Contents
Philosophical
Nature of the Course
Course
Objectives:
At the end of the course, students
should be able to;
- Appraise the role of international organizations in the
global system.
- Describe the role of some of the prominent
organizations.
- Analyze the socio-economic implications of the new
regionalism.
- Analyze the achievements and challenges of some of the
international organizations.
- Evaluate the role played by international organizations
in world affairs and its implications.
Teaching Methods:
- Lectures
- Group
Discussions and Presentations
- Library-based
research
Course
Content:
- International
Organizations and Global Governance
·
Meaning of Global Governance
·
Types of International Organizations
·
The need for International Organizations
- The
New Regionalism
·
Africa (AU, ECOWAS,SADCC& SADC)
·
Asia (SEATO, ASEAN).
·
The Americas (OAS, NAFTA).
·
Europe (ECC&EU).
·
BRICS
·
NATO
- Promoting
Human Development and Economic Growth
·
States and Global Governance: A
Complex Interaction
·
International Economic Order
(Globalization & Africa)
·
Pieces of Global Economic Governance
·
Critiques of Global Economic
Governance
- The
United Nations: The Centerpiece of
Global Governance
·
Persistent Problems and Challenges
·
Dilemmas, Successes and Failures
·
Peace operations, Collective
Security & Sanctions
International
Organizations and Global Governance:
Prior
to enrolling in this course I had basically miniature information on
International Organizations and Global Governance. In fact, one that was enough
to engage in surface conversations regarding international matters instead of
in depth discussions of someone well versed in Social Studies issues. To my
understanding then, the UN was the chief international organization with little
regard for other organizations. My metaphysical knowledge of the course stems
from being a social studies teacher at elementary level. The basic stuff that
learners are introduced to in the upper classes of primary education. With
regards to Global governance, the UN was akin to the global ruling political
party with the US as the global president and other countries like Britain,
Germany, Russia and China tantamount to being global ministers in such a
cabinet.
Regionalism: My knowledge on regionalism was confined
to the African continent divided into the Southern, Western, Eastern, Central
and Northern parts. Like stated above, this was mainly due to the limited scope
or nature of the curriculum. To my appreciative thought, regionalism was
limited to SADC, SACU, ECOWAS and AU within the African continent.
Organizations like NATO were learnt in discussions which I cannot even remember
whether formal or informal.
Human
Development and Economic Growth: My initial understanding of Human Development
and Economic Growth was rather limited to the country as a responsibility to
its citizenry. I regarded the government’s initiatives like Ipelegeng, Old age
Pension Fund, CEDA, NAMPAADD and Young Farmers to mention a few as addressing
the development of people and their economic status. The government’s
infrastructure projects which created jobs was seen as human and economic
development in my acute scope.
United
Nations: Whilst growing up, we came to know about the UN as a place where our
beloved soldier brothers were sent to Somalia for fighting the rebels. It was
until they came back with blue t-shirts written UN Peace Keeping Mission and
the UN crest that we realised that it was a body responsible for bringing peace
to the world.
Political:
Ruling for a long time corrupts the minds and as such power and control should
be shared. I am enemy of the US dominance of the world and would like to see an
interconnected world where states are equal.
Skills: I must confess
that my writing and referencing (A.P.A), use of technological skills to
supplement my learning and analysis of issues were at a level not
consistent with a
degree course. But then again, my computer skills from high school rescued me.
Values:
I have always valued and subscribed to the analogy of trying to give my best
because I cannot always give my best. My moral philosophy rests on respect for
oneself and other people and maintained a good work ethic.
Attitudes:
I have always been a reserved person since my formative years and this has also
been reflected in my philosophy of studying and even teaching. However, I have
come to realise that this attitude might have been due to an unconscious low
level of self-esteem whereby I subsequently or consciously struggled to
participate orally in class discussions.
International
Organizations and Global Governance:
This
course has broadened my knowledge on International Organizations and Global
Governance to greater parameters. I am now in a position to engage in
discussions and even present to my colleagues on international issues and
governance better. I have learnt that beyond the UN and US there are other
organizations and states which are capable of dominating this world. History
has shown that the US has enjoyed ruling this world and even defied the
statutes of the very organizations which is a member of, but new knowledge and
research has shown that the economies of some countries are on an upward spiral
and as such threaten the status quo. The course has unveiled that it is not
every international organization which is achieving its mandate and others have
subsequently failed only to resurface with different names albeit almost similar
objectives e.g. Organization of the African Union. On a bitter note to the less
developed, International organizations and Global governance are heavily
reliant on the aspirations of the world super powers reducing the masses to
being just pawns in the game. Needless to say, my students stand to acquire
relevant information from their teacher upon completion of this degree course.
Regionalism: Regionalism is the expression of a common
sense of identity and purpose combined with the creation and implementation of
institutions that express a particular identity and shape collective action
within a geographical region[1]. This initiative started with the Europeans
(old regionalism) before spreading to the rest of the world (new regionalism).
What happens is, the formation of these institutions is usually perpetuated by
a need to pre-empt or retrospectively addressing economic, political, social
and security issues. For example, the BRICS formation was influenced to a large
extent by Jim O’Neill economic research on the growing economies of the BRIC
countries.
Human
Development and Economic Growth: Human development has been defined as
enlarging people's choices in a way which enables them to lead longer,
healthier and fuller lives whereas Economic Growth is seen as the rise in the
counties ability to engage in activities (trade, mining, agriculture…) which
will eventually lead to the achievement of the former. Clearly, there exists a
strong connection between economic growth (EG) and human development (HD). On
the one hand, EG provides the resources to permit sustained improvements in HD
[2].
Sovereign states and international organizations play a central role the
achievement of Human Development and Economic Growth. For example, members of
the UN are signatory to the Education For All accord which aims at making sure
that education is provided to all people who have the capability and interest
United
Nations: The UN was founded in 1945 after the Second World War by 51 countries
committed to maintaining international peace and security, developing friendly
relations among nations and promoting social progress, better living standards
and human rights.
Due
to its unique international character, and the powers vested in its founding
Charter, the Organization can take action on a wide range of issues, and
provide a forum for its 193 Member States to express their views, through the
General Assembly, the Security Council, the Economic and Social Council and
other bodies and committees.[3]
Skills:
Through this course, I have managed to advance my ability to read critically,
apply multiple and objective perspectives to global and regional issues. My
technological prowess has even surpassed expectations since I am more capable
of confidently applying my ICT skills in downloading videos, saving data on
flash and ROM discs. Above all, I have developed my personal website[4],
blog[5] and
forum[6] for
scholarly discussions with colleagues online.
With
regard to writing scholarly papers, I can now develop outlines prior to writing
assignments and presentations which are in line with A.P.A referencing style
better than before.
Values:
Having group work and presentations as part of the course assessment has made
me to always work for the good of the lot in pursuit of the task at hand. It is
during the meetings of the group that one realises the importance of inter
personal skills and learning how to compromise in order to forge ahead. Honesty
is also critical to the self and group. Apart from the moral honesty, there is
also academic honesty which is a requirement to acknowledge your sources in any
piece of work written.
Attitudes:
This course has helped me to transform some of my attitude which were hitherto
not consistent with social studies education. Although I am not entirely
satisfied with my level of participation in class discussions, I have
profoundly increased participation in group activities. Gone are the days where
I used to approach the course in a sloppier manner to a point of wanting to
learn more. My attitude to education has developed for the better, in fact I
have of late applied for Med Social Studies on part time basis because I feel I
have so much potential to excel and develop professionally.
In
1994, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) came into force after the
Canada-U.S Free Trade Agreement. Since then, NAFTA has systematically
eliminated most tariff and non-tariff barriers to trade and investment between
Canada, the United States, and Mexico creating the environment of confidence
and stability required for long-term investment.
Each
NAFTA country forgoes tariffs on imported goods “originating” in the other
NAFTA countries. On the positive side NAFTA s more than tripled trade among the
three countries. North America has become one integrated market for the
production of advanced goods. The real advantage for the United States has been
in services. NAFTA has pushed Mexican businesses to become more efficient, and
therefore wealthier.
However,
some states have lost a
lot of manufacturing jobs to Mexico, particularly Michigan, Indiana, Kentucky,
Ohio and Tennessee. Iintense competition with Asian and Indian workers
may have depressed wage gains for Mexicans. The surge in imported food has
strained U.S. food inspectors, potentially increasing risks for U.S. consumers.
Critics say that by disrupting the previously protected small-scale agriculture
sector in Mexico, NAFTA caused a surge in illegal immigration into the U.S.
ASEAN
ASEAN was preceded by
the Association of Southeast Asia (ASA), an alliance consisting of the
Philippines, Malaysia and Thailand in 1961. ASEAN was established in 1967 by;
Indonesia, Malaysia, Philippines, Singapore, and signed the Bangkok
Declaration. The motivations for the birth of ASEAN were so that its members’
governing elite could concentrate on nation building, the common fear of
communism, reduced faith in or mistrust of external powers in the 1960s, and a
desire for economic development.
Positively,
the ‘ASEAN Way’ indicates a process of regional interactions and cooperation
based on discreteness, informality, consensus building and non-confrontational
bargaining styles that contrasts with the adversarial posturing, majority vote
and other legalistic decision-making procedures in Western multilateral
organisations.
However,
critics argue that the ‘ASEAN Way’ serves as the major stumbling-block to it
becoming a true diplomacy mechanism. Due to the consensus-based approach every
member has a veto, so contentious issues must remain unresolved until
agreements can be reached. Moreover, it is claimed that member nations are
directly and indirectly advocating that ASEAN be more flexible and allow
discourse on internal affairs of member countries.
SEATO
The
South East Asia Treaty Organization (SEATO) was an international organization
for collective defence in Southeast Asia created by the Manila Pact, signed in
September 1954 in Manila, Philippines and formalised in 1955 in Bangkok,
Thailand where the headquarters were also based. Eight members joined the
organization.
It was primarily
created to block further communist gains in Southeast Asia. SEATO is generally
considered a failure because internal conflict and dispute hindered the use of
the SEATO military. On a positive note, however, SEATO funded cultural and
educational programs left long-standing effects in Southeast Asia. SEATO was
dissolved on 30 June 1977 after many members lost interest and withdrew.
The
Manila Pact, was signed in as part of the American Truman Doctrine of creating
anti-communist bilateral and collective defence treaties intended to create
alliances that would contain communist powers.
After
its creation, SEATO quickly became insignificant militarily. Their military
forces held joint military training and they were never employed because of
internal disagreements. Historians have
considered the Manila Pact a failure and the pact is rarely mentioned in
history books. Pakistan withdrew in 1972 after the Bangladesh Liberation War of
1971, France withdrew financial support in 1975, and the SEATO council agreed
to the phasing out of the organization. After a final exercise on 20 February
1976, the organization was formally dissolved on 30 June 1977.
ECC 
The
European Economic Community (EEC) was an international organization created by
the Treaty of Rome of 1957. Its aim was to bring about economic integration,
including a common market, among its six founding members: Belgium, France,
Italy, Luxembourg, the Netherlands and West Germany. The EEC was also known as
the Common Market in the English-speaking world and sometimes referred to as
the European Community even before it was officially renamed as such in 1993.
It
gained a common set of institutions along with the European Coal and Steel
Community (ECSC) and the European Atomic Energy Community (EURATOM) as one of
the European Communities under the 1965 Merger Treaty (Treaty of Brussels).
Upon
the entry into force of the Maastricht Treaty in 1993, the EEC was renamed the
European Community (EC) to reflect that it covered a wider range of policy.
This was also when the three European Communities, including the EC, were
collectively made to constitute the first of the three pillars of the European
Union (EU), which the treaty also founded. The EC existed in this form until it
was abolished by the 2009 Treaty of Lisbon, which merged the EU's former
pillars and provided that the EU would replace and succeed the European
Community.
EU
EU
was formed through the incorporation of the European Coal and Steel Community
and the European Economic Community. The name was given since the ratification
of the Maastricht treaty to the EU on 1 November 1993. In June 1997 a treaty of
Amsterdam laid down to reform EU institutions to give Europe a stronger voice
in the world and prepare for the arrival of future member states. In December
2009 following the ratification of the treaty of Lisbon the EU officially
replaced and succeeded the EC.
EU
membership is applied for and a country should meet certain requirements for it
to be granted membership.24 out of the 28 members of EU are members of the
Schengen area where passport or any
other boarder control restrictions have been abolished. To be a member a state 
must fulfil the
economic and political requirements known as the Copenhagen criteria. To
develop a common market offering free movement of people, goods, services and
capital, solves disputes, respect its cultural richness and linguistic
diversity.
However,
EU has failed to become the most competitive and knowledge based economy, achieve sustainable growth with more and
better jobs and greater social cohesion, unsustainable status quo and
unsatisfying reforms.
OAS
The
Organization of American States (OAS) is the world’s oldest regional
organization, originating in the late 19th century with thirty-five countries
of the Western Hemisphere. Their motto is “Democracy for peace, security, and
development". The OAS oversees and
assists many political activities even though its countries are sovereign and
retain their territorial integrity. Budget shortfalls
exist annually and the organization has been considered slow in responding to
emergencies. Many states believe that the US has too much power and influence
in the OAS. The needs of some smaller, less developed countries may be
sometimes overlooked.
OAS will undoubtedly
continue to protect democracy and human rights in the hope that all citizens of
the Western Hemisphere, and the entire world, can be free, healthy, educated,
and prosperous.
NATO
North
Atlantic Treaty Organization was founded in response to the threat posed by the
Soviet Union. Contrary to popular believe, the Alliance’s creation was part of
a broader effort to serve three purposes; deterring Soviet expansionism,
forbidding the revival of nationalist militarism 
in Europe through a
strong North American presence on the continent, and encouraging European
political integration. Like the UN, it has been an expression of a US foreign
policy based on ideals believed to be intrinsically favourable to US interests
and will continue to exist as long as it serves that purpose.
SADCC
The
Southern African Development Coordination Conference (SADCC), which was the
forerunner of the Southern African Development Community (SADC), was formed in
Lusaka, Zambia, on 1 April 1980, following the adoption of the Lusaka
Declaration (entitled Southern Africa: Towards Economic Liberation) by the nine
founding member states (Angola, Botswana, Lesotho, Malawi, Mozambique,
Swaziland, Tanzania, Zambia, Zimbabwe). The Co-ordination Conference was a
result of a long process of consultations in the seventies. Some of the main
goals for the Member States were to be less dependent on apartheid South Africa
and to introduce programmes and projects which would influence the Southern
African countries and whole region.
The
Declaration and Treaty establishing the SADC, which replaced the Coordination
Conference, was signed at the Summit of Heads of State or Government on 17
August 1992, in Windhoek, Namibia.
SADC 
The
origins of SADC lie in the 1960s and 1970s, when the leaders of majority-ruled
countries coordinated their political, diplomatic and military struggles to
bring an end to colonial and white-minority rule. Today's SADC was precede by
the Frontline States (FLS) formed in 1980.
SADCC
was transformed into SADC in 1992, with the adoption by the founding members of
SADCC and newly independent Namibia of the Windhoek declaration and treaty
establishing SADC. The 1992 SADC provided for both socio-economic cooperation
and political and security cooperation. In reality, the FLS was dissolved only
in 1994, after South Africa's first democratic elections. Subsequent efforts to
place political and security cooperation on a firm institutional footing under
SADC's umbrella failed.
The
amendment of the SADC treaty heralded the overhaul of the structures, policies
and procedures of SADC. One of the principal SADC bodies, it is subject to the
oversight of the organisation's supreme body, the Summit, which comprises the
heads of state or government.
ECOWAS 
The
Economic Community of West African States (ECOWAS) is a regional group of
fifteen West African countries founded in 1975, with the signing of the Treaty
of Lagos. Its mission is to promote economic integration across the region or
"collective self-sufficiency" for its member states by creating a
single large trading bloc. It also serves as a peacekeeping force in the
region. The organization operates officially in three co-equal languages;
French, English, and Portuguese. The ECOWAS consists of two institutions to
implement policies: ECOWAS Commission and ECOWAS Bank for Investment and
Development.
In
1976 Cape Verde joined ECOWAS, and in December 2000 Mauritania withdrew, having
announced its intention to do so in December 1999.
OAU
The Organization of African Unity (OAU) was
established in 1963, Addis Ababa, with 32 signatory governments. It was
disbanded in 2002 by its last chairperson, South African President Thabo Mbeki,
and replaced by the African Union (AU). Its primary aims included promoting
unity and solidarity, defending the sovereignty, territorial integrity and
independence of African states. Above all, dedicated to the eradication of all
forms of colonialism and white minority rule as, when it was established.
AU
The
African Union (AU) is a union consisting of 54 African states in exception of
Morocco. The AU was established in 2001 and launched in 2002, South Africa, to
replace the Organisation of African Unity (OAU). The most important decisions
of the AU are made by the Assembly of
dedicated to the eradication of all forms of colonialism and white
minority rule as, when it was established the African Union, a semi-annual
meeting of the heads of state and government of its member states. The AU's
secretariat and African Union Commission are based in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia.
Their motto is “A United and Strong Africa".
Egypt,
Guinea-Buisau and C.A.R are currently suspended due to their internal
conflicts.
BRICS
The
acronym BRIC was coined by James O’Neil of Goldman Sachs Group Inc. in his
2001. It was to represent the four rapidly developing countries of Federative
Republic of Brazil, Russian Federation, Republic of India and the People’s
Republic of China without the ‘S’ for Republic of South Africa who joined 2010.
The motive was to symbolize the shift in global economic power away from the
developed G7 economies.
The BRICS member
states have gained strength on areas such as Economic prosperity, Tourism,
Research and enormous Infrastructural development. A lot of criticism has been
expressed regarding the economic, demographic and territorial lag of South
Africa from other BRICS members. Though it is just three years old, BRICS has
not been able to spell out the broad vision of the association with a charter
spelling out the intent of the BRICS as a global entity. Lack thereof a charter
reduces its chances of being regarded as a threat to already established
organizations like the G7. BRICS intends to
create a Development Bank, which may compete in the future with structures such
as the World Bank and IMF.
New International Economic Order
The
New International Economic Order (NIEO) was a set of proposals put forward
during the 1970s by some developing countries through the United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development to promote their interests by improving
their terms of trade, increasing development assistance, and other means. It
was meant to be a revision of the international economic system in favour of
Third World countries, replacing the Bretton Woods system, which had benefited
the leading states that had created.
The
powerful countries of North America and Western Europe felt threatened by the
NIEO and continuously tried to criticize and minimize it. According to
economist Professor Harry Johnson, the most efficient way to help the poor is
to transfer resources from those most able to pay to those most in need.
Commanding prices above their natural level usually reduces consumption and
thus causes unemployment among producers. Moreover, price regulation typically
gives the extra income to those in control of who is allowed to produce.
Critics of Global Economic Governance
Since
WWII, the world economy has undergone drastic changes brought about by changing
political circumstances, industrial and technological changes, and changing
trade patterns. The dominant economic order which prevailed for four decades
after WWII is referred to as IEO consisted of the North-West System (Western
Europe, Japan and North America) together with the North-East System (Soviet
Union and Eastern Europe) as well as the South System (Africa, Asia and Latin
America).
IEO
failed to function in the case of the North-east, leading to the collapse of
the USSR. The control of capital and use of neo-colonial and imperialistic
tendencies in terms of trade resulted in large disparities around the world.
The North-West system donated money to the South System, but it was not enough
to remove widespread poverty. Many developing countries and segments of the
population within the developed world called for a revision of the prevailing
IEO.
The United Nations and its problems
From
1945 to the 1970’s, the United Nations looked to be a strong successor to the
failed League of Nations. Success of sorts in Korea and the Congo had boosted
its international image. The effective occupation of Eastern Europe by Russia
made a mockery of the UN. The treatment of Hungary in 1956 could not be stopped
by the United Nations. Likewise, America’s involvement in Vietnam could not be
stopped. America and Russia, would follow the foreign policy that they wanted
to regardless of what the UN wanted.
America
had been the dominant force in the UN providing 25% of its annual budget and
expected to have a big say in final UN decisions. As more and more Asian and
African nations gained their independence and joined the UN, power blocs within
the General Assembly developed.
Much
of the important UN work is done in the Security Council and the five nations
which have the right to veto a decision of the Security Council. Developing
nations have claimed that they were only poor because so much of their annual
wealth was taken up in paying off debts to the world’s richest nations whilst
the world’s richest nations claim that internal corruption is responsible for
their poverty - not the debts they owe for money borrowed. 
Henry Lamb: Global Governance[7]
From his presentation the desire to rule the
world has been a part of the human experience throughout recorded history.
History has shown that in every age, there has always been a force somewhere,
conniving to conquer the world with ideas clothed in promises imposed by
military might e.g. Marx, Lenin, and Hitler reflect some of the ideas which
competed for world dominance in the 1900s. The competition is still underway as
seen by the dominance of the G7 in the world order and in particular the US.
People are born "totally free and
sovereign," and choose to surrender specified freedoms to a limited
government to achieve mutual benefits. The government must be sovereign in
order to distribute benefits equitably and to manage the activities of people
to protect them from one another.
Africa Union: New wine in old bottles [8]
When
the African Union was established to replace the defunct Organization of
African Unity, many Africans were relieved that now that the OAU was gone,
Africa could breathe a sigh of fresh air. In its three decades of existence,
the OAU registered more failures than successes.
After
three decades of existence, one of the greatest achievements of the OAU was its
struggle to end apartheid in South Africa.
However
beyond these, the OAU appears to be failing, creating disunity and chaos on the
African continent. The founders of the OAU were leaders of wisdom who
encouraged member countries to combine their economies into sub-regional
markets that would ultimately form one Africa-wide economic union which was a
step in the right direction. The now defunct OAU failed to resolve conflicts
between Eritrea, Ethiopia, Somalia and Sudan, internal conflicts in Liberia,
Burkina Faso, and Sierra Leone; and to pay attention to other regional
conflicts like in Angola, Mozambique, Chad and Polisario and Algeria.
The
African Union (AU), which replaced the OAU, and was inaugurated in 2002,
Durban, South Africa, with a different focus: to fight poverty and corruption,
canvass for the economic recovery of Africa and hold members to a standard of
government and respect for human rights. But surprisingly, the AU is moving in
the same direction of the OAU. For members of the AU, it is business as usual.
The OAU is alive and kicking and enjoying the good life in Addis Ababa. If
Africa's corrupt leaders cannot curb corruption and nepotism in their own
countries, what makes one to believe that they will bring about changes in the
AU?
Regional integration
It is a process in which states enter into a
regional agreement in order to enhance regional cooperation through regional
institutions and rules. The objectives of the agreement could range from
economic to political to environmental, although it has typically taken the
form of a political economy initiative where commercial interests have been the
focus for achieving broader socio-political and security objectives, as defined
by national governments.[9]
The
process has greatly benefited regions around the globe but unfortunately had
less success on the African continent due to its geographic vastness, civil
wars, corruption, hunger and diseases. As long as African countries differ in
terms of the resources, income per capita, population growth, relies too much
on Agriculture and overlapping memberships to regional bodies, Sub-Saharan
African countries will always lag behind Northern Africa. The idea of a United States of Africa will
forever remain a fallacy.
Philosophical Nature of the Course
Metaphysics
Metaphysics is the theory about the nature of
man and the nature of the world in which he lives[10]. As such, in the course
Global governance and International organizations, it can be said that man is
naturally born to manipulate the world in which he lives. His behavior will be
discussed herein as equal to the behavior of a state or country. Metaphysics
also looks at how man behaves and why he behaves the way he does. This behavior
is herein likened to the behavior of countries like the United States of
America, Iran, Russia, China, Nigeria, South Sudan, Zimbabwe and so forth. The
behavior of some of these countries is disturbing, especially those who behave
as if they were there to rule this world like the US. They will even go to the
extent of praising and proclaiming their mightiness in national speeches as if
they are the number race on earth e.g. “god bless America and nobody else”.
This might be the predestination which Marx Weber was talking about in his book
“The Protestant Ethic”. This seemingly arrogant statement shows the nature of
the American system towards the whole world. The words of one great
philosopher, Plato, who said; “societies should be divided into classes” suits
them very well. This blame can however be extended to other countries who see
themselves as advanced and developed at the expense of the less fortunate
especially we Africans. They thus view themselves as the rightful heirs to
throne of world governance to the extent that they have well established forums
where they can determine the behavior of the whole world at the snap of a
finger with binding resolutions e.g. the UN.
It is imperative to state here that given the
complex behavior of man (states) such organizations are needed to control those
who may otherwise be seen as deviating from the norm. States like Zimbabwe and
Iran have demonstrated that one can defy those who claim to be naturally ear
marked for global control with actions that are portrayed as unjustifiable by
those who feel threatened while hiding behind statutes of the world
organizations which they themselves defy. Low and behold men (rulers) of states
who have done such are still standing tall and untouched (Robert Mugabe) and
others have been overthrown (Gadhafi). It is also relevant to caution that, the
elite do not find any reason to engage in war or economic sanctions where their
interests are less represented like it is the case with Zimbabwe, but they will
jump the gun when tackled from behind as witnessed in Egypt and their reaction
to Russia’s handling of affairs in Crimea.
In a nut shell, it is the nature and behavior
of states which offer the course global governance and international organizations
its metaphysics.
Epistemology
Epistemology digs into the roots of knowledge.
What we know or what is knowable can be classified according to the methods of
acquisition and validation which are; revelation, empirical/scientific
knowledge and rational knowledge. According to Akinpelu (1981) revelation
knowledge is basically religious and is revealed to prophets who recorded it
for mankind whilst empirical knowledge is obtained through observation and our
personal experiences which are to be verified for truth and rational knowledge
is derived by reasoning. As such the rational conclusions made logically follow
what happened before.
Religiously we are taught that that the big
man above us who is absolute created us in his image and this being the case,
we are therefore equal before his eyes. However, within this course we learn
the exact opposite, that the big man above created the G7 countries and their
friends (white states) and thereafter used the remaining peels to create the
developing world (black states). It is a situation in which they are most
comfortable with and will make every effort to shun those black educationist
who maybe in their dreams see revelations of a god who is neither black no
white. The point here is, with their powers, which we have unconsciously, also
endorsed, tell us when to cut down our work force, how our road links won’t
support our economic development plans and so forth.
Empirically we have come to know and test that
some countries possess weapons of mass destruction and even used gases to
exterminate innocent civilians. Scientific knowledge and verified information
tell us that such things can take away the lives of the masses in a split
second and the repercussions therefrom are a sad tale left untold for it will
open up healed wounds. A case in point is the famous dropping of the first
automatic bomb upon the Japanese in Hiroshima where even today the effects are
still felt today despite this happening decades of years ago. Although it has
not been explicitly proven that Saddam Hussein indeed had WMD in his arsenal,
logic and science tell us that the possession of them is deadly and threatens
global peace and security. When global peace and security is threatened, the US
just don’t compromise and it will respond proactively as if it was the God of
this world alongside other states who have done well in Science and Research.
Russia as a state well advanced in science (sputnik launch) has of late become
fed up with the rule of the US and together with other countries destined to
take over the global economy in thirty years’ time formed an economic block
(BRICS) which threatens the existence of the IMF, WTB, NAFTA and in particular
US dominance. This organization was born out an empirical research done by Jim
O’Neil of Goldman Sachs and again this shows the importance of empirical
knowledge in the course international organizations and global governance. The
BRICS presidents with the help of their economic and finance ministers applied
rational knowledge in the formation of such a block.
Axiology
Values primarily refer to those objects which
we cherish, appreciate, want or need. As a matter of fact, this course so
happens to show to the students what man (states) see as valuable and that
which could be defended by all means even if means spilling blood. Naturally
man (states) feel the need to defend their territories with everything
possible. This wars are evident in religion and even acknowledged in the holy
books used for worshipping like the Koran acknowledges Jihad whereby one can
engage in war if it of defense of his religion and fellow worshippers. It is
also logical that is man (state) contravenes human rights charter, the
international community acts in unison to protect innocent civilians especially
the UN. Thus life, peace and stability are values advocated for by man (states)
in this course.
In
order to preserve peace, the United Nations has from time to time resorted to
force. With relevant examples, justify or refute the need to resorting to force
for maintenance of global peace.
Introduction
Naturally
human beings are bound to have conflicts and disagreements which consequently
threaten social peace within the societies they reside in. On a higher scale,
sovereign states are bound to encounter problems which may vary from and are
not limited to geographical boundaries, trade, natural resources and
technological innovations. The UN was established after the Second World War
(1945) to minimise and solve these problems in the best possible peacekeeping
missions (UN Charter, Article 1:1). Peacekeeping missions involve military
personnel without enforcement powers to maintain and restore international
peace (Findlay, 2002). Needless to mention, the use of force has been one such
solution lest peaceful means turn out to be futile. This essay will thus refute
the need to resort to the use of force by the UN to bring about global peace.
Force as defined by the UN Charter
The
UN Charter reads in Article 2:4 that “all members shall refrain in their international
relations from the threat or use of force against the territorial integrity or
political independence of any state, or in any other manner inconsistent with
the purposes of the United Nations”. From this article, it is not stated
explicitly what force is and should be. However, history has shown through
passed resolutions where the use of force was used that it implies economic
sanctions, travelling prohibitions and declaring war over the perpetrators.
Grounds for the use of force
Chapter
7: Article 41 states that “the Security Council may decide what measures, not
involving the use of armed force are to be employed to give effect to its
decisions, and it may call upon the Members of the UN to apply such measures.
These may include interruption of economic relations and of rail, sea, air,
communication and the severance of diplomatic relations”.[11] Some member states or
non-members have in some instances given a blind eye to the measures stated
above hence triggering Article 42 of the same Chapter that “Should the Security
Council consider that measures provided for in Article 41 would be inadequate
or have proved to be inadequate, it may take such action by air, sea, or land
forces as may be necessary to maintain or restore international peace and security.
Such action may include demonstrations, blockade, and other operations by air,
sea, or land forces of members of the United Nations”. www.un.org.
Low and behold, some countries like the US
have resorted to the use of force over other states hiding behind Article 51
which states that "Nothing in the present Charter shall impair the
inherent right to individual or collective self-defence if an armed attack
occurs against a state." For example the invasion of Iraq and Afghanistan
with the USA being cynical of the existence and manufacturing of WMD in these
countries.
Refuting points
There
is a greater need to highlight that Chapter1: Article 2.3 of the UN charter
clearly state that “Members shall settle their international disputes by
peaceful means in such a manner that international peace and security, and
justice, are not endangered”. Thus the
use of force is inconsistent with what the UN purports to, unless the use of
guns and armoured vehicles to preserve peace is seen as peaceful by certain
individuals within the structures of the UN.
As much as the super powers of the UN wouldn’t
like to admit it, the truth is that they have a huge influence as to when and
where to use force in order to uphold global peace. Their interests are always
at forefront. The United States and the Western countries are very interested
in strengthening their political, economic and cultural influence both in
Afghanistan and in the Central Asian countries and will seek to be a major
force in the distribution and consumption of energy and other natural resources
in the region[12]. Some countries have in the past gone against
the resolutions made by the UN and were never responded to with the use of
force. As an example, South Africa resisted UN condemnation of apartheid over decades. This clearly shows that there are other means
of bringing peace as led by famous and influential men like Nelson Mandela and
Mahatma Gandhi. However, these can be too slow and ineffective[13].
The
Council has repeatedly issued unclear and unimplementable mandates which have
failed to mention what chapter of the UN Charter an operation was being
authorized under, resorted to neutral terms such as ‘all necessary means’ to
convey the possibility that force might be used and abused the concept of
deterrence. The Security Council’s mandates have left force commanders and
their peacekeepers vulnerable and in some cases mortally endangered, Rwanda
being the worst example due to the resistance of the perpetrators[14].
The use of force by the UN to preserve peace
is also a wrong thing to do taking in to account that fighting, displacement
and suffering of the ordinary civilians is inevitable when force is used to
preserve peace e.g.in Syria people 92,901 have died since the conflict started[15],
more than 6 million Syrians have been displaced by the three-year-old war, four
times the number of just a year ago[16]. The implication that can
be drawn from the displacement of people is that families have split, children
have lost their parents and relatives and husbands have lost wives.
From
research[17]
“the secretaries-general, although they are the commanders-in-chief of UN
military forces…have been essentially militarily illiterate. While some have
made courageous decisions regarding the use of force, they have mostly, like
the Security Council itself, failed to ensure that they were provided with a
range of military advice, instead acting on instinct and the advice of a select
few” (p.352). The only assumption that can be deduced from the above citation
is that the secretary generals mostly rely on the permanent members to make
decisions on the use of force. Giving them the huge task of being commanders in
chief of the UN forces notwithstanding their lack of military experience is
suicidal and shows little regard for human life by the UN.
Article
23:1 in actual fact comprises the principles of equality among member states to
the effect that there are those labelled as permanent members and the select
few from the general assembly to make up the Security Council. It goes on to
mention that the selected members of the Security Council will be done on
equitable geographical distribution. My belief is that using geographical
distribution as criteria is immaterial because what is of security concern to
South Africa may not necessarily be of concern to Botswana or Lesotho. Thus
everybody should have a say in the decisions that so much affect the people of
this interconnected world in trying to bring global peace.
Innocent civilians and peacekeepers have lost
their lives in the process of using force to bring about world peace. According
to The Foreign Minister of the Russian Federation, there is a common argument
that have been deployed recently to prove that the use of force was the most
effective method to address problems, although all experience of such
interventions had demonstrated that it was ineffective, meaningless and
destructive[18]. It
is not only the human life lost in this case, but the vegetation and
infrastructure too.
Conclusion
It
goes without saying that the use of force by the UN to bring about world peace
and order is rather wrong. Article 41, 42 and 51 which pave way for the use of
force to bring world order are not in sync with Article 33 wherein countries
shall resort to negotiation, mediation, judicial settlement and arbitration.
Moreover, the use of force results in loss of lives, hunger, and poverty,
displacement of people and destruction of property.
Blackboard
discussions: (See also appendices)
YouTube videos:
PowerPoint Presentations: (selected slides)
Library based Research:
This portfolio has presented exclusively albeit with summaries what the
course International Organizationa and Governance entails. It initially brings
the curtain down with what I previously knew prior to enrolling in the course,
the skills, values, attitudes and knowledge I have gained.
Global governance is a concept
that has permeated the globalized world. The need for control by man or
individual countries has always been there since time immemorial. What is
different now is that, global gorvenance seems to be determined to high extent
by strong economical basis and by one global giant with the help of little
giants unlike in the past where empires or states controlled part of the world.
Developing countries find themselves in an eternal background position, a
situation created by the third world countries. They nonetheless connive to
help each other out of the mud through regional integration. Global governance
will forever be contested by states either individually or collectively. Like
it was philosophised a long time ago by Ibn Khaldun and Niccolò Machiavelli; no
man will rule forever, young and vibrant men shall emerge to reclaim control.
Akinpelu,
J.A. (1981). An Introduction to Philosophy of Education. London. Macmillan
Findlay,
T. (2002). The Use of Force in UN Peace Operations. Oxford University Press.
New York
Gusev,
L. (2012). The US interests in Afghanistan and Central Asia. New Eastern
Outlook. ` http://indrus.in/articles/2012/03/27.
Accessed 10/2/2014.
Gustav,
R., Stewart, F. & Alejandro, R. (2000). Economic Growth and Human
.Development. World Development,
Elsevier. Vol. 28(2), p.197-219
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Regionalism_(international_relations). Accessed 4/4/2014
http://www.un.org/en/documents/charter/chapter7.shtml. Accessed 6/2/2014
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/world-middle-east-25732018.
Accessed 6/2/2014
http://www.un.org/News/Press/docs/2013/ga11429.doc.htm.Accessed
6/2/2014
Koerth-Baker,
M. (2013). How many people have died in the Syrian civil war?
http://boingboing.net/2013/06/13t.html. Accessed 10/2/2014
O’Neil,
R. (1997). The Role of Force in World Order. Asia-Pacific. Vol. 4:1.p 17-33
Figure 1
Figure 2
Figure 3
Thursday,
March 6, 2014 1:01:09 PM CAT
Total views:
49 (Your
views: 1)
Regional Integration
is an arrangement for enhancing cooperation through regional rules and
institutions entered into by states of the same region.SADC is more progressive
than ECOWAS because #SADC has a larger international trade presence than
ECOWAS#The region's export (SADC) in 2011 amounted to US$218 billion, 1.2
percent of the world total, while ECOWAS presence is low with US$131 billion
worth of exports in 2011, which is 0.7 percent of the world total.
Figure 4
COMMONALITIES- All this regional organizations
are active in bring peace and security. These organizations have created
security for their regions a priority as they take preventative diplomacy,
mediation and peace operations.3.intergration and new regionalism are viable in
African state? I’m of the view that integration and new regionalism cannot be
viable in African states on the bases that African states are commonly affected
by civil wars, political unrest and leaders are power hungry to enrich themselves.
[1] en.wikipedia.org
[2] Gustav,
R., Stewart, F. & Alejandro, R. (2000).
[3]
www.un.org
[4]oabonamosessello.simplesite.com
[5]
oabonamosessello.sosblogs.com
[6] oabonamosessello.africamotion.com
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ilqv2qoCgB4
[8] Tesfamikeal
(2004)
[9]http://www.bing.com/search?q=differences+aniC%2CSEATO%2CECOWAS&fo
[10]
Akinpelu (1981).
[11] www.un.org.
[12]
Gusev (2012)
[13]
O’Neil (1997).
[14] Finlay
(2002).
[15]
Koerth-Baker (2013).
[16] www.bbc.co.uk
[17] Finlay
(2002).
[18] www.un.org
No comments:
Post a Comment