TOPIC I:

DEFINITION, NATURE AND CHARACTERISTICS

OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS

DEFINING INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS

Here are some definitions:
By C. Archer: "An international organization can be defined as a formal, continuous
structure established by agreement between members (governmental and/or non-governmental)
from two or more sovereign states with the aim of pursuing the common interests of the
membership."
By M. Virally : "IO can be defined as an association of states, established by agreement
among its members and possessing a permanent system or set of organs, who task is to pursue
objectives of common interest by means of co-operation among its members."
By P. Gerbet: "The idea of an international organization is the outcome of [state or any
other actors] objectives to bring order into international relations by establishing lasting bonds
across frontiers between governments or social groups wishing to defend their common interests
within the context of permanent bodies, distinct from national institutions, having their own
individual characteristics, capable of expressing their own will and whose role is to perform certain
functions of international importance." (in C. Archer, s.34).
As seen in C. Archer's book International Organizations (pp.33-34) there can be given more
definitions. However, we can summarize these definitions by extracting the common features as
follows:
In this and any other definition of international organization, the terms "international" and
"organization" have their own separate meanings. The term "international ogranization(IO)" is
made up of the terms "international" and "organization". So to understand the IO, we need the
focus on these terms first. What does the term "international" mean? And what does the term
"organization" mean?
The term international is actually a misnomer, for it assumes only one dimension of the
interactions among the international actors, that is the relations between the nation-states. In
reality, when looked at the evolving processes of international relations, there can be seen at least
three dimensions of interactions in the world arena.
The first is the interactions between the states, that is called the interstate, or between the
governments of the sovereign states, that is called the intergovernmental relations. The term
"interstate relations" refers to the relations between the formal officials of the sovereign states
such as diplomacy, international agreement or treaty, war etc.. Indeed, these interstate relations
are generally conduced by the government representatives such as between the prime ministers
and the foreign ministries. Then it is called the intergovernmental relations. In general, interstate
and intergovernmental relations are the same. But in same cases, they can be different. For
example, for some countries the rule of the state can have different realm from the rule of the
government. The state, as an abstract institution, can have some institutions and principles which
are not controlled by the government. In such cases, e.g. British royalty has its own identity and
relations with other institutions, the elected governments have no involvement. Except for some
such cases, however, the intergovernmental relations are at least assumed to be interstate
relations.
The second dimension is the transgovernmental relations. Transgovernmental relations
can also be seen as formal relations between the sovereign states. But the difference is that they
are conducted by the branches or the departments of the governments, for example between the
defense ministers, or between the trade ministers, and sometimes between the different branches
of the different governments, e.g. between a defense minister of a state and a interior ministry of
another state The problem with these relations is that they can be out of the sate and the
government control. So there can emerge such cases in which the relations between any two
states go uncontrolled and unexpected because these relations do not go through the normal
foreign policy making channels.
Still more problematic is the transnational relations, the third dimension of the term
international relations. Transnational relations include those relations between the national
control and even the sovereignty of the formal state officials. Although these relations are
conducted within the borders and territories of the sovereign states, they can deal with such issues
which might challenge the decision making powers of the government officials. Well-known
examples are the relations between the multinational organizations, civil society groups, and the
individuals.
All these separations are important because each dimension has its own organizational
form.
Those created by interstate relations are called IGOs, such as NATO, UN, and so on.
Those created by the transgovernmental organizations are also called IGOs such as
Interpol.
Those created by the transnational groups are called the INGOs, such as MNOs, IBM, Shell,
Mobil, Toyota etc. And of course the IGOs are very different from the INGOs in every aspect of
international organizations, i.e. membership, objective, structure, activities, voting mechanisms
(decision-making procedures).
The term organization is defined as"a group, society, club, or business, especially a large
one that has particular aims, e.g. student organizations, ... the World Health Organization" (Collins
Cobuild English language Dictionary (London: HarperCollins Publisher, 1987), s.1015) The term
organization have two different, though interconnected, definitions.
Organization as a process refers to the variety of interactions between the actors in certain
fields of human actions such as diplomacy, trade, commerce, peace conferences, etc. Thus, actors
come together to bring harmony, to find solutions to the problems, and to arrange and thus
organize their relations into a set of agreed rules, principles for their objectives. In international
relations, we can see several examples of these processes in diplomacy, trade, commerce, war
where there are rules, customs, structures and so. In sociological meaning, they are the normal
interactions processes among the units that may not manifest themselves in formal organizations
of bricks and mortar, headed paper. But some of these international processes are organized in
the form of institutions.
In this regard, an important example is the theory of international organizations. An
international regime is a set of procedures, rules, norms, and institutions for certain kinds of
activity, e.g. trade, money, sea, air, technology, etc. (Keohane and Nye, Power and
Interdependence, s.5). So, the institution is the part of international regimes. But there can be an
international activity with some norms, rules, and procedures, but not an institution. Or over time,
as the process takes a changing form, the institution may also change the rules and procedures.
For example, IMF. The second depends on the former.
Organization as institution refers to "a formal technical and material organization with
constitution, local chapters, physical equipment, machines, emblems, letterhead stationary, a
staff, administrative hierarchy, and so forth." International institutions are the representative
aspects of the phase process that has been reached at a given time. The institutional framework
for the already existing international interactions adds "stability, durability and cohesiveness" to
individual relationships which otherwise might be "sporadic, ephemeral, and unstable" (Archer in
p.2, citing Duverger, 1972, s.68). At the international level this is shaped up by the practice of
diplomatic method or adherence to the tenets of international law or by regular trading, as well
as by the activities of such international organizations as NATO, WHO and so on.
To recap, international organizations represent the apex of a pyramid of multinational
diplomacy. At the base are the issues suitable for negotiation, then comes the agreed rules and
norms, and then comes appropriate international organizations or institutions.
We are concerned with the organizations as institutions, not with the broader notions of
international organization. Whereas the second dimension is the topic of international theory and
politics in general; the first part, though not less important, focuses on the formal and concrete
organizations or institutions. Meanwhile, whereas the first dimension is called international
organization in singular form, the second dimension is named as international organizations in
plural.
So international organizations are the institutionalized products of the international
interactions. If there wasn't any international interactions, there would not be international
organizations. There can be shown more preconditions for the emergence of international
organizations. Before that we will have a definition of the international organization:
1. The existence of a number of independent states. Thus, it is obvious to conclude that
international organizations emerged after the Westphalia Treaty in the modern period. Although
there are different views on the minimum number required for establishing and international
organization, most writers accepted that there must be at leas two "qualified members of the
international system." Thus it can be bilateral or multilateral. But the organization must be open
for the voluntary membership of the other eligible states.
International organizations can be setup by two different actor types. States and non-state
actors. Those set up by the states are called IGOs; those set up by the non-governmental
organization are called INGOs. We deal with the first type.
2. There must e a substantial measure of international contact between them. Thus, there
were not any inter-Atlantic international organizations in the 18th century in which the American
and European states were involved.
Once international organization is set up, it must have permanent activities involved by the
members. So the organization must hold more or less regular plenary sessions at certain intervals.
3. There need to be an awareness of problems that arise from state's co-existence. The
states must recognize that the creation of international devices and systemic methods for
regulating their relations with each other is useful. (Archer, s.4).
There can be shown three reasons for the states to establish an international organization:
 1. Functional cooperation for common needs and problems: WTO, IMF, WHO,
2. Regional cooperation for dialogue, peace, etc. EU, OAS, ASEAN,
3. Security: Collective security and collective defense organizations: UN, NATO, Warshaw
Pact.
4. International Organizations are set up by a formal constitution, which is generally an
agreement or treaty among the member states. The legal document lay down the formal status of
the organization, showing the aims, rules, conditions, organs, and so on. In a way, the foundation
paper is a constitution of the organization.
5. The organization should have a permanent secretariat and headquarters, based on a
fixed capital. But organs of the organization can be scattered around the members so that every
member has a feeling of belonging to the organization. And the officers of the organization must
be recruited from the member countries. So there is an international staff running the
organization.
6. Thus, international organization is an international entity having its own individual
characteristics, capable of expressing its own will and whose role is to perform certain functions
of international importance.
The last point, that is the independence and the capability of the international organization,
is very debatable. Although the others are more or less feasible and possible o achieve, the last
one is controversial. Can the international organizations have an independent personality in
international relations? How powerful are they in achieving their objectives? Are the
complementary or rival to the states? All these questions are about the nature of the international
organizations in the international system.
2. NATURE OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Once set up, there emerges a new international body. The international organizations gain
an independent personality (status) to act i international relations. They are free and distinct from
the members. Since they are created for achieving the common goals of the member states, they
are expected to be active in the organization of international relations for finding common
solutions to the common problems, for opening new opportunities for its founders at least.
However, the question is that: are they capable of doing these activities in international relations?
and most importantly, how much independence and authority do they have to conduct these
relations on behalf of its members. To answer these questions, one need do deal with their
position in international system, level of autonomy in international activities vis a vis the state
sovereignty, and their capacities.
1. The position of the international organizations in international system.
The international system consists of nation-states, their interactions, international
organizations and the interactions of the private groups organized or not. Thus the international
organizations are only one part of the inter-state system, actually as the product of these inter-
state relations.
It is widely believed that the international organizations are proper and recognized
members of the international system, thus actors of international relations, similar to the states.
Because, they are recognized by the members of the organization, if not by all the states in the
international system. Thus, as international actors, they participate in international relations by
making their own decisions, by doing their own political, economic, social, technical and even
military activities; and as result the can be very influential in the process of international relations.
2. The level of autonomy and the state sovereignty
However, that does not mean they can be as autonomous as the nation states because
their sphere of influence was limited by the sovereignty and independence of states. As the
"children" of the sovereign states, they are shaped by the inter-state relationships and by their
objectives, more than they shape the state policies. So in general they have a minor role and
influence over the states and the world politics in general. Basically the international organizations
do not rule over the state sovereignty, and are expected not to interfere into the internal affairs
of the states, be they members or not.
However, over the last decades, in the wake of new developments in technology,
information and political-social issues, their power has increased. As the need for international
cooperation between the states has increased, their role and importance has increased.
3. The capacities of the international organizations are also not very promising. Most of
them do not have their own armies, independent budgets, strong facilities such as equipment,
arms, etc. But, their capacities are mostly donated by the members states. So if they fail to
contribute to the organization, the latter cannot fulfil its activities efficiently and continuously.
Indeed, the high level of contribution by one member state is good. But on the other hand,
the greater the contribution by one state, the greater the risk that that state wants to control the
organization for its own objectives. So this is a dilemma for the international organizations.
4. National interests vis a vis the common interests.
The international organizations are established for the common objectives of all the
members. However, this rule is generally challenged by the national interests of the members.
Some states may wish to use the organization as an instrument for their own national interests. In
these cases, there can be seen clash of interests, and thus conflict within the organization. As a
result, the organization cannot function properly.
3.CHARACTERISTICS OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANIZATIONS
Although there are a great variety of international organizations in the international
system, with different objectives, sizes, regions etc., all can be categorized into a standard criteria
with some common characteristics. These are the essential and irreducible characteristics:
1. Membership: all draw in membership from two or more sovereign states, be they official
or private depending on the type of the international organization.
2. Aim : The organizations are established with the aim of pursuing the common interests
of the members. At least on paper, it should not have the express aim of the pursuit of the interests
of only one member, regardless of the desires of the others.
3. Structure : The organizations should have their own formal structures of a continuous
nature astablished by an agreement such as treaty or constituent document. The nature of the
formal structure may vary from organization to organization but it should be separate from the
continued control of one member. It is this autonomous structure that differentiates a number of
international organizations from a series of conferences or congresses. Furthermore, the
organizations generally have an assembly for all the members to participate and have a vote, an
executive organ for running the organization, and a secretariat for implementing the decisions.
Some organizations also have their own courts to resolve the problems among the members.
International organization must have a fair voting system so that no one state can control
the organization, and one or more are not excluded from the system. In general there are three
different voting systems: a. Simple majority, b. Qualified majority, c. Consensus
4. Activity: The organizations should have an international activity, that is, those activities
beyond the internal politics of the members or any other states. And their level and type of
activities are determined by the consent of the qualified number of the members, not by only one
member of the organization.
Activities can be categorized into two groups such as profit-making, and non-profit
activities. In this regard, the IGOs are non-profit organizations; whereas most of the INGOS (TNCs
in particular) are profit-making organizations.
TOPIC 2:
THE EMERGENCE AND THE GROWTH OF INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATIONS:
HISTORICAL PERSPECTIVE
As Jacopson put it perfectly, the contemporary web of international organisations began
to emerge in the early years of the 19th century, developed steadily in the latter half of the century
and the first half of the 20 the century, and mashroomed since the end of the Second World War.
Thus, the emergence and the growth of the modern international organisations is process of two
centuries, if not to include the period before the nineteen century, and thus can be divided into
four periods.
1. The period before the 19th century up until the Vienna Congress
2. The period from the Vienna Congress until the First World War
3. The period from the First World War to the Second World War
4. The period from the end of the Second World War to-day
As we have already indicated in the first topic to define international organisations,
international organisation as process has always existed since the emergence of the modern
international system after the Westphalia Treaty of 1648. But these processes did not yield to an
international organisation as institution until the time that the states faced great problems and
realised that they had to create some permanent institution to deal with these problems.
1. The Pre – 19th Century Period
Indeed, before the 19th century, there were several views and proposals in European
continent for instituting peace and order in the continent. As Jacopson indicates six of these peace
plans are noteworthy. The "peace plans" proposed by those intellectuals such as Pierre Dubious
(1255-1312), George Podebard (1420-1471), Due de sully (1559-1641), Emeric Cruce (1968-1743),
William Penn (1644-1718), and Abbe de Saint-Pierre (1658-1743), and J.J. Rousseau, Jeremy
Bentham, I Kant and others in the following century, all had the same, objective, that was to
prevent war and preserve peace in Europe by an organisation of European countries. But their
methods of having this objective were different. Some proposed an organisation for the spread of
Christianity in other parts of Europe; some for the fulfilment of crusades against the infidels; some
for the protection of the Europe from outside attacks especially by the Turks; and some for peace
and order within the European countries.
But all of these proposals had some seeds in the emergence of international organisation
as institution. First of all, Most of them did not envisage a universal organisation their membership
were limited to the European states only. Some included Russia, some the Ottomans.
2. The Congress of Vienna and the aftermath
First international organisations as institution started to emerge after the two historic
events in Europe. They were the French revolution and the industrial revolution.
1. The first quasi-international organisation was the Congress of Vienna, which convened
after the war between France and the status quo powers Australia, Prussia, Russia and England.
The Congress of Vienna was an organisation as process, but not a organisation as institution.
However, it was very important and even seminal meeting of the states. It made fundamental
arrangements, rules, principles and developed crucial habits for an international order in Europe.
Although the main preoccupation of the Congress was political-security, that is the nature of
national boundaries and regimes throughout Europe, it dealt with soem economic and social
issues. Inded, the first international organisation as institution was created by the Congress of
Vienna, the Central Commission for the Navigation of the Phine.
But the Congress of Vienna was actually oriented to the political and security order in
Europe. The Congress itself introduced some novel techniques and habits for the later
international organisations. Some of them can be categorised as follows:
The most important novelty was the agreement by the great powers to make regular
consultations on the issues of war and peace in Europe at "fixed intervals. So there developed a
habit that the states would convene conferences at peace time regularly to discuss the war-peace
problems, and try to find political, legal solutions for these problems.
This agreement among Austria, Prussia, Russia and England, and France was called the
"Concert of Europe". The Concert of Europe was based on the Treaty of Chaumont signed by
Austria, Prussia, Russia and England, or so-called the Quadruple Alliance. Its main objective was to
preserve the balance of power and status quo in Europe, which had been devastated by France.
The Concert of Europe countries would act together to prevent French attempts to change the
balance of power and status quo in Europe. So for this objective, they convened at certain periods
to consult on these matters. Aix-la-Chapelle (1818). Troppau (1820), Laibach (1821), Verona
(1822). But, as the French treat to European peace and security was eliminated and as
disagreements between England and others on the maintainence of status quo increased the
Alliance and the meeting were terminated. In other words, the powers returned to the habit of
convening after an international war such in the Congress of Paris (1856) after the Crimean War,
The Congress of Berlin (1878) after the Russian-Ottoman War.
Meanwhile, there developed a kind of secretariat to make the organisation of these
meetings.
2.Another development in the 19th century was the expansion of international system to
include not only the European powers, but also the United State, the Ottoman Empire, Japan,
China and Latin American countries. As new actors entered to the system, new type of
organisations developed to make arrangements on war-peace issues concerning not only Europe
but whole world. And thus came the Hague Conferences on legal, security and political issues. The
first Hague Conference in 1899, dealing with disarmament, was participated by 27 states including
Europeans, the United States, China, Japan, Mexico. The second Hague conference was convened
in 1907 with the participation of 44 counties. In the Hague conferences, A Panel of Arbitrators was
established to settle disputes through international negotiations. Moreover, there emerged the
Permanent Court of International Justice and the International Court of Justice after the
Conferences.
3. Another important factor in the development of international organisations in the 19 th
century was the growing international trade and commercial relations not only in Europe but also
in Europe. The innovations in communication, travel and transportation as well as the spread of
the industrial revolution made a positive impact on the relations between individuals, groups and
states. For example, they came to use the rivers, open seas and oceans, and techniques of
telegraph, posting in the 19th century. All these growing relations necessitated to make
arrangements for a better and efficient communication, travel and transportation and trade and
commerce. In this regard, the first international arrangement was the Central Commission for the
Navigation of the Rhine (1815), created at the Congress of Viena with a permanent secretariat,
central building and rules. Its original members were the riparian states of the Rhine, France, the
Netherlands, five German states, and Prussia. And the European Commission for the Control of
the Danube, created after the Congress of Paris in 1856 for the same purpose. Two more
international organisation were created in 1865. The International Telegraph Union (which exists
today as a special agency of the UN with the name International Telecommunication Union and
the International Commission for the Cape Spartel Light in Tangier.
Some of these organisations were intergovernmental, some transgovernmental and some
mixed membership. But it can be said that they were inter-effective. That is, some were initiated
by the private groups and taken on by the state representatives; and some were crated by the
state representatives and purely IGO.
4. In the latter half of the 19th century, the rise of the public international unions was
mirrored by that of the private international associations. National humanitarian, social, economic,
religious, educational, scientific, and political organisations arranged international meetings. The
first such gathering was the World Anti-Slavery Convention of 1840. It was this sort of association
that spawned permanent organisations with the machinery of secretariat, boards and assemblies.
In statistical perspective, the emergence and the growth of the international organisations
can be analysed as follows:
As a result, according to the Union of International Associations, number of IGOs rose from
7 in the 1870-4 period to 37 in 1909; and the number of the INGOs had already reached 176 by
the later ate.
Most of the international organisations were Europe-originated, i.e. regional, and specific
purpose. But towards the end of the 19th century, both the number and the members of the
International Organisations increased.
3. The First World War and the Aftermath
The First World War gave first to truly international oganisation, the League of Nations. The
League was a comprehensive organisation which aimed to make arrangements not only on
political-security issues, but also to some extend on economic-social issues. But all were to
organise a new international order.
 Thus, the number of the IGOs increased rapidly. 32 new organisations were in the five years
after 1919 and 44 in the five years after 1945. That means that the two great wars convinced the
states to make new arrangements to prevent war and to preserve peace.
The League of Nations was the first great international organisation the world had ever
known. In short, the League was a product of many novelties as far as the development of
international organisations.
 It was the first universal organisation, theoretically open to all states in the world.
 It had a multipurpose, ranging from political-security issues to the conditions of
labours.
 It had a permanent structure: with the Council as the governing body, the Assembly as
the decision-making body, and the secretariat as the implementing body located in
Geneva.
4. The Second World War and the Aftermath
In the period after the Second World War, international organisations, be it IGOs or INGOs
spawned. This can be attributed to several factors, but most important of them are:
- Decolonization : As the number of sovereign states increased rapidly through the
decolonization after the 1950s, the number of the international organisations also increased.
- Technological and scientific development necessitated the creation of new international
organisations: such as the Organisation for International Aviation. International Maritime
Organisation etc.
- The IGOs bgetting IGOs. As a new phenomena, in this period, the IGOs created new IGOs.
For example, The UN has created several new international organisations under its structure,
although each has its own structure, objectives etc.
In the post-Second World War period, new kinds of international organisations emerged.
Indeed, they were innovations in the development of international organisations. Some of these
innovations are:
 There emerged international governmental organisation to manage the affairs of the
peacetime military alliances, such as NATO, WTO, Baghdad Pact etc. They were
"specialisation on security matters".
 Supranational organisations such as the ECSC and later the EU.
In conclusion, by the 1980s, many different types of IGOs had been established, and many
different factors played a role in their creation. In 1980, there were 621 IGOs; and 4265 INGOs I
the world.
TOPIC 3:
EMERGENCE AND GROWTH OF INTERNATIONAL
ORGANIZATIONS:
THEORETICAL PERSPECTIVE
International Organisations are products not only of a historical evolution of international
politics but also of a theoretical construction of international politics. Like in other dimensions of
international politics, there have been several writers or intellectuals to have developed views and
perspectives about the nature, role and function and importance of international organisations.
These views can be seen as the comments on the international organisations, but also as the guides
for the political activists or statesmen.
In the light of our study of international relations theory in the last term, and of the plan of
the "Chapter 3: Writings on International Organisations" in Clive Archer's book International
Organisations, we can categorise theories about the international organisations into four groups.
1. Traditional theories: Idealists and Realists
2. Pluralist (or "Revisionists" in Archer) theories
3. Marxists theories
4. Third-World theories
All these theories have very deep and comprehensive roots and background. We will not
go into details of these roots and background as we have already learned them. But suffice it to
say that these roots and backgrounds have close connections with their understanding of
international organisations. Therefore, if necessary, we will touch on the fundamental tenets of
the theories.
1. TRADITIONAL THEORIES
The common characteristic of the traditional theories is the point that they adopt a classical
state-centric approach to international organisations. Otherwise, these two theories. Idealist and
Realist, have different views on most aspects of international relations, indeed on international
organisations. Thus, despite their state-centric approach they have rather differing views on the
nature, role and function and importance of international organisations in world politics.
1.1. Idealist Theories
As we know, idealism is political philosophy whose roots go back to the nineteenth century
enlightment and liberalism. Its basic view is based the primacy of moral, legal and organised
process of international relations for the establishment of permanent peace and order in the
world, and for eradicating the war-conflict problem from the human society. In other words, to
idealists, international law and international organisation is inseparable forces and factors for this
objective.
As we know, idealists were very active and loud during the inter-war period where there
were an attempt to construct an international collective security system in the world under the
League of Nations. Thus, many writers in this period such as L. Morimer. A. Zimmerman, H.
Lauterpacht, L. Woolf focused primarily on the League of Nations in the perspective of
international law. They primarily delta with the international organisations in practice, with their
legal personality, constitutions (the Convenant), and their organisation problems etc. Indeed,
idealist in general viewed international organisations as the instruments to resolve international
disputes and conflicts by means of international law for peaceful international order.
In the inter-war period and later, some idealists saw them as institutions for an
international government. They viewed them as "authority over the states and their foreign
actions." In England, for example, the Fabian Society, headed by L. Woolf, proposed in 1916 the
establishment of an international government to stop war and restore peace in the world, and
argued that "if war is to be prevented, states must submit to some international control and
government in their political and administrative relations. Their views were influential in the
creation of the League of Nations. They believed that under such a government, legal problems
could be submitted to international court or to a similar tribunal, and political problems to an
international council of states.
Idealist view slowed down in the wake of the failure of the League of Nations in the period,
but this tradition never died off. Indeed, even after the Second World War in the United Nations
era, there were some idealist views advocating the supremacy of international law to be
implemented by the Collective Security mechanism of the United Nations. We always encounter
such views in international wars, disputes and conflicts, as in the cases of the Iraqi invasion of
Kuwait, the Bosına War, the Israeli invasion of the Palestinian territories.
But, international organisations are successful in some cases, not so much in others. Why?
The answer to that question is given by the opponent view of the traditional views.
1.2. Realist Theories
The Realist Views as the dominant paradigm of the post-Second World War was very loud
and active in stressing the failure of the idealist views. Those writers such as E.H. Carr, Georg
Schwarzenberger, Reinhold Niebuhr, Hans J. Morgenthau blamed spirit of the League of Nations
for the break up of the second World War. And they named these views as "utopians" and showed
alternative views on the basis of "reality". They claimed that international organisations are
products of the international reality. So what are these realities.
There is no world community who abide by the common rule of law of international
organisations, but an international anarchy in the sense of a lack of a government at the
international level. So there is no common community interest. This is the basic reason for the
failure of the international organisations. Because of the lack of an international community, there
cannot be a common authority above and over the sovereign state.
On the contrary, in international politics, there is power politics, national interests and
sovereignty. There realities affect the operation and performance of international organisations.
The idealist views of the supremacy of "morality" and "law" in the operation of international
organisations do not represent the reality and are not very influencial. Instead, the concerns of
national interest, power struggle and sovereignty play primary role.
Thus, international organisations are mere instruments of states for their pursuit of the
above. They are simply and purely interstate institutions which are important in so far as they are
used in the search for power or in solving the problem of peace, as Morgenthau argued. Therefore,
international organisations play only marginal role in international relations. They can be powerful
and effective, and trivial and ineffective, depending on the foreign policy of the members.
Then, one should not underestimate their role and importance if the states wish to put
them into practice as an actor of international politics. If so, they can have a significant place in
the maintainance of peace and order. If not, they can be tools of the power politics of the states.
 Finally, the Realists do not attach any importance and attention to the INGOs as begin
neglectible actors. Just like they do not attach importance to so called low politics issues, they do
not see these organisations very important.
2. PLURALIST (OR "REVISIONISTS") THEORIES
Pluralists here means the non-state centric approach to the phenomena of international
organisations. They believe that the number and variety of international organisations speedily
increased in the last 50 years mainly because of the great changes in the non-state actors in the
world politics. Therefore, they advocate hat to understand the phenomena one must pay attention
the activities of these forces and their international organisations. They believe that as
international relations has been getting multi-lavered, involved by transactional groups, the
characteristics of international organisations have changed. Thus, they view the world different
from the traditional theories, not as set of sovereign states but as a set of plural actors in various
colours.
This perspective includes different sub-groups, which can be divided into five:
functionalists, neo-functionalists, transactionists, interdependence, and globalists.
2.1. Functionalists
Functionalist advocate world-wide internationally active, functional organisations. The
pioneering writer of this school is David Mitrany. He claimed hat there should be functional
international organisations for the establishment of a peaceful international order. Functionalism
is based on the opinion that as a result of increasing material and technical instruments, there is
more need to have co-operation on "technical-functional issues" across borders among those
concerned non-state actors. In such areas as transportation, health care, communications,
agriculture, industrial development, scientific development, and so on, there is a need for
international co-operation because they are no longer carried on within the borders of the
sovereign states, but are undertaken across the frontiers on a regional, continental or universal
bases. These activities would be overseen by international arrangements which would be more
like boards of management.
The functional agencies of the UN- ILO, WHO, FAO etc.- as well as some INGOs – League of
Cross societies, World Scout Movement, etc.- are examples of this type of arrangements.
Functionalism globally active international organisations, not considering regional
functional groupings.
According to Mitrany, these arrangements would be free of political interference. So
political conflicts would be lessened, and war problem be resolved. He actually underestimated
the power of the political forces in functional cooperation and organisations.
He presumed that welfare would prevent the warfare. However that was not case all the
time. Indeed, the pursuit for welfare may also cause warfare.
He claims that functional approach circumvents ideological and racial divisions, as it does
the traditional boundaries. But it is not the case. For example, there is ideological rifts in the ILO,
UNESCO, WHO etc.
2.2. Neo-Functionalists:
It is indeed the application and adaptation of the functional theory into European and
Atlantic institutions, esp, to the European Community in the 1960s and 1970s.
 Indeed, the ECSC and the EEC were based on the functional approach but on the European
continent. They aimed to have a supranational authority over the member states, under which the
interest groups would co-operate on the Community rather than on the national basis.
This experiences were studied by the so-called neo-functionalist writers such E.Haass,
L.Lindberg, J.Nye. Its difference from the functionalism are two:
 They limit their functional approach to the regional basis,
 On the issue of political decisions, they claim that functional co-operation would spill-
over into new areas and into the political decision-making level, leading to full
integration.
2.3. Transactionits:
The more transactions, the more chance and need for international organisations. K.
Deutch's "amalgamated communities" (like the USA), and the "security communities".

2.4. Interdependence-Transnationalists
As a result of increased transnational activities since the end of the Second World War, the
world is getting more interdependent. Interdependence motivated states to establish
international organisations to manage the issues of interdependence. Keohane and Nye's "Power
and Interdependence" gave international organisations an important role in the complex
interdependent world.
International organisations are the bases of international regimes.
2.5. Globalists
It is "whole world approach", viewing the world as a single unified entity. It does not limit
itself to functional or geographic differences. It focuses on the well-being of the ecosystem, the
planet earth. Its is concerned with the survival of the planet. Nuclear escalation, pollutions,
communication revolution etc. are all global phenomena. Those world-wide issues or problems
beg for global solutions based on the institutions that can take a global perspective.
For example, John Burton's work "World Society" is a kind of this approach.
3. MARXIST THEORIES
Markist-Leninst theories have a different view of international relations, viewing it as a
class struggle, a struggle between the capitalist world and the socialist world. Due to their
antagonizm to the capitalist world, they don't originally want establis relations with them. But this
view later changed. Especially, starting from the end of Stalin era, the Soviet Union involved in
many international organisations. The soviets' approach to international organisations were
determined by their involvement in three different international organisations. The first is the UN.
The Soviet participation in the UN; The Soviet-Eastern Europe organisations, and the Soviet Union
vis a vis the Third World.
4. THIRD WORLD VIEWS
Many Asian, African and Latin American writers on international organisations have
adopted a Marxist approach to international organisations. Their views can be categorised into
two groups. Some viewed them as tools of exploitation of the Third World by the capitalist
countries; others as agents of liberation and development. The first group is generally categorised
as "dependency school"; the second as "developmentalists- modernists".
4.1. Dependency School
Advocating a neo-colonialism, they believe that the international organisations, especially
the INGOs are instruments of the neo-colonialism. Samir Amin, Cordosa, Dos Santos are well-
known advocators of this view. They are so pessimistic that there is no hope for the colonized
countries to be benefiting partners of the international organisation.
4.2. Developmentalists-Modernists:
This group is more optimistic about the relations between the Third World and the
capitalist world. They view the international organisation as an instrument for development. Paul
Prebish is the pioneer of this view, and at the same time actively played role in the formation of
the UN's ECLA (Economic Commission for Latin America), and the UNCTAD. He was the president
of the UNCTAD.
TOPIC 4:
CLASSIFICATION OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS
There are hundreds of IGOs and thousands of INGOS in international system. Thus it is
difficult, indeed, impossible to study and know each of them in detail. But we as the students of
international relations need to have a general view of them as the participants in international
relations in different levels and influence. How can we do that?
The best way is to have a broad classification of the international organisations, trying to
have a general pattern so that one can easily understand their characteristics and operations in
international relations. When looked at the international organisations in general, it can be seen
that they have more or less similar features and characteristics, which have been developed over
the years. All of them can be classified under three criteria.
1. By membership,
2. By aims and activities,
3. By structure.
1. BY MEMBERSHIP
International organisations are set up by more than two or more international actors. Thus
they are made up of those members each of which may have different characteristics. The
membership of the international organisations can be analysed from two perspectives. 1. The type
of the members; 2. The Scope of the Membership: Regional or Universal
1.1. Type of Membership:
Depending on the type of their members, international organisations can be classified into
three types:
1. Those set up by sovereign states or governments only, called IGOs,
2. Those set up by non-state or non-governmental entities, called INGOs,
3. Those set up by states or non-states, but with mixed membership such as the ILO.
1. IGOs: Intergovernmental Organisations (IGOs) are established by two more states or
governments. These international organisations are established on the basis of the
principle of sovereignty, which has three important elements:
 Only sovereign states are subjects of international law.
 Sovereign states are equal actors in their standing in international law.
 No external body or norm can have the right to intervene into the domestic affairs of
their governments.
The principle has consequences for the international organisations. First, they are
established by the sovereign authorities of the states. Thus, they are deemed to be
intergovernmental. Second, all the states are believed to have equality in the formation and
operation of the organisation. But, in reality, that is not the case. Indeed, in some IGOs some
members have more rights and powers than the others, as will be seen below. Third, international
organisation or its members are expected not to interfere into the domestic jurisdiction of the
member states. The UN article 2.7 is about this principle.
 However, in practice all these principles are not respected fully. As for the first principle,
some non-state actors participate in the IGOs. For example, the Palestinian Liberation Organisation
(PLO) participates in the meetings of many international organisations such as the UN, the ICO, so
on. In these cases, there can be some states behind the non-state members to support their
participation. As for the equality, in principle, they are assumed to have one member-one vote.
But in reality, they can have unequal voting power, e.g. the UN Security Council, and in the EU
Council of Ministers. As for the non-interference, this is the most sensitive one. No state can be
bound by an agreement or a decision to which it is not a party. That is, sovereign states can not be
forced to follow the IGO decisions if they abstain from, or refuse, it.
b. INGOs: These are the international organisations which are set up by non-state or non-
governmental organisations. To have difference see Archer pp. 39 and 40.
In the literature, there are there sorts of international organisations:
1. The Genuine INGOs: These are set up by non-governmental organisations only. So they
do not include any representatives form the states. For example, international Olympic
Committee, The World Council of Churches, etc.
2. The hybrid INGOs: they may be set up by the governmental or non-governmental
actors, but having mixed membership.
3. TGOs: Transgovernmental Organisations: set up by local authorities or some
departments of governments. Thus they do not include the central, formal members.
Such as interpol, interparliamentary union, inter-party organisations such as Socialist
International, and so on.
4. MNOs-MNCs or TNCs: These are private international organisations. For example, IBM,
Mobil, Toyota etc.
1.2. The Scope of Membership: Regionalism versus Universalism
Membership of the organisations is selective depending on the aim of the organisation.
Some are regional: and some are universal. Regional organisations are limited to those states
which are within the scope of the region. And universal organisations are open to all states in the
world, at least in theory.
Here, the problem is the definition and delineation of the region, and thus the limits of
regional international organisations. What are the criteria for being a region, so that the members
can be selected? Which member is the region, which are out?
For the definition of regions, there have been developed several criteria. Some focused on
the geographical borders, some on the level of interactions among the states in a geographic
region, some on other. Bruce Russet (in 1967) focused on five aspects to tackle the problem of
regionalism. These are the criteria for defining a region:
 social and cultural homogeneity,
 sharing similar attitudes and external behaviour
 political interdependence,
 geographical proximity.
 On the basis of his analysis, Russet delineated the regions into four major groups whose
members shared much in common, although there were "core members" and "periphery
members".
1. Eastern Europe with the USSR, Poland, Rumenia, Bulgaria, etc.
2. Latin America
3. The Western Community, including the Europeans, the USA Canada, Japan
4. Asia, including the Arab and African states.
However, it can be seen that all these definition and delineation of regions and
international organisations have changed in the post Cold War era. As a result, as the definition
and delineation of the regions have changed, the memberships of the international organisations
have started to change, like the EU and NATO.
2. BY AIMS AND ACTIVITIES
International organisations are established for some aims, and perform some activities to
achieve these aims. All these aims and the scope of activities are enshrined in their basic
documents by which they have been established. The document proclaim the aims and the
intended activities. The proclaimed aim is the most apparent statement of the intentions behind
the existence of an organisation. The activities are the fulfilment of the proclaimed aims. These
aims and activities can be categorised into two groups:
1. General purpose : This general purpose does not mean that it can do everything. But,
it aims a general peace and order of the international relations. So the organisation is
structured and institutionalised in the view of this general aim. Example are: the
League of Nations, the United Nations, and the European Union.
2. Specific Purpose : The specific purpose does not mean only one aim or activity. It can
range from only one to more, but not so many. Specific purpose can be contained
within a specific area, for example security-military; political, economic-trade, social-
cultural, scientific-technological, and so on.
Cantori and Spiegel grouped the aims into three:
1. Organisations that aim at encouraging "co-operative relations" between the members.
2. Organisations that intend to decrease the level of conflict between the members by
means of conflict management,
3. Organisations that aim to produce a confrontation between members of differing
opinions or between members of the organisation and non-members.
3. BY STRUCTURE
By structure we mean the institutional formation or break-down of the organisation into
constituent organs and departments. It shows the division of labour in the decision-making
mechanism of the organisation. Who does what? Who has how much power and role? How is the
power distributed among the members as well as between the organisation and the members?
for an institution to make its own decisions and run its activities effectively and permanently, there
need to be institutional arrangements. Institutional arrangements determine not only the
distribution of power among the members, but also the division of labour within the organisation.
 When looked at the development of the structure of international organisations, we can
see that there have been four basic organs in general: These are : 1. Assembly, sometimes called
as Parliament and so on. 2. Executive, decision-making body, generally called as the Council. 3.
Secretariat, doing the day-to-day running of the organisation. 4.Judicial organ, dealing with the
legal issues or problems among the members.
Institutional Power of Members
The structure shows how power is distributed in the operation of the organisation. And it
can have two dimensions. First, institutional structure differentiate between one member and
another. Not all the members have the same power within the organisations. For example, in the
League of Nations and in the UN there was, and is, permanent membership status in the Councils.
Second, this discrepancy in the powers are reflected in the voting mechanisms of the
organisations. There are different voting mechanisms. 1. Unanimity, 2. Weighted voting, 3.
Majority voting by simple majority or qualified majority, and 4. Veto rights for some members.
Running the Institutions: The Secretariat
This is about how the international organisations will be permanently run. As known,
international organisations have legal personality. So they have permanent operations. To achieve
these operations, they need permanent organs and staff, called secretariat, to fulfil the day-to-day
runnig of the organisation. So there developed the secretariat branches, that is an international
civil servant staff with a loyalty to the organisation rather than to their own original home country.
The UN Charter Article 100 is about this. But the secretariat and the head of the secretariat is not
so powerful to run the organisation irrespective of the interests of the members. Because they are
influenced by the member state

TOPIC 5:
ROLES AND FUNCTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS
There is no doubt that international organisations have been an indispensable part of
international system and international relations, especially since the end of the Second World War.
Today we can come across several of them in every part of the world, whose importance, scope of
area and activities range from the simple and small ones to very great and universal one such as
the United Nations. And most of them are in the agenda of world politics as well as in the world
public opinion. We hear and see their names, activities, good or bed reputations in the media. We
hear that the NATO air forces launched military operation in Kosova; the European Union created
a money called "euroe"; the United Nations Secretary General went to Palestine to talk to the
leaders of Israel and the PLO and so on.
Why are the international organisations so active and occupying our agenda? Why do the
member states, as their founders, give so much permission to represent them in international
system? And how do the international organisations influence the process of international
relations?
All these questions relate with their role and function in international relations. By role it is
meant how they serve the interests and aims of its founders and other states, and how they help
the states establish relations, solve their problems. By function, we mean how they can affect the
working of international relations, that is the process of international system.
ROLE OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS
They are created to serve the interests of states, in the case of the IGOs, and of the civil
society groups, in the case of the INGOs. In this regard, there play three important roles.
1. As instruments
2. As arenas,
3. As actors
1. As Instruments
As the former Executive Secretary of the UN's Economic Commission for Europe, Gunnar
Myrdal said that "...international organisations are nothing else than instruments for the policies
of the individual governments, mans for the diplomacy of a number of disparate and sovereign
national states... The organisation becomes important for the pursuance of national policies
precisely to the extent that such a multilateral co-ordination is the real and continuous aim of
national governments." (Archer s.131)
So international organisations are one of the foreign policy instruments of the states. They
can be used as means for establishing diplomatic relations and struggle with other states.
Sometime, they can be used as political influence over the others or political means for co-
operation and co-ordinations, sometimes as a legal force for international relations. In short, the
states can use them as for their diplomatic, political, economic, trade, military and even
propaganda objectives over other states or actors.
But which member country can achieve this? Actually, each has its own objectives towards
the others, and thus want to use for this or that end. But most of time it is not possible for the
organisation to be helpful for all of them especially if they have rather different interests. In these
cases, the most powerful member can use it for its interests, maybe with the consent of the
majority of the other members.
Sometimes, if there are more than powerful state competing over the organisation, then
the organisation fail to run because each side struggle to prevent the other side from controlling
the organisation. As a result, there emerges a deadlock, thus no decision is taken, no activity is
undertaken by the organisation.
Indeed when we look at the history of the United Nations, for example, we can see that at
the beginning the USA was able to use the UN as an instrument for its objective in the Cold War
arrangements. Thus the USA could able to manipulate the UN towards making pro-USA decisions
in the case of the Korean War, in the creation of Israel and Indonesia, in blocking China from being
a member of the UN, and so. Because at that time, most of the UN General Asssemble members
were pro-SU, and the Soviet Union was out of the Security Council in protest to the SU objection
to China's membership to the UN. But after the mid-1950s, as the Soviets realised its mistake to
abstain from the UN Security Council and as the General Assembly was having new members most
of which were pro-Soviet Union, the SU manipulation of the UN slowed down. As a result, from
the 1960s onwards the UN could not play an effective role in the resolution of international
problems, especially those security and peace issues. The UN could not stop, or resolve, many
problems in the world.
 Members try to use it by using several tactics, such as:
- By manipulating the decision making process of the organisations. The manipulation
occurs by influencing over the others concerned or effective in the decision-making. This influence
can be through persuasion, bribes, threats, or carrot-stick tactics. Thus they draw the others into
their own sides.
- By having a secretariat who favours its policies. Thus, a state lobbies for those officials
who will support its policies, or at least not to support the others.
- By controlling the budget of the organisations. As happens everywhere, if a state makes
high contribution to the operations of the organisation, it wants to control it, and expects from the
organisation to pay the price.
2. As Arenas
As arenas, they can act as a forum or platform within which action takes place. In this case,
the organisation becomes a meeting place for the members to come together to discuses, argue,
debate issues and find solutions to their own or coon concerns. Arenas can be used for a play, a
circus, or a fight.
International organisation provide their members with opportunity of advocating their own
policies, view-points and suggestions in more open and public forum than that provided by
bilateral diplomacy.
They act as arenas in various ways:
 During the formal meetings of the organs as they make decisions,
 During the adhoc meetings,
 During the informal, off-the record and face-to-face encounters in the coffee breaks,
luncheons, dinners, parties etc. All these informal meeting sometimes can be more
important than the formal meetings. Because the state representatives can make very
interesting, off-the record talks.
3. As Actors
They can play as actors of international relations. In some cases, they can act as dominant
as the member states, playing as autonom, if not as independent, actors free form the control of
its founders. Autonomy means "having a stable and coherent decision-making machinery within
its boundaries."
As actors, they affect the course of world events. By its decisions, sometimes called as
resolution, commendation, communication, etc., they can compel some or all the member
governments to act differently form the way in which they would otherwise act. By these actions,
it gains an "actor status" in the eyes of the world public opinion.
Actually, they are legal personality created by its members, but once they come into
operation, they gain an institutional power which may be more than the totality of its members.
In this way they can become autonomous actors. That is, they make their own decision, can act
contrary to the preferences of its members, and can effect the actions of other members. In this
way, they can also affect the operation of international system. How do they affect the operation
of the international system? This is a question concerned with the functions of international
organisations.
 FUNCTIONS OF INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATIONS
International organisations function in the following ways:
1. Articulation and aggregation
2. Norms creation
3. Recruitment
4. Socialisation
5. Rule-making
6. Rule-application
7. Rule-adjudication
8. Information
9. Operations
1. Articulation and Aggregation
International organisations can function for the aggregation and articulation of the national
interests of its members into the international system. Thus, they bring the interested states into
the same framework to articulate their interests into the world society. Just like interests groups
in the national systems articulate and aggregate their common interests by forming institutions,
associations, and interest-groups such as unions for better wages and working conditions, or green
peace for cleaner environment, states do the same by articulating and aggregating their common
interests onto the international political system through the international organisations. To
achieve this, they form coalition, co-operation, alliance. For example, OPEC is a organisation for
the aggregation and articulation of the oil exporting countries, to raise the oil prices, or to increase
their power by using oil as a weapon. UNCTAD is sub-organ of the UN to articulate the interests of
the developing countries, and to augment their voice in the system. On the other hand, there are
some INGOs for the same objective, such as World Zionist Organisation, International Chamber of
Shipping, etc.
2. Norms
They can function as the makers of norms and law for the operation of international
relations. In other words, they make law for the states to follow. Their activities are grouped into
three groups:
On political issues: They produced several documents or treaties in improving human
rights, for example 1948 UN Universal Declaration of Human Rights, 1982 Law of Sea,
On economic issues, they make arrangements to improve trade and economic relations
among the nations. For example, GATT developed important norms for free international trade
and commerce by lowering the custom tariffs and bringing some standards for the running of the
world trade.
On security issues, the UN and other regional organisations developed some norms in the
filed of disarmament, nuclear non-proliferation, ban the use of force, de-legitimisation of
colonaialization, etc.
3. Recruitment
 They function as the forces to recruit new actors into the international system. Especially
the U encouraged the colonial powers to free their colonies, and the colonies to join into the
international system by joining the organisation. So in the 1950-60s, many new states became
members to the UN. As a result, the number of the UN members sharply increased from to 50s to
the 100s.
4. Socialisation
They adapt the states into the international system by socialising them. Just like in the
national system there are institutions such as military, schools, foundations to socialise the citizens
into the national system, international organisations educate and train them in such a way. It takes
place at two levels:
 By direct means, any organisations provide educational, social, psyhcological
environment to the citizens of the member countries. Thus they create a "community
sprit" In that some INGOs play a great role by affecting the people in different ways.
 By formal and diplomatic ways, state representatives or diplomats can be "socialised"
to act in certain ways that is acceptable to the rest of the "international community".
They learn new thinking and alternative ways of living. As a result they are persuaded
in a way in line with the general norms of international system.
5. Rule-Making
They make rules for the arrangements of relations between its members. Rules can take
form of a decision, a resolution, a recommendation, a conference declaration, or a treaty or
agreement. For example, the EU makes rule for its member states, civil groups or citizens to follow.
The UN takes resolutions or recommendations on different issues. But in most cases, these rule
should be taken by the consensus of the members to be effective.
6. Rule-Application
Rule – application means putting the rule into effect In most cases, the rules are expected
to be put into effect by the member governments because the international organisations may not
have the resource or means to put them into effect. But for the rules to be applied widely, they
should be accepted by the members states as useful for their interests. Otherwise, they can remain
as papers.
For example, the UN Security Council imposed sanctions to several aggressors, but only a
few of them were put into practice, such against Iraq, but not against Israel.
7. Rule - Adjudication
Rule – adjudication means the legal solution of the problems by the judicial courts. In
nation-states, the rule-adjudication is carried out by the judiciary- law courts, arbitration panels,
tribunals, an so on. In international level, this is done by some institutions such as International
Court of Justice inn the case of the UN, and the Permanent Court of International Justice in the
case of the League of Nations, or the European Court of Justice in the Case of the European Union.
But the decisions of these courts are boundary only for those who accept its authority.
8. Information
They collect, keep, and disseminate information to the states which need them. For
example, the WHO, WMO, FAO, and many other functional international organisations have wide
array of information in their own special field. And states uses their own interests.
 9. Operations
Their operations vary depending on the field of the international organisation. Thus some
deal with providing credit (IMF-World Bank), some with helping refugees (UNHCR), some with
health problems (WHO) and so on.
TOPIC: 6
THE UNITED NATIONS :THE ROOTS
The United Nations was established after the Second World War, in 24 October 1945. But,
its roots both as objectives and structure go back to the beginning of the First World War and the
aftermath. In other words, the United Nations is a successor of the previous international
organisation called the league of Nations. So before the United Nations, one must look at the
emergence, structure and development of the League of Nations.
1. THE LEAGUE OF NATIONS
The League of Nations was created after the First World War in the Paris Conference of
1919-1920. In that the United States, The Great Britain and France played the main role. Even
during the First World War, there were several private groups and institutions who put forward
plans or projects for the establishment of an international organisation to stop war and maintain
peace in the world. Then, SU President Wilson, in the view of these proposals, issued his famous
14 points, the last of which was proposing to create an international organisation.
So The League of Nations was created by the victors of the First World War, the USA, Great
Britain, France, as well as Japan and Italy. Thus, when the victors met in Paris Conference to make
settlements with the defeated powers, Germany, Ottomans, Austria, Hungary, Bulgaria, they
imposed treaties to them. Meanwhile to put them into practice as well as to prevent another war
by making global arrangements, Wilson worked hard to set the rules for an international
organisation.
Thus, the founding document of the league of Nations, called the Convenant, was approved
by the plenary session of the Paris Conference on April 28. 1919, but coming into effect on January
20, 1920.
And the Convenat was annexed to all the treaties imposed on the defeated powers. That
shows the fact that the League of Nations was an instrument for the victors to achieve their end
over the defeated powers. The League was rather restrictive on several points.
Some Characteristics of the League of Nations
It was the first universal organisation, at least in theory.
It was based on the sovereignty principle.
AIMS OF THE LEAGUE OF THE NATIONS
As states in the preamble of the Convenant (Misak), its main objective is to "prevent war,
and to promote peace and co-operation." The convenant incled 26 articles, divided as follows:
 Articles 1-7: on membership and structure
 Articles 8-17 : on instruments and measures to prevent war and to promote peace
 Articles 17-20 : on international treaties
 Articles 21 : on the establishment of international organisations
 Articles 22-25 : on international co-operation and administration
 Article 26 : on modification of the Convenant articles.
So the achieve its objectives, The League of Nations had those instruments and institutions:
  No secret agreements are allowed. Every agreement were to be registered to the
League.
 Mandate regimes were institute for those territories which were carved form the
defeated countries.
 Peaceful settlement of disputes, either by the mediation of the League, or other ways
 Sanctions against the aggressors (that is the Collective Security System), in Article 16
 Disarmament encouraged
 War, although war was not totally outlawed by the Convenat, it suggested alternative
ways to refrain from going to war, either by peaceful settlement or by sanctions. But
under some conditions the states were permitted to go war.
 AND, international economic and social cooperation was encouraged. So some organs
were created such the ILO, Health Organisation, See. Bennet, s.27.
MEMBERSHIP
45 states signed the Convenant. But there were two categories of membership, it accepted
an universal membership, though.
1. Orginal members: a signatories, b. invited members
2. Elected members (those admitted to the League later)
 Members could withdraw the League with two years notice,
 Members could be expelled from the league.
At the beginning, there were 45 original members; ater 21 members were admitted in its
number reached to 60 in 1934. 17 left; and 1 (Soviet Union) was expelled.
Indeed all the great powers left or were expelled: The USA never became a member;
Germany was admitted in 1926, but left in 1933; Soviet Union was admitted in 1934, but expelled
in 1939; Japan left in 1933; and Italy in 1937. So only France and Great Britain were the stable
members in the history of the league.
STRUCTURE
The League of Nations was structured in accordance with the balance of power in
international politics at the time. So it reflected the balance of power in reality.
The League of the Nations had three main organs:
1. The Assembly, 2. The Council, 3. The Secretariat, 4. And sub organisations and
committees.
THE ASSEMBLY:
Each member was represented in the Assembly, with one vote, by maximum 3
representatives.
Meetings were irregular, but at least once a year.
6 permanent committees
Voting: in principle, decisions were made by the unanimity of the members. But in some
ways, there were majority voting.
 THE COUNCIL:
Composed of two categories, permanent and elected.
Permanent members were: Great Britain, France, Italy, Japan.
Temporary members were to be elected: 4 countries by the Assembly. But the initial
temporary members were Belgium, Brazil, Spain, Greece.
But the number and the name of these members changed several times during the 1930s,
once reaching to 15.
THE SECTERARTIAT:
The first international secretariat, with permanent, administrative, and neutral position in
world history.
The first Secretary General was Sir Eric Drummand (British).
THE OTHER ORGANS:
On economic and social cooperation
Health Organisations, Organisation of Communications and Treansit
THE PERMANENT COURT OF INTERNATIONAL JUSTICE
It was not a part of the League of Nations. But worked in close contact especial
THE SUCCESS AND FAILURE OF THE LEAGUE
It was established to prevent wars and promote peace in international relations.
In the early years, there were some success in settling disputes. But these were between
the small powers.
But after the 1930s, as the great powers created problems, themselves being aggressors,
the league could no take effective reaction, failing to implement the Collective Security. The
instruments could not be put into force effectively.
For example, in 1931, Japan invaded Manchuria of China, and the League failed to stop
that.
In 1935, when Italy invaded Etiopii, the League imposed sanctions against Italy, but it was
not implemented decisivily by Britain and France.
And it could not stop Germany's invasion of Checkslovakia in 1938, but Britian and France
"appeased" Germany.
Nor could it prevent armaments in Europe.
By 1940, another World War had started, and the League was not there.
WHY DID IT FAIL?
- Because the Collective Security could nor be activated. That is, as the great powers
became aggressors, the great majority of great powers could not act decisively and effectively
against the aggressor. Because of their national interest calculations. This is the heart of the
international organisations, that is to reconcile the common interests with the national interests.
2. STEPS TOWARDS THE UNITED NATIONS
 The failure of the League of Nations to prevent the second World War was also the end of
its life. Bu that does not meant that it was the end of the international organisations. Indeed, even
before putting an official end to the life of the League of Nations, from the early stages of the
Second World War, the Allies led by the United States again started to work on a new international
organisation. There were geld several meetings among the Allies during the war. In these
meetings, the preparations were made for a new international organisation. So the steps to create
the United Nations were as follows:
- Like in the case of the creation of the league of Nations, there were many private groups
and institutions with ideas and plans for an international organisation.
- The Atlantic Charter, on 14 August 1941, in Newfoundland in the Atlantic Ocean, when SU
President Roosevelt and British Prime Minister Churchill discussed not only how to win the war
against Germany and Italy, but also on how to disarm these nations, so that wars would be
prevented. On that date the United States was out of the war.
- The United Nations Declaration, 26 states fighting against the Axis powers met in
Washington on 1 January 1942, to sign the declaration. In that declaration, which was the first to
"United Nations" they gave their support to the SU war strategy against the Axis and subscribed
to the principles o fteh Atlantic Charter.
- The Moscow Declaration, by the four powers, the USA. Thee UK, The Soviet Union, and
China on 30 October 1943. They pledged their efforts for the establishment of a general
international organisation after the war. One month later, in Teheran meeting they reiterated their
willing. Thus, the Soviet Union and China were also included in to the US-UK design.
- The Dumbarton Oaks Conversations, in Washington D.C., 21 August-7 October 1944. This
was the main conference in which the details of the United Nations Charter were discussed. Those
issues such as the membership, voting procedure, the aim and scope of the organisation, and many
other issues.
- The Yalta Confeence, in 4-11 February 1944, meeting of Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin.
In that meeting the voting procedure in the Security Council was decided, and the membership of
Ukraine and Byelorussia was accepted.
- The San Francisco Conference, 25 April-26 June 1945. 50 countries, with 282 official
delegates alongside 1400 advisors and staff member, participated in the Conference. They were
countries which had adhered to the United Nations Declaration and that had declared war on one
or more of the Axis power. They signed the UN Charter whose details had been prepared by the
SU, the UK, the Soviet Union, and China to lesser extend.
- The Charter came into effect on 24 October 1945, after the required number of
ratifications were made.
From that, we can conclude, that just like the League of Nations, the United Nations were
pionereed by the US and the UK, except France who was occupied at that time. Thus, it was to be
dominated by the victors. That was reflected in the Charter, even more clearly than the one in the
League because now only five powers were give the right to veto.
TOPIC 7 :
THE UNITED NATIONS: AIMS, MEMBERSHIP, AND STRUCTURE
The best way to know about the aim, membership, and structure is to look at the basic
document of the organisation concerned. So, to see the structure of the UN, we should look at the
UN Charter.
The UN Structure in the Charter
The Preamble, starting with the "We the peoples...", is a general preface about the UN
objective
Chapter I: Purposes and Principles, listing the purposes and principles.
Charter II : Membership, explaining the admission, termination and suspension of
membership.
Chapter III: organs. After that each organ is dealt with in a separate chapter as follows:
Chapter IV : The General Assembly,
Chapter V: The Security Council. The following 3 chapters (VI-VIII) explains in more detail
the functions of the Security Council to promote peace and security in international relations.
Chapter VI : Pacific Settlement of Disputes,
Chapter VII : Action with Respect to Threats of Peace, Breaches of the Peace and Acts of
Aggression
Chapter VIII : Regional Requirements,
Chapter IX : International Economic and Social Cooperation. This chapter look at another
dimension of international community, and
Chapter X : The Economic and Social Council. This chapter focuses on the UN organ
regarding the previous chapter,
Chapter XI : Declaration Regarding Non-Self Governing Territories. This chapter deals with
a rather outdated issue of trusteeship, and
Chapter XII : International Trusteeship System, dealing with how the system should work,
and
Chapter XIII : The Trusteeship Council, dealing with the management of the previous
function,
Chapter XIV : The International Court of Justice, the fifth organ of the UN.
Chapter XV : The Secretariat.
And so on...
Basic Aims of the UN
Article 1 describes the UN aims:
1. To maintain international peace and security, and to take necessary measures and
steps to achieve this objective.
2. To develop friendly relations among member nations, and to take other appropriate
measures to strengthen universal peace.
 3. To achieve international cooperation in solving social, cultural, economic,
humanitarian problems.
4. To provide an arena for harmonising the actions of nations in the attainment of these
common ends.
And when achieving its objectives, the UN will take into consideration the following
principles:
Basic Principles of the UN
Article 2 depicts the UN principles that the members adhered to, and are obliged to respect
and abide by. These are the most fundamental basis of the UN system.
1. Sovereign equality of al the UN members. This is mainly a legal perspective. By
international law, every member state has got equal treatment within the UN system. This
principle is well applied in the General Assembly in which each member has got one vote,
regardless of power or size or wealth.
However, from political perspective, members are not accepted as equal because as seen
in the Security Council, some great powers have more rights and weight in decision making
process: five permanent members have got "veto" rights in the security Council.
Another implication of the sovereignty principle is that the UN is not an organisation or
entity over the member states, so it cannot impose a policy or decision over the members. The UN
decisions can be implemented only by the consent of the member states. If one of more do not
want to abide by, it cannot be forced to do so by any means.
But, there is one exception to the above rule: if the Security Council makes a decision on
international peace and security, every member is obliged to abide by it. Nevertheless, even this
can be very disputable, and some members may resist to it. Then, the force is used by the great
powers. But whether the use of force is lawful is a controversial point.
2. The members are obliged to fulfil in good faith all their obligations assumed by them in
the Charter. Because they promised to do so at the outset.
3. The members shall settle their international disputes by peaceful means as stated in the
Charter.
4. The members shall refrain from making threats or use of force in any manner
inconsistent with the UN purposes.
5. The members are obliged to support the enforcement measures and actions of the UN,
and to refrain form giving assistance to those states that are the objects of the UN preventive or
enforcement actions.
6. Non-members are also expected to conform to the collective security measures of the
UN for the maintenance of peace and security.
7. The UN itself or its members should not interfere into the domestic jurisdiction of the
member states under no condition, except for the Security Council enforcement actions under
Chapter VII.
The Membership
The UN has achieved to be a universal organisation because of its universal membership in
practice The number of UN members increased from 51 at the San Francisco Conference in 1945
to 178 in the 1990s and to 200s today. The main cause of the increase in the number is the
introduction of several new states into international system over time. But, the biggest increase
occurred in the 1960s after the decolanization, and in the 1990s after the end of the Soviet Union.
Only the sovereign entities (states) are eligible to be a member of the UN. But, there are a
few exceptions: i.e. the PLO participates in the UN General Assembly sessions as an observer.
And the only criteria for the states to gain membership is to be a "peace-loving" state. But,
the decision about this can be disputable. Indeed, it was so during the early years of the Union.
Then, the US and the USSR blocked the admission of some countries due to ideological and political
preoccupations. Their main opposition was based on this "peace-loving" criteria. But in the 1960s,
they come to a "gentlemen's agreement" that every country would be admitted to the UN without
any resistance and delay. That is why there was a flood of new countries into the UN in the 1960s.
Admission to the UN is jointly made by the General Assembly and by the Security Council:
Candidate members are nominated by the Security Council, and elected by the General Assembly
by 2/3 majority.
Suspension and dismissal form the UN is also made in the same way as in the admission.
There were some membership problems in the UN history:
- Unlike the league of Nations, the UN has always included the great powers from the
beginning, except for the Chinese membership. In that, China was represented by the Nationalist
Government in Taiwan form 1949 to 1971. During that time Beijing did not have a seat in the UN
organs, because the US blocked its membership in the UN. Mainland Chine, Beijing, became the
official member of the UN only after te US withdrew its veto after the rapproacement between
the two countries in 1971.
- The position of the divided states were problematic. For example,
Both sides of Germany (West and East) could not become UN member due to the
superpowers' competition and conflict over these states. They became UN members only in 1973
on the same day. After unification in 1990, their membership was reduced to one seat and one
vote. Similarly, North and South Vietnams became member in 1977 after their unification.
Similarly, North and South Koreans became member in 1991 after their unification.
Switzerland remained out of the UN throughout due to her international neutrality. In 1986
the Swiss people rejected the UN membership in a referendum by 1/3. However, Switzerland has
always been supportive of the UN resolutions, and participated in several UN activities.
The Structure- Organs
By structure, we mean distribution of power among the members and the organs of
international organisations. The structure also shows the decision making mechanism and
procedures.
The UN has six organs, each of which has different functions, roles and decision making
procedures: the General Assembly, The Security Council, The Economic and Social Council, the
Trusteeship Council, the International Court of Justice, and the Secretariat.
1. The General Assembly
The General Assembly is the largest platform in which all the UN members have one seat
and equality by law. So it is the most representative and central organ. Theoretically if not in
practice it has got the biggest power, many responsibilities, influential functions and roles in world
politics.
It is an open forum and arena for the international community to express any problems,
ideas, policies etc. Every member has got the right to raise any issue concerning international
relations. So any issue can be debated and discussed. Some see it as a "talking shop".
Sessions: The General Assembly can be such a platform in two ways. First, during the
regular annual sessions form the third Tuesday of September to the end of that year in the UN
Headquarters in New York. So during this regular sessions, every member state participates in the
Assembly and talks to the international community representatives. Generally, high level
representatives such as heads of the state or government or foreign ministers attend the regular
sessions, so that they can voice their views at the highest level.
Second type of the Asssembly meetings is special session. The UN members can meet any
time in any part of the world. So unlike the regular sessions, special sessions have no fixed time or
place. It ca meet upon a call form majority of the UN members through the Secretary General on
an issue concerning the international community. For example in the past, the General Assembly
had several special sessions on different international issues in different parts of the world: On
Palestine in 1947 and 1948, on Financial and budgetary Problems in 1963, on Disarmament in 1978
and 1982, on International Economic Cooperation in 1980, and so on.
Some of special sessions can be held in the form of World Conferences on different issues.
On Human Environment in Stockholm in 1972, on the Law of sea in Caracas, Geneva and New York
between 1973-1982, on Employment in Geneva in 1976, on Population in Mexico City in 1984, on
Women in Nairobi in 1985, on Disarmament and Development in New York in 1987, and so on.
Sometimes, the General Assembly can hold "emergency special sessions" under the
General Assembly's 'Uniting for Peace Resolution' on an issue threatening international peace and
security. But to hold such a session, the Security Council should be inactive or at stalemate.
Working Procedure : The General Assembly works in such a way that the issues are
discussed in one of seven UN committees, and decided in the plenary session according to the
procedure shown in the Charter. The UN committees are 1. Political and security Committee, 2.
Economic and Financial Committee, 3. Social, Humanitarian and Cultural Committee, 4.
Trusteeship Committee, 5. Administrative and budgetary Committee, 6. Legal Committee, 7.
Special Political Committee.
As a product of several years of work and organisation over the years, the General Assembly
has created several subsidiary international organisations such as UNCTAD (United Nations
Conference on Trade and Development), UNICEF (UN Children's Fund), UNHCR (UN High
Commissioner for Refugees), WFP (World Food Program), UNEP (UN Environment Program),
HABITAT (UN Centre for Humanitarian Settlement), and so on.
Furthermore, all UN specialised organisations (such as IMF, WTO, FAO, UNESCO etc.) are
indirectly connected to the General Assembly system through the Economic and Social Council.
However, these organisations have their own independent operation procedures.
Functions: The General Assembly's functions can be categorised into five groups:
1. Under Article 10, discussing and making recommendations about international issues. It
has almost unlimited mandate to discuss any international issue that it deems important. It may
range from security and peace issues, to economic, social, cultural, technical issues. There is only
one exception this to rule: That is, under Article 12 the General Assembly cannot discuss an
international security issue which is already on the Security Council's agenda. However, if the
security Council fails to make a decision for the resolution of an international problem, in this case
the General Assembly under the famous 'Uniting for Peace Resolution', which was taken at the
time of the Korean crisis in 1950.
The G.A. can make there types of decisions on the international issues:
a. Declarations. Broad statements of general principles and norms. For example, the
Universal Declaration of Human rights in 1948. It is a kind of recommendation to the states for
improving their human rights conditions. Thus it is not legally binding, but may only be politically
influencial over the government.
b. Resolutions: They are the decisions on particular issues or for particular country(ies). The
General Assembly recommends it or them to take necessary measures on the problem. But it
cannot force. So they are also not binding.
c. Conventions: multilateral treaties or agreements agreed by the UN members. For
example the 1982 UN Law of Sea. They are binding for those countries which signed the treaty or
agreement, and not binding for the others.
2. Under Article 15, supervising and reviewing all the UN activities. It can perform this by
receiving and examining annual reports of the UN organs, both main and subsidiary organs.
3. Under Article 17, financial functions: the General Assembly approves the UN budget, and
also distribute the expenses among the members.
4. Under Article 18, elective functions: It elects new members to the UN, members to the
other UN organs by itself or together with the Security Council. It can also dismiss a member, and
suspend the membership of a country, which never happened so far. It decides by 2/3 majority in
these important issues.
5. Under Article 108, amending and revising the UN Charter. All the amendments must be
approved by the security Council.
Voting: Each member has one vote. There are two kinds of voting procedures: On important
issues as shown in Article 18 Paragraph 2, decisions are made by 2/3 majority of the members
present and voting. On other ordinary issues, decisions are made by a majority of the members
present and voting.
2. The Security Council
The security Council is the most powerful organ of the UN because it reflects the balance
of power in the world, and it is the most effective body to deal with international security and
peace issues. The Security Council is responsible for the achievement of the main aim of the UN
organisation, that is, promoting peace and security and preventing war. In other words, the main
aim of the UN hinged on the shoulders of the Security Council. Whether it has been successful on
this mission is a controversial point. Mostly, it was not. The main reason behind this failure is also
to do with its structure and composition and the balance of power and interests among the
permanent members of the body.
The security Council has fifteen members divided into two types: a. Five permanent
members the USA, the soviet Union (now Russia), China, France, the United Kingdom. B. Ten non-
permanent members (whose number was six at the beginning), elected by the Security Council
and the General Assembly for two-years term. The non-permanent members are elected form
different parts of world, distributed, though not mentioned in the Charter but by a consensus
among the permanent members, as follows: 5 from Africa and Asia, 2 form Latin America, 3 from
Europe.
Sessions : Under Article 28, the Security Council metes continuously and regularly
throughout the year by the participation of the permanent diplomats of the member countries. It
can also have emergency meetings occasionally when there emerges an urgent international
security and peace issue. Moreover, it can have special meetings in other places other than in New
York headquarters. It elects a chairman for its sessions by rotation every month.
Functions: The Security Council's functions can be categorised into four groups:
1. Under Article 24, maintaining peace and security and resolving conflicts and wars by
using the UN instruments shown in Chapters VI and VII mainly, and in other articles (VIII and XII)
of the Chapter.
2. Under Article 26, organising conferences and making rules for disarmament in the world.
3. Under various articles, election of members to the UN and to the other organs. It shares
this function with the General Assembly.
4. Under Article 83 Paragraph 3, it shall supervise the Trusteeship Council and the trust
territories.
Voting : Similar to the voting in the general Assembly, each member, permanent and non-
permanent has one vote in the decision making process. But, there two different decision making
types: On procedural and ordinary issues, decisions are made by nine affirmative votes of any
members. In other words, all votes have similar weight. On important issues, decisions are also
made by nine affirmative votes of members including the five permanent members. Here is the
crux of the matter: This means that each of the five permanent members have got "veto" power
on important issues. This also shows that non-permanent members of the Council do not have
equal voting power in such matters.
Interested and disputant countries can participate in the Council sessions as observer with
no voting right.
Finally, the Security Council can form subsidiary organs or committees to achieve its
objectives. For example, it created several peace-keeping forces for different crisis points such as
Cyprus, Palestine, Lebanon, Pakistan, Kosova, Serbia, so on. One of its sub-organs is the military
Staff Committee, which was set up for the organisation of the military forces contributed by the
member countries for the resolution of international problems. But, this Committee has never
been operational because of disagreements and lack of common objectives among the five
permanent members. it worked in no case.
3. The Secretariat
The secretariat is made up of a Secretary General and a number of international staff for
the running of the UN operations. The Secretary General is the executive head of the UN. Therefore
it can play a very important role both in the operation of the UN and in the management of
international affairs. Because if its important, this post is very competitive.
The Secretary General is appointed by the General Assembly's 2/3 majority upon a
nomination by the Security Council for five-years term. Because of the importance of the post,
there emerges some dispute among the permanent members during the nomination process. To
overcome this problem, the Secretary General is chosen from the neutral countries, such as, in the
past, from Austria, Peru, Egypt, Kenya.
The Secretary General, as the chief administrator of the UN, can participate in the meetings
of all the organs. He appoints the staff from member countries in the view of their financial
contributions.
The Secretary General shall not receive any instructions and orders form his own state or
any member states. He should be neutral. Similarly, the UN staff should abide by the same
principles. This is arranged in Article 100.
Functions:
1. to act as a chief administer of the UN in international relations,
2. to participate in the meetings of the UN organs for oversceing their activities,
3. to perform roles and duties assigned to him by the General Assembly and the Security
Council,
4. to prepare annual reports for the General Assembly about the work of the UN,
5. to appoint the staff under the regulations established by the General Assembly,
6. Under Article 99, to bring to the attention of the Security Council any matter that in
his opinion threatens international peace and security.
4. Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC)
The ECOSOC is the body to deal with social and economic problems in the world. To achieve
this objective, it has relations with all the subsidiary organisations.
The ECOSOC is made up of 54 members all elected by the General Assembly upon
nomination of the Security Council for five years. Small and underdeveloped countries have the
majority. It meets twice a year, one in Spring in New York, and one in Summer in Geneva.
Functions
1. Making deliberations and recommendations on maters related to economic and social
problems, human rights, welfare, education, health, food, trade, transportation, population,
drugs, and so on. They are not binding.
2. Making research and writing reports on the world problems. For example, World
Economic Survey, UN Statistical Yearbook, UN Yearbook on Human Rights etc.
3. Coordinating activities among the member countries interested. But his is not very
effective and conclusive most of time.
5. The International Court of Justice
The International Court of Justice is an integral part of the UN framework, unlike the case
of the Permanent Court of International Justice which was not formally part of the League of
Nations. All the UN members are automatically members of the Court, but that doesn't meant that
it can have authority over them. Similar to the status of the UN itself, the Court can involve in inter-
state disputes or problems only by their consent and remission. Thus the Court's decisions cannot
be binding on the members unless they desires. So, it is not like national courts' position over the
individuals and national institutions.
 The Court is situated in the Heague in the Netherlands. It is composed of 15 judges who are
elected by the General Assembly and the security Council in the same way. Each judge is elected
form different member country for nine years. Re-election is possible. Decisions are made by
majority of the judges. Nine judges constitute a quorum. As stated above, the Court can deal with
the problems only upon a demand form the member countries. And the members are not obliged
to submit their problems to the Court. But once a state submits a problem to the Court, it must
abide by its decision.
Functions
1. acting as a court for hearing and decisions,
2. giving "advisory opinions" on legal questions, which are not binding,
6. The Trusteeship Council
It is a version of the mandate regime of the league of Nations. The Council supervises the
colony territories on behalf of international community.
But today there are only a few colony territories in the world. Therefore, the Council's
function is almost out of date.

TOPIC 8:
THE UNITED NATIONS:
METHODS TO ACHIEVE ITS AIMS
The most important aim of the UN, like that of its predecessor League of Nations, is to
improve security, peace, cooperation and welfare in the world. This was formulated simply as the
prevention of wars and conflicts and promotion of peace and security. But the question is how to
achieve this highly significant aim, what methods o ways are there to achieve it.
The UN system has developed three methods for attaining its aims:
1. Under Chapter VI, Peaceful Settlement of Disputes (legal, peaceful method).
This method requires the use of legal instruments to prevent a dispute form escalating
into a level of conflict or war. So this is a pre-war measure.
2. Under Chapter VII, Collective Security Mechanism (in the Charter it is stated as "Action
with respect to threats to the peace, breaches of the peace, and acts of aggression"
(partly peaceful and partly coercive method).
This is a rather comprehensive approach to end a war or aggression so that
international peace is restored. So this is used after the aggression, or start of a fighting and war.
3. Under Chapter IX, International Economic and Social Cooperation (functionalist
method).
 This is a method to prevent wars and conflicts by using functionalist cooperation among
the states, by improving economic and social interdependence among the peoples. It is believed
that if the countries enhance economic interdependence, they fight each other less likely.
Now, let's seen in greater detail how these methods work:
1. Peaceful Settlement of Disputes
This method is generally used before the outbreak of conflict, confrontation, fighting or
war between two or more countries. It is for preventing the outbreak of fihting or war, and thus
maintaining peace and security. It asks the member states to resolve their disputes by peaceful
means, dialogue, conciliation, rather than by resorting to arms. In an age in which mass destructive
weapons are strung, it is a very prudent approach because it prevents the catastrophic outcomes.
The UN showed the path for the peaceful settlement of disputes. As stated in Chapter VI,
in articles form 33-38, it includes three steps:
1. Step: As indicated in Article 33, if a dispute arises among states, the parties should seek
a solution to their dispute by using one or more of the following diplomatic means: negotiation,
inquiry, mediation, conciliation, arbitration, judicial settlement, going to regional agencies or
organisations, or other peaceful means of their choice.
Let's see what they mean:
1) Negotiation (müzakere): face-to-face discussion between or among the disputant
powers with the objective of reaching an agreement. No third party involves in the negotiaon
process.
2) Good office (aracı) (not mentioned in Article 33): the assistance of a third party or state
which is outside the dispute. It only offers a channel of communication or provide facilities for the
parties to meet and negotiate.
3) Inquiry (soruşturma). A process of fact-finding activity by a neutral team of investigators.
They make research and collect data about the problem, and prepare a report of conclusions to
be resented to a court or institution.
4) Mediation (arabulucu) : when the third part not only involves but also makes suggestions
to the parties for the resolution of the dispute. But it can have this position only by the consent of
the parties.
5) Conciliation (uzlaştırma) : involvement of a commissioner or officer of an international
body or organisation. He tries to persuade the parties for an agreement by using diplomatic tactics.
6) Arbitration (tahkim, özel hekimlik): submission of the dispute to a panel of judges or
arbitrators who use legal sources for the resolution of the dispute. At the start of the process, the
parties sign an arbitration agreement called "compromise" in which the method of selecting the
judges to form the panel, the time, the place of hearing, and the legal sources to be applied, and
any other details are shown. All these details are decided by the parties themselves.
7) Adjudication or judicial settlement (mevcut mahkemelerin kullanılması). Submission of
the dispute to an international court such as the International Court of Justice in the Heague, or
European Court of Justice.
2. Step : If the parties cannot resolve their dispute in the above ways, the Security Council
may involve in two ways: either by a call form the disputant countries, or by the Security Council's
own initiative. Once the dispute comes to the Security Council agenda, it is debated by the Council
members as well as the disputant countries. The disputant countries can raise their viewpoints,
but they cannot use vote in the final decision making. There can emerge two alternatives at the
end of the negotiations in the Council:
1. If there is an agreement at the end of the negotiations, the Council issues are solution
for the settlement of the dispute. And the parties are obliged to abide by the resolution
terms.
2. If there is no agreement, then the Security Council may decide to transfer the dispute
to another international body, be it an international organisation, a commission of
inquiry or conciliation, the General Assembly, and so on. Or, the Council may ask the
Secretary General to involve as a mediator.
Indeed, the Secretary General has involved in the peaceful settlement of the disputes in
different parts of the world. One of them is the Cyprus dispute for which the Secretary General(s)
have been working for a solution for decades.
3. Alternatively, the security Council may retain the item on its agenda for a period of
months, even years.
However, if the dispute deteriorates during the Security Council negotiations and no
solution found, then under the famous "Uniting for Peace Resolution" the General Assembly can
seize the dispute and try to reach a solution.
3. Step : Involvement by the General Assembly can occur in various ways: a. by a request
form the disputant countries, b. by a request from the Security Council members, c. by a request
form the General Assembly members.
However, due to its nature and less power capabilities, the General Assembly is less
equipped to deal with the disputes. It can make recommendations, which are not binding.
However, if the dispute is submitted to Assembly by the parties themselves, then they are
expected to abide by the General Assembly recommendations.
4. Step: Submission of the dispute to the UN International Court of Justice. As stated before,
the parties are free to submit the dispute to the Court, but once a decision is made by the Court,
the parties must abide by it.
Self-Defence as an interim measure
Suppose the dispute could not be resolved by peaceful means, and one of the disputant
parties attacked and invaded the other, thus violated international peace and security and its
commitments shown in the UN Charter. What can happen? As an interim and emergency step, the
victim country can take "self-defence" measures under the Article 51. According to this article, any
country or group of countries have the right to self-defence against the aggressor alone or
collectively until the security Council takes up the problem into its agenda and takes necessary
measures. Thus, while the self-defence measures are implemented, the victim should inform the
Security Council of the problem and ask for necessary measures. If the Security Council involves,
then the self-defence measures should end, and the collective security measures should start, as
will be explained below. But if the Security Council does not act and take measures, then it is
obvious that the victim can continue to defend itself. However, there are three preconditions for
the self-defence operations.
1. The aggressor should be "defined and determined" clearly.
 2. There should be "no time gap" between the aggression and the self-defence operation.
3. The self-defence should be "proportional" to the aggression.
As stated above, the victim can sell-defence itself alone or with the help of other states.
And within that context, according to Article 52, UN members can establish "regional collective
defence" organisations for maintaining peace and security under the UN regulations. For example
NATO is such an organisation.
Moreover, under the same article, the UN Security Council can use these regional
international organisations in its own operations. For example, the UN Security Council used NATO
in Bosnia operations.
Suppose the UN Security Council remained inactive, or could not start collective security
measures, then the General Assembly can seize the aggression and take measures under the
'Uniting for Peace Resolution.' It can start the process in an emergency session of the Assembly.
2. Collective Security Mechanism
We know what the collective security means. It is a collective opposition against an
aggressor country for the protection of both the victim and international peace and security by
using international measures ranging from sanctions to war. In short, it is "one for all, all for one."
These measures or arrangements are stated in the UN Charter, Chapter VII, Articles 39-51.
Accordingly, if there is a "threat to the peace or breach of the peace, and act of aggression", the
UN Security Council shall involve and take necessary measures step by step for the restoration of
international pace and security.
1. Step: To determine that there is a threat to international peace and security. This is
stated by a UN Security Council resolution. However, making a decision about who violated peace
and security and who is the aggressor is difficult because of possible disagreements or conflict of
interests among the permanent members of the Council. During the Cold War, the Security Council
could not make such decisions for the Iraqi invasion of Iran, the Soviet invasion of Afganistan, the
American invasion of Granada and so on. However, when there is a clear case and a consensus
among the five permanent states in the case of the Iraqi invasion of Kwait, the security Council
could easily make the Resolution 660 in which the aggressor was asked to end its occupation.
If the aggression is not ended, then the Security Council takes further measures in the
following steps.
2. Step : If the threat persists despite the warning by the Council, then interim or provisional
measures are taken to stop the further deterioration of the situation. Interim measures include
warnings to suspend diplomatic relations, or any other steps depending on the case.
3. Step : If the interim measures are seen to be not enough, then under Article 41 the
Security Council may impose sanctions (embargo) on economic, commercial, financial, diplomatic
or an other issues, but not any military actions. And it calls upon the international community to
act o these sanctions. The sanctions may take different forms such as cutting-off, suspension, all
depending on the degree of vulnerability of the aggressor.
4. Step : If the Security Council believes after a while that sanctions are begin violated and
so not being effective to persuade the aggressor, it can take additional "military enforcement
measure." This is not war declaration, but sing military tactics on the air, land and sea, to enforce
the sanctions and prevent the countries from violating the sanctions. These tactics are blockade,
interception of the aircrafts, ships, or trucks in the air, sea and land respectively which attempt to
violate the sanctions. All these measures are implement by the forces under the UN flag, but
contributed by the member countries.
Under Article 43. Member states are asked to contribute military forces or any other
necessary facilities for the enforcement operations.
According to Article 47. The enforcement operations should be decided and implemented
by the Military Staff Committee, which is a sub-committee of the security Council. The Military
Staff Committee is made up of the Chiefs of Staff of the permanent members of the Security
Council, and those countries which contribute to the operations in some cases. And the military
operations will be determined by a collective decision of the participant countries.
Peacekeeping forces and operations
A novel instrument used by the security Council for maintaining peace and security is
"peacekeeping forces and operations." This is not included in the UN Charter, but invented by the
security Council in the 1960s. Peacekeeping forces are temporary military forces which are
contributed by the member states for the UN operations on specific international conflicts. They
are formed to "keep peace" after a war between states ends. So they are deployed on the conflict
point after the war to prevent the repetition.
The decision on the creation and operation of, and contributions for the peacekeeping
forces are made by the Security Council. The Secretary General plays role in the assembly of the
forces from the member countries, and in the implementation of operations under the UN's "blue
helmet" commander. Contributions are accepted from those countries which are neutral to
disputant sides. And costs are normally paid by the contributors themselves. But if a contributor is
unable to pay the costs, the UN Budget is use for meeting the costs.
The time duration of the peacekeeping forces are also decided by the Security Council,
generally for there to six months, and may be extended repeatedly.
A more novel development is that there emerged alternative versions of the peacekeeping
forces concept. Observing forces, peacemaking forces, and stabilisation forces.
What are the differences among them? The difference is to do with the mission, objective,
and use of instruments.
- Peacekeeping forces: They can be deployed in hot spots only by the permission of the
warring sides. If one of them opposes, they cannot be deployed. During their work, they stand
between the enemy lines to prevent their contact and renewal of fighting. They just interpose
between the warring parties physically and keep them apart. They should remain neutral between
the disputants. They are not allowed to open fire to neither side at all. Indeed they do not have so
much military power to fight against any side, because they carry small and light arms for use only
in low level attacks for self-defence. And, this lack of enough military power can create problems
if one of the disputants uses heavy weapons against the peacekeeping forces, or against the enemy
side. In these cases, the war may outbreak again, or the peacekeeping forces may be killed.
- Observing forces : They are established for observing some development in the crisis areas
such as elections, cease-fire arrangements, human rights conditions, so on. They don't carry arms
or weapons.
- Peacemaking : This is a rather new concept and development. According to this concept,
the UN-led forces can "make" peace, by enforcing and imposing solutions on the warring parties.
Peacemaking forces can be deployed before and/or after the outbreak of the war. Therefore, if it
is deployed before the outbreak of a war, it is called as "preventive force". In either case, they can
open fire against the aggressor for preventing the war. However, this can create problems on
certain situations because of "subjectivity" allegations.
The best way to prevent war and make peace is to implement additional measures other
than military force, such as diplomatic, political, economic, financial instruments. Here, we move
to the third method of maintaining peace and security in the world: that is the Functional
Approach.
3. Functional Method for Peace and security
Equipped with a number of functional instruments and organisations such as the World
Trade Organisation, International Monetary Fund, the World Bank, the World Health Organisation
and many others, the UN has the potential to create such an international society which have
close, friendly, and cooperative interactions on a number of "soft and humanitarian" issues ranging
from trade, economy, finance, technology, human rights, health, children, transportation and
many others. The UN subsidiary functional organisations can improve interdependence and
harmony of interests among the member countries, so that problems, disputes, and conflicts
among them can be resolved by peaceful and soft means. All these functional arrangements bring
peoples together, and improve harmonious relations among them.
This is the idealist view of international politics. And the UN was created by such an idealist
philosophy. But, does it work? How far is it successful in achieving this idealist project?
In general, we can safely argue that it does not work as good as expected and in such a way
shown by idealist philosophy. But, we should also accept that it works for some cases, some
periods of time, and for some group of countries. In general, some of the UN functional
organisations such WHO, ICAO, WTO, work for the benefit of the whole international community
and for the good of humanity, thus contributing to promotion of peace and security. However,
some of the UN functional organisations such the IMF, the WTO, the World Bank and so on are not
so successful in promoting harmonious relations. but the problem here is not with the UN
organisations, but with the member countries, big or small, donor or receiver. More clearly, reel-
political considerations and manipulations of these organisations by powerful members, and the
failure of small countries to make necessary adjustments on their national problems for various
reasons are two important obstacles in the operation of the functional method.
In short, this is the heart of international relations, and there are to conflicting theoretical
perspectives about this debate: Realism and Liberalism. The solution is for you to find!!!