represent the interests of all the
    German princes (who were in theory subordinate to
    the Emperor, but in practice independent).

12
Modern Diplomacy
  • During this period the rules of modern diplomacy
    were developed. The top rank of representatives
    was an ambassador. At that time an ambassador was
    a nobleman, the rank of the noble assigned
    varying with the prestige of the country he was
    delegated to. Strict standards developed for
    ambassadors, requiring they have large
    residences, host lavish parties, and play an
    important role in the court life of their host
    nation. In Rome, the most prized posting for a
    Catholic ambassador, the French and Spanish
    representatives would have a retinue of up to a
    hundred. Even in smaller posting ambassadors were
    very expensive. Smaller states would send and
    receive envoys, who were a rung below ambassador.
    Somewhere between the two was the position of
    minister plenipotentiary.

13
United Nations (UN)
  • On April 25, 1945, the United Nations Conference
    on International Organizations began in San
    Francisco. In addition to the Governments, a
    number of non-government organizations, including
    Lions Clubs International were invited to assist
    in the drafting of the charter.

14
UN Charter
  • The 1945 UN Charter envisaged a system of
    regulation that would ensure "the least diversion
    for armaments of the world's human and economic
    resources." The advent of nuclear weapons came
    only weeks after the signing of the Charter and
    provided immediate impetus to concepts of arms
    limitation and disarmament. In fact, the first
    resolution of the first meeting of the UN General
    Assembly (January 24, 1946) was entitled "The
    Establishment of a Commission to Deal with the
    Problems Raised by the Discovery of Atomic
    Energy" and called upon the commission to make
    specific proposals for "the elimination from
    national armaments of atomic weapons and of all
    other major weapons adaptable to mass
    destruction."

15
Human Rights
  • The pursuit of human rights was one of the
    central reasons for creating the United Nations.
    World War II atrocities and genocide led to a
    ready consensus that the new organization must
    work to prevent any similar tragedies in the
    future. An early objective was creating a legal
    framework for considering and acting on
    complaints about human rights violations.

16
UN System
  • General Assembly
  • Security Council
  • ECOSOC - Economic and Social Council
  • ILO - International Labour Organization
  • FAO - Food and Agriculture Organization
  • UNESCO - United Nations Educational, Scientific
    and Cultural Organization
  • WHO - World Health Organization
  • World Bank / IBRD - International Bank for
    Reconstruction and Development
  • IMF - International Monetary Fund
  • ICAO - International Civil Aviation Organization
  • ITU - International Telecommunication Union
  • WIPO - World Intellectual Property Organization
  • IRO - International Refugee Organization(ceased
    to exist in 1952)

17
Realist critique
  • Crude version Institutions are irrelevant
  • A perspective only Americans could seriously
    entertain
  • World Trade Organization
  • International Monetary Fund
  • European Union

18
Theoretical significance of the EU
Challenge to realism
  • Anarchy is not immutable
  • Erosion of sovereignty
  • Functionalist transformation of interests
    (spillover/spillback)

But the history of EEC, EC, EU is uneven
- Liberals celebrate periodic successes
  • - Realists gloat over setbacks

19
Brief chronology
  • 1950 Schuman Plan, ECSC
  • 1954 EDC fails (August) Geneva Treaty ends
    French Indochina War (July)
  • 1957 Treaty of Rome (France, FRG, Italy,
    Belgium, Netherlands, Luxembourg)
  • 1963-68 De Gaulle vetoes UK membership
  • 1965-66 De Gaulles empty chair tactic (French
    walkout, demanding national veto)
  • Luxembourg compromise on unanimity voting
    Qualified Majority Voting less than unanimity
    required
  • 1973 UK, Denmark, Ireland enter

20
Qualified Majority Voting
  • the proposal must be supported by 232 out of the
    total of 321 votes (72.27)
  • the proposal must be backed by a majority of
    member states
  • the countries supporting the proposal must
    represent at least 62 of the total EU population.

21
Brief chronology
  • 1979-84 Thatcher forces budget renegotiations
  • 1981 Greece joins
  • 1986 Spain and Portugal join
  • 1986 Single European Act increased
    harmonization
  • 1991 Maastricht Treaty on EU
  • Four Pillars social policy, EMU, justice,
    common defense policy
  • UK opts out of social policy, retains an option
    for EMU

22
Brief chronology
  • 1992 UK leaves EMS (market pressure)
  • 1990s Association agreements with Eastern
    Europe
  • 1995 Finland, Austria, Sweden join
  • 1999 Economic and Monetary Union (EMU)
  • 2004 Ten countries join EU

23
Causes Spill-overs
Increase trade
Lower barriers
Create new firms
Mobilize new lobbies
Ernst Haas
24
More than an International Organization
  • Budgetary autonomy (direct taxation)
  • 3 of government spending in Europe
  • Direct effect of regulations, directives, ECJ
    rulings
  • Internal affairs
  • CAP
  • Structural funds
  • Social policy
  • EMU

25
Realist critique
  • Sophisticated version Institutions advantage
    powerful countries (Krasner 1992)
  • World Trade Organization
  • International Monetary Fund
  • European Union

26
GATT, WTO
  • Cons for weak countries
  • Major powers set the agenda
  • Agricultural subsidies (360B by OECD countries)
  • Trade barriers for infant industries
  • Pros for weak countries
  • Quasi-legal system, DRPs
  • But, U.S. exerts outside options
  • Bilateral threats
  • Regional trade groups NAFTA, APEC

27
Before GATT
  • Discriminatory trade agreements advantaged
    stronger players
  • Optimal tariffs are possible only for large
    countries
  • Large economies fare better in trade wars
  • Strategic trade subsidies can wipe out infant
    industries

28
International Monetary Fund
  • Criticisms
  • Conditionality
  • Cuts social services wages
  • Destabilizes new democracies
  • Benefits foreign investors
  • Involvement in debt negotiations
  • Benefits foreign lenders
  • Facilitates excessive lending to unconstitutional
    governments
  • Weighted voting

29
IMF Voting
  • Other G-10 is Italy, Canada, Belgium,
    Netherlands, Sweden, and Switzerland

30
International Monetary Fund
  • Benefits
  • IMF can serve as a self-commitment device
  • Inflation, exchange rates, capital flight
  • Foreign investment
  • Emergency financing as insurance against
    financial crises
  • But, its not clear the IMF can really reassure
    capital markets

31
Conclusions
  • International institutions are key features of
    the international system
  • Define strategies options for weak powers
  • Represent power resources for strong powers
  • Distributional consequences of institutions are
    an open empirical question
  • Research agenda under what conditions do
    powerful countries cede advantages in order to
    make joint gains?
About PowerShow.com