Before Midterm Slide Notes

Lecture 1 → Intro
● Objectives → core concepts, issues, trends and actors in IO, critical junctures in
the history
● New Sources
○ Apnews.com
○ Bbc.com
○ Aljazeera.com
○ Rt.com
○ Democracynow.org
○ Union of International Association → yearbook of international
organizations
● Poli Sci studies power & IR studies power at the international or global level
● International Relations and IOs
○ IR→ Global politics
■ Non-state actors
■ Transnational institutions
■ Economic and social/interconnectedness
■ Global issues
■ Domestic and international connection
○ IO → global governance and the roles of IO in global governance
● Global Governance
○ VS Government → formal actors/institutions, hierarchically, backed by
formal authority
○ Governance → formal and informal actors/institutions and processes that
govern; not (formally) hierarchically structured
■ More incorporating that government
■ Global governance complex → actors and such
■ Govern → produce a degree of order and facilitate collective action
■ Weiss & Wilkinson (2015) → “sum of informal and formal ideas,
values, norms, processes and institutions that help all actors to
identify, understand and address trans-boundary problems”
■ Global governance is wider than IO
■ A pluralistic fashion spread horizontally; power is vertically
● Evolution of Global governance concept
○ Ww2 → focus on formal IO; don’t want another war
○ The 70s/80s → international regimes; issue-specific governance; norms and
such
 ■ International regime → set of principle norms, rules and decision-
making procedures around which actor expectations converge in a
given issue area (Krasner, 83)
○ The 90s turn to global governance
■ End of the cold war
■ Rise and increase of new actors
■ Major technological changes
■ Intensification of globalization and related issues; transnationalism
● Globalization → compression of time and space on a global
scale that deepens the scale and widens the scope of
interconnectedness
○ Existential tension between globalization and state
sovereignty
● System of Global Governance
○ Institutions → rules of the game
■ Constrains and guides/shapes behaviour
○ Organizations → formal institutions with agency; they act
○ Multilateralism → coordinated relations among 3 or more states in
accordance with certain principles
○ International Law → the political and legal system of rules and principles at
the international level
■ Hard law vs soft law; soft law constitutes the majority of international
law
○ International regimes → principles, norms, rules and decision-making
procedures around which actor expectations converge in a given issue area
○ Global political economy → interconnected and embedded institutions and
processes of economics and politics at the global level
● Actors in global governance
○ States → only actors with sovereignty
■ Major power
■ Middle power
■ smaller/weaker
○ IOs (inter-governmental organizations)
■ At least 3 member states
■ Operate and have activities in several states
■ Created through a formal inter-governmental agreement
■ Can be single or multipurpose → often security or economic-based
■ Maybe sub-regional, regional, continental, hemispheric, global
■ Separate legal standing from member states
■ Agents with a degree of autonomy from their principals
 ■ Functions → provide forum for cooperation and decision-making;
develop standards of behaviour; formal rules; particular operations;
socialize; provide info
○ INGOs
■ Private voluntary associations geared toward a common purpose
■ A manifestation of civil society
■ Members from more than one state
■ Functions → services; expertise; monitor actors; causes/policies
promotion; negotiations and conferences
○ For-Profit Market Actors
■ Multinational corporations (MNCs)
■ Private authority → authoritative private decision-making in areas
where states have not acted (or ineffectively)
○ Hybrid Networks and “Partnerships”
■ Regularized interactions of governmental and non-governmental actors
across nation boundaries
■ Transnational advocacy networks, epistemic communities and global
public-private partnerships (GP3s)
○ Illicit actors → terrorist organizations/crime groups
● Power in GG
○ Pervades IOs
■ Role in who participates, voices heard and whose interests are
privileged
● Critical Historical Junctures in IO
○ Birth of modern state system → Peace of Westphalia, 1648
■ Western, European creation
○ Modern international order → 1814-1914 Congress of Vienna
■ Order → regularized patterns of interactions between states/actors
○ European dominance was driven by imperialism, unequal patterns of trade and
industrialization
○ Modern European colonialism/imperialism → 1493-1914; 1884/85 Berlin
Conference
○ 1914-1918 WW1
■ Versailles Peace Treaty and the League of Nations
○ The 1930s Great Depression → organization of the global economy and
influenced creation of the Bretton Woods Institutions
■ World Bank, IMF, WTO
○ 1939-1945 WW2
■ Catalyzed the modern world order and contemporary IOs
■ End of formal colonialism
○ Cold War; Post-WW2 → 1991
 ○ Rise of American hegemony and global governance
○ 1993 Formation of the European Union (EU)
○ 9/11
○ 2007/08 → Global Financial Crisis
○ Rise of China and BRICS
○ 2011 Arab Spring
○ 2016 Brexit
○ COVID-19

Lecture 2 → Theory of IR & IO

● Theory → simplification of the world
○ A simplification and sets of assumptions of the world or a particular
phenomenon in order to help understand it
○ Lense of sorts
○ Mid level theories are about specific questions or subjects in IR
○ How do we test theories?
■ Observation → can they be seen in reality; empirical
■ Logical → consistent with what else we know about the world
○ Help to understand, explain and predict
● Major theories of IR
○ Realism/Neorealism
■ Most dominant along with Constructivism
■ Oldest theory
■ Way media represents the international realm
■ Think of the game of Risk
■ 40s-50s very popular with outcome/during the Wars and the Cold War
reflected realist assumptions about the world
■ Core Assumptions
● States are the only relevant actor in IR; state-centric view
● Self-help system of anarchy
● State interests are equating with maximizing security/power;
act rationally to protect own interests; no morality role
● Emphasis on relative gains; zero-sum game; one win is one's
loss
■ Types of Realism
● Classical Realism
○ Human nature is emphasis
○ Power relations are reflected in IOs
○ Karr? Carr?
○ Morgantheo? → IOs have little relevance to
understand IR
● Neorealism (structural realism)
 ○ Scientific approach to IR
○ Abandoned human nature; it's about the structure of the
system which makes states act in realist ways; anarchy
guides state behaviour
○ Capability of states (distribution of power) and anarchy
are what shapes IR
○ Waltz → father of neo-realism; states are security
maximizers
○ IOs are just arenas for state to gain power
○ Defensive
■ Waltz
■ About security
○ Offensive
■ Mearshimer
■ About power
● Neoclassical realism
○ Combines structure and the internal issues of states
○ Not as simplistic as other two
■ Mid-level Realist-based Theories
● Security dilemma thesis → one state gain in security
threatens others; think of Cold War
● Balance of power thesis → structures naturally create a
balance of power; think of checking; self help and interest
○ Internal and external building
● Bi-polarity thesis → bi-polarity is the most stable out of all
polarity systems
● Hegemonic stability thesis → peace and order comes from a
dominant state; unipolarity; ensure the system is structured
to hegemon advantage
○ Liberalism/neoliberal institutionalism
■ Realists are to pessimistic; too state centric; thinking of anarchy
wrong; legitimizes big power management of the international realm
■ Historic alternative to realism; optimistic realism
■ Post ww1 era it became popular, League of Nations
■ Post ww2 a resurge of thinking cuz of UN
■ Post 90s a surge of IOs cuz of US decline
■ Core Assumptions
● States are central but NOT the only actors; there are other
actors that matter but they are still small impact compared to
states
● Effects of anarchy are mitigated by institutions and
interdependence
 ○ Conflict is the exception not the norm
● State interests can change; institutions and organizations can
shift the focus
○ Rational actors have incentives to cooperate
● Emphasis on absolute gains; it is not a zero-sum game;
indifferent to the gains of others; as long as everyone gains they
are happy
● Belief in human progress
○ Individual rights/freedoms
■ Types of Liberalism
● Classical liberalism
○ Human nature; which is progressive and impacted by
institutions
○ Individual freedoms and democracy; constitutionalism
○ Roles of non-state actors
○ IOs are where cooperation happens and to improve for
everybody
● Neoliberalism (neoliberal institutionalism)
○ 70s and a revival of liberalism from globalization
○ More scientific not assumptions but challenged classic
liberal views
○ Anarchy; main actors; self help but institutions dampen
the effects that realism presents
○ Construct of complex interdependence
■ Mid-Level Theories
● Democratic peace theory → democratic nations don’t go to
war with each other
● Functionalism → arrangements come out of what people
need within the state? Certain economic things come from
what people need not power relations
● Rational choice and game theory → actor interest goals
predict outcomes of agreements; prisoner’s dilemma;
institutional relations support certain rational choices over
others
○ Constructivism
■ Different set of lenses than realism and liberalism
■ A metatheory
■ The most followed by IR scholars
■ Rose in the 90s
● Recognition of ideas in IR
● End of Cold War → change in the idea structure of the
international system
 ■ Alexander Wendt? 1999 book
■ Core Assumptions
● Social theory of IR; not system of states but a society of states;
global culture from globalization; ideas matter just as much as
material; idea that US and North Korea are enemies can change
● IR is socially constructed
○ Anarchy is what states make of it → Wendt
○ Trump looks at everything from Realists perspective so
the system becomes a realist systems
● Social structures like culture shape state interests and identities
and vice-versa
● Knowledge and legitimacy shapes how actors interpret the
world
● Other kinds of actors matter for IR; not just states
■ Social and normative content of IOs that govern behaviour; social
arenas; producers of norms and understands; they have real power; are
considered separate from constituting states
○ The English School
■ Realism + liberalism + constructivism
● Power; cooperation; fundamental norms and institutions;
■ Core Assumptions
● IR reflects a society of states (vs. a system of states)
● Importance of fundamental institutions that underlie
international society
○ Diplomacy, international law → fundamental
institution
● Reflects a high level of order in the society
● Importance of global civil society; large role in bringing order
● Critical Theories
○ Basics
■ Normative theory; has an objective (change)
● “Theory is always for someone and for some purpose” (Cox)
● Argues that all theories are like this even tho realism doesn’t
have an explicit objective
● No theory is value neutral
■ Problem-revealing Theory (vs problem-solving theory)
● And problems about other theories
■ Different ontological and epistemological assumptions
● Ontology → what is the world made up of; what are we
trying to explain; what is the most important thing to
understand the world
 ○ Realism → state-centric therefore states have
ontologically prominent
● Epistemology → how can we understand reality?
○ The theory of knowledge, especially with regards to its
methods, validity and scope
■ “Post-positivists”
○ Critical political economy (Marxist and Neo-Marxist)
■ Marxist analysis → economic system drives society and relations of
power; capitalist has contradictions in it like income inequality that
make it unstable; capitalism is a series of crises
■ Lost after Cold War but gaining more power
■ Core Tenets
● Examines change over time (historical), focusing on the role of
economic factors (materialism)
● Views in its totality (politics, economics, culture)
● Focuses on social forces rather than states
● Power is reflected in the base and superstructure
● Neo-Marxists focus on relations of production to relations of
exchange/trade and/or ideology in the global political economy
■ Neo-Marxist Theories
● Dependency Theory/ World Systems → development gap
on south vs North; terms of trade that are on the expense of
the south; north/core underdeveloped the south/periphery
● Neo-Gramscian Theory → builds off the first; the history of
the world reflects different world systems; grand scale of
dependency; there is a core and periphery there is an
exploitative relationships; colonialism; control through
consent
○ Post-Structuralism (postmodernism)
■ Better understood as approach than a theory
■ Problematizing and tearing down the truth that others present
■ Core Assumptions
● Skepticism towards truth claims and metanarratives that claim
some sort of truth
● Emphasis on the relation between knowledge and power
● Raises questions about ontology
● Deconstruct discourses to reveal their inherent power relations
● Genealogy (the history of the present); like mental health and
how are understandings of that and power relations reflect how
we now know it
● Intertextuality analysis (text represents discourse)
 ○ Feminism
■ Analysis of the global subordination of women - economically,
politically, socially, ideologically, physically- and dedicated to its
elimination
■ End of cold war became more focused upon
■ How ideas of gender both affects world politics and is an effect of
world politics
■ Traditional understandings of IR rests on a conception of “politics”
that is a gendered construct
■ Liberal Feminists IR → focus on women’s roles in IR and the impact
of IR on women
■ Critical Feminist IR → look at how gender is identificable in
international structures, ideology and in the IR discipline itself
■ Post-Colonial/Marxist → emphasis on the intersectionalities of the
colonial experience and/or with gender identities
■ Post-Structrual Feminist → focuses on the role of gendered
language in creating knowledge
● Mid-Level Theories of IO
○ Intra-Organizational Processes → what happens in organizations
■ Principal-Agent Model → clear distinction of principles and the
agent or organization itself. States give power to agents; agents
have a degree of autonomy; most show this.
■ Organizational Culture → organizations create their own culture
independent of states. Bureaucratic cultures.
■ Organizational Adaptation and Learning → how organizations
evolve from adaption and learning
○ Inter-Organizational Processes → between organizations; cooperation and
conflict
■ Network Theory → examines links between organization
domestically and internationally

Lecture 3 and 4 → UN
● Centerpiece of global governance
○ 193 members
○ +2 non-member permanent observer states (Holy See and Palestine) → can
speak but can not vote
○ Only truly global IO
○ Primary purpose → maintain peace and security
● Functions
 ○ Provides the global security system
○ Creates international law, norms and principles
■ Ie. human rights, development and environment
○ Offers arena for multilateralism
■ Collective action, socialization, and knowledge distribution
○ Provides a cornerstone for most international regimes
○ Sponsors global conferences/summits and facilitates global networks and
partnerships
● Global Conferences and Summits
○ Increasingly sponsored since 60s
○ Ad hoc events convened at the request of at least 1 state
■ Authorized by the UNGA or ECOSOC
○ Outcomes include declarations, action plans and new institutions
● The Un(S)
○ First UN → states and the framework through which states act (principals)
○ Second → autonomous actor (agent) separate from states
○ Third → either special interests and or partners/networks
● History
○ Peace Conference of Westphalia (1648)
○ Congress of Vienna, Concert of Europe
○ Berlin Conference
○ Hague Conferences; established Humanitarian law
○ League of Nations
■ Developed during Versailles Conference (1919)
■ “Toothless” failure
● Non-participation by powerful states
● Rules required unanimity for enforcement
● Great depression stoked national focus
● Breakout of WW2
● UN’s Founding
○ 1945 by 51 states
○ Charter → constitutional document
■ Laying out principles and structure of the system
● Core Principles
○ Article 2
■ Sovereign equality of members
● One vote in the general assembly
● Not in the Security Council
■ Refrain from threat or use of force
■ Treaties must be carried out
● Including supporting enforcement measures
● Everyone has to pay to the UN you want that money to go
somewhere
 ■ Non-intervention
■ Self-defense (article 51)
● UN System
○ Complex system
○ “Clan”; lose collection of parts
○ Centralized and decentralized
○ Programs; organizations; funds
○ UN family of Organizations
○ 6 principal bodies
■ General assembly
● Most important
● Legislative branch of the UN; sets the international agenda
● Meets annually for three months in New York
○ Can also call “special sessions” and “emergency special
sessions”
● Produces resolutions, not orders; unlike security council
● 6 Committees → certain tasks
● Functions
○ Arena of general debate
○ Agenda making
○ Resolutions
○ Soft law
○ UN budget
○ Charter Revisions with the UNSC
Gives voice to smaller states/Global South
○ Gives membership
○ Elects non-permanent members of other bodies
○ Appoints judges to the ICJ
○ Appoints UN Secretary-General (UNSC help)
○ Supervises subsidiary bodies
○ “Uniting for Peace” resolutions’ override UNSC, 1915;
used rarely
● Decision-Making
○ 1-state, 1 vote
○ Majority simple or 2/3rds
○ Most deliberate work done in 6 main committees
■ Disarmament and security
■ Economic and financial
■ Social, humanitarian and cultural
■ Special political and decolonization
■ Administrative and budgetary
■ Legal committee
○ Coalitions or Caucus groups are formed
 ○ 5 Regional Groups
■ Wester Europe and Others
■ Easter Europe
■ Africa
■ Latin American and Caribbean
■ Asia and the Pacific
■ Each with specified amount of non-permanent
seats in the UNSC
■ 2 long-standing coalitions/divisions: East/West
& North/South
■ Security council
● Core of global security system
● The legitimizer for the use of force
● P 5 → US, UK, France, Russia and China; great powers
following the WW2; have veto power
● 10 non permanent members; elected by UNGA for 2 yr term
○ Africa/Asia (5), Latin (2), West Europe (2), Eastern (1)
● Authority to grant peacekeeping forces
● Serve at the invitation of a host gov
● Funds must be voted by the GA
● Activities and standing rose dramatically in post Cold war
● More actions in conflicts, more peacekeeping, more sanctions
● Created ad hoc war crimes tribunals
● No regular meeting → responds to specific crises,conflicts
● Non-members may address UNSC
● Substantive resolutions requires 9/15 votes including all P-5
● Decisions are binding on all member states
● Most work occurs in 14 committees
■ ECOSOC
● Central forum to address economic and social issues
● Most complex organ, 70% of human and financial sources
● 54 members, 3 year terms
○ P-5 and Germany/economic power houses frequently re
elected
● Most work done in functional and regional commissions
● Functions
○ Identifies solutions to problems
○ Development goals
○ Higher standards of living and the respect of human
rights
○ Makes recommendations to GA
○ Officially connects NGOs to UN
■ Secretariat
 ● Administration of the UN
● “Second UN”
● International civil service
● Large staff
● Offices → New York, Geneva, Vienna, Nairobi
● Holds high level of legal and expert legitimacy
● Functions
○ administration/bureaucracy of UN
○ Helps implement operations
○ Gathers statistical data and prepares studies/reports
○ Service meetings, translates speeches/documents
● Secretary-General
○ Manager of UN
○ Commands important moral authority
○ Face of UN
○ Leadership in UN budgets
○ Holds office for 5-year renewable terms
○ Selection process is highly politicized
○ Antonio Gureze? Of Portugal
■ ICJ
● Judicial arm of the Un; World Court
● Systematizes and progresses law
● Ensures Charter Principles are followed
● Different from the Criminal Court
● Acts as impartial body for settling legal disputes between states
only not individuals
● Gives advisory opinions on legal questions
● UNSC expected to enforce ICJ rulings
● Limited power cuz of sovereignty
● Functioning
○ 15 judges; 9 year terms → elected jointly by the
UNGA and UNSC; geographic representation; different
modes of law
○ Decisions are made by majority vote
■ Trusteeship Council
● Now defunct
● Originally established to oversee the administration of non-self-
governing trust territories (former colonies)
○ 19 Specialized Agencies
■ UNESCO
■ WHO
■ ILO
■ FAO
 ■ IMF
■ World Bank
■ Largely independent which is difference from subsidiary funds
and programs
■ Autonomou; self governing
■ Reported annually to ECOSOC
■ Funded by mandatory contributions (assessed cuz states must pay by
their ability to pay)
○ Subsidiary Funds and programs
■ Funds → UNDP, UNEP, UNICEF, WFP
■ Programs → UNHCR, UNAIDS, UN Women
■ Voluntary financial contributions
■ Non-autonomous organizations
■ Report to both the UNGA and ECOSOC
○ All coordinated by the Chief Executive Board (CEB)
■ Secretary General
● Logic of the system and implications of it for midterm
● US and the UN
○ Relatively contentious and unstable relationships
○ 1945-60: American-led bloc dominated the UNGA
○ 60s: decolonization and emergence of the Global South voting bloc (G77)
■ G77 and the UN Conference on Trade and Development both
formed i 1964 → antithetical to US interests
○ 1970s/80: US often preferred to bypass the UN
■ Cold War politics stalled the UNSC
■ Global South blocs steered the UNGA
■ Under Reagan the US refused to pay its assessed dues; financial crisis
of the UN cuz it was the biggest funder; very skeptic like Trump
○ Later 1980s: cohesiveness of G77 erodes; economic crisis; debit crisis of the
Global South leading to the loss of cohesiveness
○ Post 9/11: US increase participation in UN (yet unilateral action in Iraq); two
faced approach
○ Trump: skepticism of multilateralism or ‘globalism’
● Canada and the UN
○ Always been strongly supported of the UN
○ Highly regarded in the UN
■ Played a large role in facilitating UN based int’l law
○ Served as one of the most rotating members of the UNSC
○ Yet Canada has also been the subject of criticism from the UN
■ Indigenous issue
■ SLC scandal last year
■ Lack of int’l business oversight
● Ongoing Challenges for UN
 ○ Constrained by sovereignty
○ Global politics
○ Consistent and sufficient funding
○ peace/security, inequality increasing, human rights and climate change
● Common Criticisms of the UN
○ Ineffectiveness and inaction
○ Lack of coordination and top-down management issues
○ Administration inefficiency
○ Funding
○ Integration of non-state actors
○ Antiquated institutional structure
○ ‘Globalism’
● Ineffectiveness and Inaction
○ Failure to act
■ Rwandan Genocide (94)
■ Darfur (ongoing)
■ Syria (2011)
● Coordination and Management Issues
○ Engage in competition for resources during crises
■ ex) Haiti earthquake (2010); overlapping and no help in other areas
○ Nefarious activities of peacekeeping forces
○ General top-down management problems
● Financing
○ UN regular budget → administration, major organs, funding/programs
■ Peacekeeping expenses, tribunals and specialized agencies are separate
○ Funded by member’s states’ assessments according to a formula based on
ability to pay
■ Assessed contributions
○ US is the largest (20%)
○ Big business and private foundations are increasingly playing a larger
financing role
● Issues with Consistent and Sufficient Funding
○ Principle of sovereign equality does not align with funding obligations
■ Creates resentment by large funders
○ Frequent difficulties in getting states to pay assessed contributions
○ Series of crises → 60s, 80s, 90s
○ Proposals → create a UN tax on all int'l arms sales and/or currency
transactions
■ Increase penalties for non-payments
■ Increase pledges from MNCs and private foundations
● Issues with Integrating Non-state actors
○ Particularly the for-profit private sector
○ Increasing since the 90s
 ■ increase capacity
■ Facilitate corporate social responsibility (CSR) initiatives while
serving core business interests
■ 2000→ Launch of the Global Compact of Shared Values and
Principles
● Committed the UN to opening up to big business
■ Increasingly engages business in decision-making practices
■ A contentious institutional practice
● Institutional Constraints
○ Constrained by post-WW2 structure, redundant agencies, inadequate
personnel and policies, lack of transparency/accountability, limited resources
and inability to meet the needs of a changing world
○ UN Charter is difficult to amend
■ Has happened on two occasions
● Reforming the UN
○ Improving coordination; 70s
○ Financial reforms; 80s
○ Managerial, 90s
○ UNSC reform, 90s and most debates occur around this
■ Debates include representation and the veto power
■ UN cannot effectively stop aggression by a great power or great power
ally
■ Resolutions and order reflect great power politics
● vague /imprecise and/or inconsistent
■ Agreement that more states should be added to the UNSC
● I.E Germany/Japan contribute more than UK, Russia and China

Lecture 5 → Regionalism and European Regionalism

● Sovereignty integration spectrum
● Regional IOs reflect the most integrative forms of IOs, especially in Europe
● NATO can be understood as being based in Europe
○ Institutional predecessor was the 1947 Treaty of Dunkirk between France
and the UK → a treaty of mutual assistance
● Regional IOs
○ Exist in every region
○ Came out after ww2
○ Address security, economic, political, environmental and human rights issues
○ Vary widely
■ scope/mandate, organizational structure, membership, size and identity
○ Multiple regional IOs have overlapping membership; nested
○ Most prominent in Europe, the least in Asia and the Middle East
 ○ In Europe IOs are more institutionalized with more formal and legally-binding
rule systems, formal voting processes and enforcement mechanisms for
compliance
■ Asia is the opposite side of this
○ Most are economic than security second
● What is a region
○ Traditionally → regions assumed to be constituted by territory/geography
○ Constructivists → based on ideas and identities
○ Functionalists → based on function; wer create regions out of their
functions
○ Regions are social and/or functional spaces
○ Regionalization → intensification of interactions in a region
○ Regionalism → state-led political projects promoting inter-governmental
(or supranational) collaboration within a region
○ Forms
■ Inter-governmental → decision-making and authority shared
amongst member states
■ Supranational → degree of authority and decision-making is
deferred to a supranational body that makes decisions for member
states to comply with
● Waves of regionalism
○ Post-ww2 - 70s
■ Eurocentric
■ Cold war based
○ Late 80s → “The New Regionalism”
■ Economic cooperation
■ End of Cold War
■ New transnational issues
■ Involvement of non-state actors
■ Multidimensional
● Political Factors Driving Regionalism
○ Power
■ Driven by hegemons
○ Political ideology and identity
○ Internal and external threats
○ Domestic politics
■ Similar regime types
○ Leadership
■ Jean Monnet, Father of Europe
■ Gamal Nasser, Arab League
■ Robert Shcuman?
● Economic Factors Driving Regionalism
○ High degree of economic interdependence
○ Desire for economic growth
○ Compensatory mechanisms for developing states to integrate
○ Complementarity of economic politics with other policies
● Europe’s ROs
○ Dense network established post WW2
○ European experience informs both theory and practice of IOs
○ Western → NATO, Organization for SEcurity and Cooperation in
Europe, Council of Europe, EU
○ Eastern → Warsaw Pact, Council for Mutual Economic Assistance
● NATO
○ Can be understood as a European-based or trans-continental IO
○ Est. 1949 as a Cold War collective security alliance to contain Russia →
collective defense and deterrence
○ Headquarters → Brussels, Belgium
○ Most highly organized regional security IO
○ Most dominant formal security alliance
○ Uniqueness in its post Cold War transformation
○ North Atlantic Council (NAC)
■ Principal decision-making organ
■ Represents NATO’s overarching political/strategic level
■ Meets at the summit (periodically), ministerial (2x a year) and
ambassadorial (weekly)
■ Chaired by the Secretary-General
■ Included number of committees for specific issues
■ Made by consensus
○ Military Committee
■ Composed of Chiefs of staff of each member state
■ Oversee NATO’s military command structure, strategy and policy
○ Supreme Allied Command Europe (SACEUR)
■ Highest military position behind the military committee
■ Responsible to the military committee for the conduct of all NATO
military operations
■ Authorized by the NAC
○ Allied Command Transformation (ACT)
■ Considers future threats, past and innovative practices
○ After Cold War
■ Readjusted its strategic concept
● Toward conflict prevention, crisis management and
humanitarian response
■ 1993 → first military operation
 ● Former Yugoslavia; enforced arms embargo and a no-fly zone;
bombed Bosnian Serb army installations; peace keeping
■ 1999 → Intervention in Kosovo; extended bombing campaign
■ 9/11 → collective security principle invoked; anti-insurgency
operations in Afghanistan; training and technical assistance
■ 2011 → enforced no-fly zone and arms embargo; undertook
air/naval strikes in Libya
● Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)
● European Union
○ Most integration; most intrusive to date
○ 27 members (began 6)
○ Supranational
○ 510+ million people
○ Commands 18% of worlds GDP
○ Most institutionalization of any IO
○ Own legal system, parliament, bureaucracy, currency and court
○ European citizenship and free movement of labor
○ Copenhagen conditions for membership
■ Respect for democracy, rule of law, human rights, protection of
minorities, market economy and capacity to implement EU rules
○ Largest contributor to the UN and global development aid
○ Involved in peacekeeping, elections monitoring, advocating environmental
cooperation, democracy and human rights
● European Integration
○ Internal peace/security initiatives
■ Avoid further European rivalries
■ Enmesh Germany
○ External peace/security
■ Contain Soviet threat
○ Political driver
■ US offered incentives through the Marshall Plan
○ Economic incentives
■ Economic regulation and market development
● Timeline of Integration
○ 1951 → European Coal and Steel Community established
■ Created supranational authoritative body
■ Original 6 → Belgium, France, Germany, Italy, Luxembourg, the
Netherlands
■ Meant to neutralize competition over certain natural resources that
could spill into further conflicts
○ 1957 → Treaty of Role
■ Established the European Economic Community
 ■ Committed to a common market and customs union
○ 1992 → Maastricht Treaty
■ Formal creation of the EU
■ European citizenship, monetary union movement
● EU Common Policies
○ Began with trade and agricultural policies
○ Have grown to include, regional development, fisheries, food safety, social
policies, monetary, environment, human rights
● Structure of EU
○ European Commission
■ Executive body
■ Ensures states implement EU legislation
■ Makes proposals to the legislative bodies
■ Includes 28 commissioners appointed by member states
■ Functions like a governmental cabinet
○ Council of Ministers
■ ½ of the EU’s legislative bodies
■ Represents “intergovernmentalism”
■ Composed of national gov ministers (28)
■ Executive functions: foreign/security policy, concluding treaties on
EU’s behalf
○ Parliament
■ ½ of the EU’s legislative bodies
■ The voice of EU citizens; only EU body directly elected by voters in
member states
■ Composed of 751 MEPs
○ European Council/Summit
■ Key body for majore EU initiatives
■ 1 head of states per state, 1 minister per state, 1 representative for
foreign affairs per state
■ More informal
■ 4x a year
○ European Court of Justice
■ Judicial branch of the Eu
■ 27 judges
■ Interprets and enforces EU laws/treaties
● Challenges to the EU
○ Debt Crisis
■ Following the 07/08 global financial crisis
■ 5 eurozone countries unable to pay gov debt and/or bailout banks
under their jurisdiction
○ Refugee crisis
○ Reversibility of integration: Brexit