Universal and regional Intergovernmental organizations (igos)

 

The 1648 Peace of Westphalia, which ended the Thirty Years' War, also ended the secular authority of the Pope by creating sovereign and independent territorial states. When European states started to integrate in the 1950s and later in February 1992 when the Maastricht treaty on European Union was signed, they moved a step away from the absolute sovereign control of states over their territory, and toward the reassertion of authority by supranational institutions.

The history of world politics for the past three hundred fifty years has largely been a chronicle of interactions among states, which remain the dominant political organizations in the world. States' interests, capabilities, and goals significantly shape world politics. However, the supremacy of the state has been severely challenged. Increasingly, world affairs are being influenced by organizations that transcend national boundaries—universal international organizations such as the United Nations and regional organizations such as the European Union. Diverse in scope and purpose, these actors perform independent roles and increasingly exert global influence.

In this unit we examine the growth and influence of these transnational organizations, a variety of other nonstate actors, such as ethnopolitical and religious movements and multinational corporations, which are also increasingly active on the world stage. The purpose or this unit is not simply to describe these actors' existence, but to question the extent to which their activities undermine states' continuing autonomy. The focus is on governments' capacity to manage global change, as well as the role of international organizations in the transformation of world politics.

There are two principal types of international organizations: Intergovernmental organizations (IGOs) [1] are those whose members are states; non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are those whose members are private individuals and groups. Neither type is unique to the twentieth and the twenty-first centuries, although both are now more pervasive. The Union of International Organizations, which maintains comprehensive, up-to-date information on both types, records that their numbers increased sharply during the nineteenth century, as international commerce and communications grew alongside industrialization. In 1909, there were 37 IGOs and 176 NGOs. By 1960 there were 154 IGOs and 1,255 NGOs, and by 1997 these numbers had surged to 260 and 5,472, respectively.

In interpreting these trends, we should keep in mind that it is not easy to identify and measure international organizations. In principle, IGOs are defined by not only the fact that their members are states, but also by their permanence and institutional procedures; IGOs meet at relatively regular intervals, and have specified procedures for making decisions and a permanent secretariat or headquarters staff, although they do not have direct access to many of the material resources normally available to states. If these criteria were relaxed, the number of IGOs would far surpass the two hundred and sixty "conventionally defined" organizations just cited, as would the number of NGOs. An additional 1,570 international bodies would qualify for inclusion as IGOs, as would more than 9,636 other nongovernmental associations that share some characteristics with NGOs.

This growth in transnational organizations has created a complex network of overlapping memberships. In 1996, some two hundred countries and territories had more than 135,000 different delegates representing them at the meetings of the 5,472 IGOs. The cooperative activities of these networks of interdependence span the entire range of global issues: trade, defense, disarmament, economic development, agriculture, health, culture, human rights, the arts, illegal drugs, tourism, labor, women's plight, education, debt, the environment, crime, humanitarian aid, civilian crisis relief, telecommunications, science, globalization, immigration, and refugees, to name just a few.

While more than 96 percent of all the transnational organizations now in operation are nongovernmental, the remaining 4 percent are more important because their members are states. The smaller subset of IGOs that governments create will remain preeminent as long as the preeminence of states themselves persists, because IGOs derive their importance from their character as associations of states, which gives them whatever authority IGOs exercise.

IGOs are all composed of states, but vary widely in their purposes and breadth of membership. One study found that only eighteen qualify as general-purpose organizations, and of these only the United Nations approximated universal membership. The rest, making up more than 97 percent of the total, were limited in their membership and purposes. The variation among the organizations in each subcategory is great, particularly with single-purpose, limited-membership IGOs. The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), for example, is primarily a military alliance, while others, such as the Organization of American States (OAS), promote both economic development and political reforms. Still, most IGOs engage in a comparatively narrow range of activities the purposes of which are usually economic and social, such as the management of trade, transportation, and other types of functional cooperation. In this sense IGO are agents as well as reflections of global social and economic interdependence produced by the expansion of activities transcending state borders.

Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) also differ widely. Due to their number and diversity, they are even more difficult than IGOs to characterize and classify. In 1997 the Union of International Associations categorized 10 percent of some 5,472 NGOs as universal membership organizations, with most of the remaining 90 percent classified as intercontinental or regionally oriented membership organizations. Functionally, NGOs span virtually every facet of modern political, social, and economic activity in an increasingly borderless globalized world, ranging from earth sciences to health care, language, history, culture, theology, law, ethics, security, and defense.

It is useful to think of NGOs as intersocietal organizations that help promote agreements among states on issues of international public policy. Many NGOs interact formally with IGOs. For instance, more than one thousand NGOs actively consult with various agencies of the extensive United Nations system and maintain offices in more than one hundred cities. The partnership between NGOs and IGOs enables both types to work together in pursuit of common policies and programs.

Although widespread geographically, NGOs are most active in the advanced Global North industrial democracies. "This is so because open political systems, ones in which there is societal pluralism, are more likely to allow their citizens to participate in non-governmental organizations, and such democratic governments are highly correlated with relatively high levels of economic development" (Jacobson).

 

Notes:

1 IGOs: institutions created and joined by governments, which give them authority to make collective decisions to manage particular problem(s) on the global agenda.

 

Exercises:

1 Answer the following questions:

1 What was the consequence of the 1648 Peace of Westphalia?

2 Which organizations influence world affairs?

3 What are the 2 principal types of international organizations?

4 What are peculiar criteria of IGOs?

5 What issues do the “networks of interdependence“ span?

6 Which part of the “networks of interdependence“ belongs to IGOs and NGOs?

7 How widely do IGOs vary in their purposes and breadth of membership?

8 What are usual purposes of most IGOs?

9 What are the criteria and functions of NGOs?

10 What is the relationship between IGOs and NGOs?

2 Give Russian equivalents for the following word-combinations:

secular authority, reassertion of authority, supranational institutions, diverse in scope and purpose, to undermine continuing autonomy, to manage global change, to maintain comprehensive information, to measure international organization, conventionally defined organizations, overlapping memberships, networks of interdependence, entire range of global issues, breadth of membership, economic interdependence, expansion of activities, due to diversity, universal membership organizations, to span every facet, borderless globalized world, intersocietal organizations.

 

3 Give English equivalents for the following words and word-combinations:

взаимодействие государств, определять мировую политику, выходить за национальные границы, оказывать глобальное влияние, современная информация, иметь в виду, оставаться выдающимся, состоять из государств, быть ограниченным в членстве и целях, узкий спектр, проведение общей политики.

 

 

4 Make up nouns from the following verbs and adjectives using suffixes:

to sign, to reassert, to bound, to perform, to exert, to grow, to describe, to exist, to continue, to manage, to maintain, to interpret, to identify, to define, to cite, to add, to include, to represent, to defend, to persist, to derive, to compose, to approximate, to promote, to engage, to reflect, to produce, to expand, to agree, to pursue, to advance, to allow, to participate, to correlate;

capable, significant, supreme, diverse, comprehensive, permanent, regular, entire, legal, broad, particular, active.

 

5 Make up adjectives using suffixes:

 

peace, Europe, history, Universe, region, globe, religion, autonomy, principle, government, commerce, institution, convention, defense, economy, health, culture, environment, crime, science, character, authority, function, care, society;

to depend, to create, to dominate, to vary, to continue, to pervade, to comprehend, to communicate, to respect, to relate, to include, to cooperate, to persist, to derive, to compare, to produce, to use, to help, to extend, to describe.

 

6 Give as many synonyms as possible to the following words:

to create, to integrate, to shape, to undermine, to manage, to span, to persist, to limit;

treaty, interaction, affair, scope, alliance, cooperation;

dominant, severe, diverse, continuing, complex, entire, preeminent.

 

7 Give antonyms adding negative affixes if necessary:

secular, capable, significant, regular, permanent, direct, normal, conventional, available, complex, legal, governmental, important, broad, limited, different, useful.

 

8 Explain the meaning of the following adverbs and make up sentences with them:

significantly, severely, sharply, relatively, conventionally, primarily, comparatively, virtually, formally.

 

9 Insert prepositions where necessary:

1 Most IGOs engage … a comparatively narrow range … activities the purposes … which are usually economic and social.

2 The history … world politics … the past 350 years has largely been a chronicle … interactions … states.

3 It is useful to think … NGOs as intersocietal organizations that help promote agreements … states … issues … international public policy.

4 The 1648 Peace … Westphalia ended the secular authority … the Pope … creating sovereign and independent territorial states.

5 IGOs are all composed … states, but vary widely … their purposes and breadth … membership.

6 The variation … the organizations … each subcategory is great, particularly … single-purpose IGOs.

7 … principle, IGOs are defined … permanence and institutional procedures.

8 … instance, more than one thousand NGOs actively consult … various agencies … the extensive UN system and maintain … offices … more than one hundred cities.

9 IGOs meet … relatively regular intervals, and have specified procedures … making decisions and a permanent secretariat or headquarters staff, although they do not have direct access … many … the material resources normally available … states.

10 The partnership … NGOs and IGOs enables both types to work together … pursuit … common policies and programs.

10 Translate from Russian into English:

1 Как показывает история мировой политики, именно государства всегда оставались доминирующими политическими организациями в мире, а их интересы, возможности и цели в значительной степени определяют мировую политику.

2 Доминирующей роли государств бросают вызов организации, выходящие за рамки национальных границ (такие как ООН, ЕС и др.), которые оказывают все увеличивающееся влияние на мировую политику.

3 В соответствии с современными данными Союза Международных Организаций, благодаря развитию международной торговли и коммуникаций в течение 19-го века количество межгосударственных и негосударственных организаций значительно увеличилось.

4 Если бы межгосударственные организации имели менее строгие критерии и могли бы иметь прямой доступ к материальным ресурсам, то их количество было бы намного больше.

5 Несмотря на то, что межгосударственные организации состоят из государств, их цели значительно отличаются, например, НАТО – в первую очередь, военный союз, а Организация Американских Штатов заинтересована в экономическом развитии и политических реформах.

6 Что касается функциональных особенностей негосударственных организаций, эти организации охватывают практически все грани современной политической, социальной, экономической деятельности в безграничном мире.

7 Многие межгосударственные организации взаимодействуют с негосударственными организациями, а их партнерство дает им возможность проводить общую политику и совместные программы.

 

 

11 Questions for discussions:

1 The role of international organizations in world politics.

2 IGOs and NGOs, the comparison of their criteria and functions.

UNIT 9