

OK, having set out in very crude terms, the relationship between government, democracy,
capitalist development.
0:00
 I now want to fast forward to the mid 1990s and indeed our contemporary period and look at
how the disjuncture that David Hale referred
0:10
 to at the beginning of I refer to the beginning of the lecture between globalization on the one
hand and democracy on the other,
0:20
 played itself out in calls for a new system of global governance.
0:28
 In essence, I think that it's helpful to think of global governance as addressing one basic
question who will what provides security,
0:35
 prosperity and well-being in the world?
0:44
 And one way of thinking about the answer to this question is to look at three areas rule,
regulation and legitimacy,
0:47
 where global governance, both in its practice but also its theory, tries to offer alternatives or
pride.
0:56
 Answer to the question of what? Provide security, prosperity and well-being.
1:03
 So if we look at the question of who rules in the world system today,
1:09
 global governance proposes that there's been with with global change and globalization as
discussed in previous weeks,
1:16
 there needs to be a relocation of authority precisely because globalization has
1:24
 intensified interdependence and transnational flows that go beyond the nation state.
1:30
 We've got to rethink the location of authority.
1:36
 And this is where the notion of governance comes in as a distinction.
1:40
 Away from the formal hierarchical authority of the state,
1:47
 legitimated through law and police powers, law enforcement, that is what is known as
government.
1:54
 Moving away from that governance is about shared goals implemented through informal,
2:00
 often nongovernmental mechanisms of soft law that we saw just a minute ago in the first part
of today's lecture.
2:06
 So one way of thinking about it is between hard and soft power, between black and white law
and reading in between the lines.
2:15
 Those of you more legally oriented might might think of it in that way.
2:22
 Another way of thinking about it is the public private partnership idea that governance is not
purely about the public,
2:26
 nor is it merely about the private, but tries to coordinate the interaction between those tries to
facilitate the best of both worlds.
2:34
 Remember, this is emerging in the 1990s in this moment of liberal optimism.
2:44
 Secondly, global governance is about regulation.
2:49
 It suggests that in order to administer cross-border flows, we need to establish international
regimes,
2:53
 multilateral organizations, international institutions, interstate cooperation.
3:02
 This requires both building on existing multilateral institutions and reforming them.
3:10
 So the question, too, that is posed is who or what provide security, prosperity and well-being?
3:17
 The answer of proponents of global governance is multilateral institutions to international
organizations,
3:25
 to co-operative arrangements between states,
3:32
 be they bilateral or multilateral integration like we've experienced in the European Union, or
cooperation among American states or African states.
3:35
 These are good or good examples of how governments can regulate what are increasingly
increasingly complex and transnational affairs.
3:46
 If we are to channel those flows and harness them to the benefit of of public benefit of the
majority,
3:57
 then they have to be corresponding institutions that allow the actors, if you like, the sluice
gates of these complex into transnational interactions.
4:05
 Now, that regulation needs to be for some advocates of global governance,
4:14
 some theories of global governance updated to the 21st century, and therefore institutions like
the UN Security Council,
4:19
 multilateral organizations like financial institutions like the IMF or the World Bank, even the
informal,
4:28
 relatively informal interstate gatherings like the G-7 or G eight need to be reformed,
rethought.
4:35
 In the case of the G-7 G eight, of course, there was a creation of a G20 post after the financial
crash of ninety six ninety eight.
4:44
 So this reinvention, this constant reinvention of what the boundaries of.
4:55
 Politics are is part and parcel of the thinking of global governance, and finally, global
governance offers an answer to what is legitimate.
4:59
 This is very important aspect of our discussion because order a credible order, political order,
5:11
 be it local, national or especially global, requires some degree of legitimacy.
5:18
 Legitimacy, legitimacy is different from legality.
5:25
 Sure. Those international laws. There's international law rules.
5:29
 But many of those will be illegitimate. They do not they're not fit for purpose or they do not
necessarily capture
5:34
 the mood of a particular global public sphere of a particular public opinion.
5:42
 This is often played out nationally. Again, a good example is South Africa.
5:50
 Apartheid was a very good instance of a legally codified racial oppression, which was
absolutely legal in South Africa, but clearly illegitimate.
5:56
 Both of the majority of the population in South Africa, but also internationally illegitimate,
certainly by the 1970s, if not earlier.
6:08
 So transposed globally. The argument here is that, for instance,
6:19
 institutions like the UN Security Council and the UN Charter that gives veto rights to just
6:23
 five member states out of the many hundreds that are member states of the United Nations,
6:30
 might be legal. That's what the charter says as it was written all or at least approved in 19 in
San Francisco in 1945.
 6:36
 But what is the what is the legitimacy behind that claim?
6:45
 What about all the emerging powers, let alone the peoples that are often not democratically
represented by state authorities?
6:52
 So that tension between legality and legitimacy is one that governments tries to address by
transferring
7:01
 authority to non-state actors and to this idea of a global public opinion that should participate.
7:09
 Note the Republican refrain that in the affairs, in global affairs,
7:16
 it's not just states that are responsible for global affairs, but so should public opinion citizens,
7:21
 non-state actors, interest groups, including corporations, but also market forces,
7:28
 but also nonmarket forces, trade unions and other kinds of representative organizations.
7:36
 And in terms of legality and legitimacy are to be distinguished from authority.
7:43
 Who has the authority to exercise rule again, conventionally, even, or especially democratic
rule suggests that the political community,
7:49
 the dominant political community, is that of the state and the government is the representative
of that of the people.
7:59
 Governance suggests that we have to rethink where authority lies and it may in part lie within
states.
8:06
 It may indeed, in part lie in interstate international organizations like the UN Security Council
or like the UN Assembly.
8:16
 But perhaps we have to think beyond states and grant authority, as we'll see later in the
course, to other agency standard setting agencies.
8:24
 Interestingly, this comes from the private sector. The idea that Standard and Poor's, for
instance, or the other rating agencies that rate states,
8:36
 according to other non-state actors, with regard to their financial status or credibility.
8:47
 These are key players in the global political economy and indeed arguably wider than that.
8:57
 And so governance suggests that that's a good thing because authority has been transferred
9:03
 from the purely centralized government authority to networks outside that of the state.
 9:08
 So I hope you get a sense there of how global governance is not just a description of an
aspiration or set of institutions,
9:15
 but carries with it all kinds of implications about where authority, legitimacy, legality resides
in the global system and whether it should do.
9:22
 Finally, for this section, before I move in the final third section of this lecture into looking at a
specific case study or an illustration
9:35
 of how democracy was exported to Iraq in significant part of the discourse and practice of
global governance,
9:46
 is this notion of global civil society something which for most.
9:54
 I wrote about some years ago and here,
9:59
 it's important to bear in mind that civil society includes a multitude of sins and virtues outside
of the state,
10:03
 principally the so-called third sector, nongovernmental organizations association or life
generally across states.
10:14
 As I was saying, everything from Oxfam right through to the Muslim Brotherhood, ranging
from Vietnam, Pacino, CNN,
10:22
 which I've mentioned in another context to the the rating agencies that I just referred to a
moment ago,
10:31
 all of these can be seen as part of the civil society.
10:37
 But some of them have a political orientation. Some of them have a market orientation.
10:42
 So we should be clear that civil society incorporates the market and market forces as much as
it does political forces with a small P, if you like.
10:47
 I mean, the Muslim Brotherhood has risen to power in certain places, most recently in Egypt.
10:57
 But it is also a transnational organization has been since 1928,
11:02
 incorporating Muslims from across different parts or politically certain orey a political
11:08
 orientation for Muslims across different parts of the Arab Middle East and indeed beyond.
11:13
 So civil society can be seen as both a sphere,
11:19
 a private sphere of the market and an associational experience of social movements and for
many advocates of global civil society.
11:24
 This domain, this real domain of international relations has several democratic benefits.
11:35
 One, it is pluralize king. It diversifies the way our authority resides, how regulation is
undertaken and what constitutes legitimacy.
11:45
 It allows for the functional proliferation of specialist agencies so that these are not just limited
to areas of hard power,
11:57
 as it were, of lawmaking and security. But I diversified, as they did after 1945, to include
health and education and the environment.
12:05
 So the UN specialist agencies or specialized agencies like the World Health Organization
12:20
 we've already discussed or UNESCO are good examples of this functional proliferation.
12:26
 Secondly, global civil society can contribute to transparency.
12:32
 And one of the core readings for this week's seminar,
12:38
 you will have also seen references to the importance of accountability to the story of
transparency, to accountability and legitimacy.
12:40
 One way of making the law legitimate is to buy in through a degree of consistency,
transparency and accountability.
12:52
 If the law makes a mistake, if there is a miscarriage of justice,
13:01
 a legal system that acknowledges that and redresses that is one that gained some legitimacy,
right.
13:05
 The law is sometimes wrong sometimes. Maybe all the time.
13:12
 So transparency is very important. The role of codes, of conduct, of benchmarking,
13:17
 the rating agencies that I mentioned a minute ago and league tables on global affairs is
present, but also positive.
13:22
 And so the question then becomes one of what influence there might be without
accountability, particularly of private authority.
13:30
 Is it right and proper that the more vocal, the better funded the NGOs with higher profile?
13:39
 Generally, though not exclusively from the global north, should have a greater role in global
governance.
13:50
 Should they have more influence? Clearly, many do have greater influence.
13:58
 Medecins Sans Frontieres, Oxfam, I mentioned earlier Greenpeace.
14:02
 These institutions have sat at the table of international organizations, often at the detriment of
smaller, perhaps more critical organizations.
14:07
 Many of them from the global south. And so again within global civil society.
14:17
 There's considerations about authority, legitimacy and accountability.
14:21
 Thirdly, global civil society is deemed to be a positive and real development because as we've
seen a couple of weeks time,
14:27
 when we talk about the new wars, the counterparts, new wars of the 1990s that apparently
supposedly descended into an unprecedented barbarism.
14:34
 The use of child soldiers, of irregular armed forces, the victimization of civilians, all those
phenomena had a counterpart in.
14:46
 Of civility, the phrases from Mary Koldo, one of the theories of new wars.
14:59
 She suggests that the global civil society, as it was developing in the 1990s, can and should be
an alternative to the carnage,
15:04
 the barbarism that was being experienced in cities like Sarajevo, for instance, in Bosnia
during the civil wars of the early 1990s.
15:13
 And therefore, global civil civil society can be a domain of humanitarianism, both in the
sense of solidarity, of human solidarity,
15:22
 but also legally in terms of the identification of the right,
15:31
 the responsibility to protect and the right to intervene on behalf of humanity as part of a
global citizenry.
15:37
 That that is, we act, therefore, as concerned citizens of the world.
15:46
 Expressing solidarity towards our Bosnian brothers and sisters were victims of state attentive
genocide.
15:51
 And I'm thinking about the 1990s. And in that context, global civil society becomes a
humanitarian agent that advances not just public opinion,
 15:59
 but can also progress particular standards of humanitarian intervention and humanitarian law.
16:09
 And finally, the global civil society is clearly a domain of advocacy,
16:18
 where networks across states organize in terms of a whole series of of aims, development,
promotion, human rights of women's rights, you name it.
16:23
 All kinds of advocacy groups have organized transnationally for many decades, if not
centuries.
16:36
 Think of the abolitionists, the campaigns to abolish the slave trade and slavery that was
clearly a network, a transnational network.
16:42
 And so here the role of naming and shaming of influence, if not necessarily enforcing, plays a
key role in global governance.
16:52
 There's all kinds of ways in which hard law the case I use.
17:00
 In the end, that is the 1997 Ottawa Convention on Anti-personnel Mines.
17:05
 That is a convention that eventually was inscribed in the international law abolishing anti-
personnel landmines.
17:10
 But it came as a result of constant pressure by advocacy groups non-governmental
17:17
 that often managed to bring allies from within governments or states people.
17:22
 I think Princess Diana was involved at some stage in that particular campaign as celebrities.
17:27
 And we'll come back to that in the second part. Of course,
17:34
 when we look at networks and the role of experts and celebrities in raising the profile of
particular advocacy campaigns and how then
17:37
 that filters through into the more institutional processes of international international
organizations so that in this instance,
17:45
 the anti-personnel mine convention,
17:55
 the Ottawa convention, was effectively grafted on to existing legislation and is what
specialists call an instance of norm cascading,
18:00
 where you start with certain norms, certain narrow norms, and then they cascade down to all
other areas,
18:12
 including this is a geographical as well as a legal concept.
18:18
 So they might go from international organizations.
18:22
 The Ottawa convention very spread out and cascades down into states where land anti-
personnel land mines are especially acute problems,
18:25
 Sri Lanka and parts of western, south and southern Africa in parts of Southeast Asia, but also,
legally speaking.
18:35
 What emerges as an advocacy and an attempt to set certain standards bringing in this or that
states, you know,
18:44
 perhaps the more progressive social democratic states, Canada or the Scandinavians, then
cascades also into other arenas of global governance.
18:51
 So I hope you get a sense here that the combination of the public,
19:00
 private state and civil society of hard law that is enforceable and soft law that is merely about
compelling
19:05
 states and those in authority to behave in a particular way is at the core of the notion of global
governance.