Free Custom «Roles of International Organizations from a Realist Perspective» Essay Paper

Introduction

Realists counter liberalism with a stand of the absence of teamwork within international organizations. Realists argue that international organizations are created and run to cater for the interests of powerful states and not for the common good of all their members. The stress of the formation of such organizations is mainly in the end point rather than the general overview of teamwork. Therefore, the end point for the formation of international organizations is to enhance the exercise of might of powerful states by regulating and controlling the organizational roles. It was the case that led to the formation of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) of 1967 as a platform through which the U.S. would frustrate the drastic growth of China’s economy. From the above backdrop, international organizations are formed to pursue more power and self-interests of member countries. Current essay will determine the roles of international organizations from a realist perspective in an analytical and critical form. The paper will present different examples and analytics in terms of interests and roles of such formations.

Role of International Organizations (IOs)

Unlike the liberalist view that international organizations, including intergovernmental organizations (INOs) and non-governmental organizations (NGOs), are formed for collective interests, realists view it as group(s) formed for states’ own agendas (Heywood, 2011). Realists are skeptical about both international organizations and international law. It is mainly because IOs form the basis of international politics backed by international laws that are disguised in the form of treaties (Korab-Karpowicz, 2013). The realist perspective disregards and reduces the liberal role of the United Nations, for instance, as a tool for international cohesion, peace and state regulation to a platform of power exertion due to its failures of its security council to punish aggressor states in a collective way and their inability to penetrate the state laws (Norton & Company, 2010). It is the case in the continued conflict between Palestine and Israel where peace missions are thwarted by political powers of states (Korab-Karpowicz, 2013). International NGOs, on the other hand, are also tools of power created and given legal power by state with a main role of backing up the mother nation or state when need arises in host nations. Therefore, the power to dissolve international NGOs is vested in the mother nations as the giver of legal authority (Ellis, 2010). For instance, the USAID organizations spread in almost all Third World countries can be terminated or efforts frustrated by the U.S. Government for personal gains.

In addition, international organizations are formed under the international laws. It makes international organizations a tool for implementation of international laws in host nations. Realist’s views on international law are also skeptical and affect the understanding and interpretation of the role of international organizations as implementers (Meierhenrich, 2012). In this case, the role of international organizations changes from liberalism to states’ self-interests in that members comply with international law not to have a collective bargaining power but to enjoy peace and order embedded in its membership (Norton & Company, 2010). Hence states comply with international law for their own self-interests. It is in the interest of states to enjoy peace and territorial respect for airspace and international trade that they join international organizations such as the United Nations and heed to international law and not for collective power (Norton & Company, 2010).

The major roles that international organizations are supposed to play in the global arena include security, provision, peace maintenance and restoration, international trade and humanitarian efforts (Norton & Company, 2010). These, according to realists, are only roles pursued as per the interests of member and host nations to such organizations refuting claims that cooperation during such roles is paramount. Realism is reinforced by sovereignty of states as prescribed by international law which allows countries to pursue their own national goals (Ellis, 2010).

Security and peace maintenance calls for intensive cooperation due to its complexity in workforce. International organizations complicate and sometimes frustrate peace missions when it comes to abiding by the international law of state sovereignty (Ellis, 2010). According to international laws, it is due to the prescribed nature of cooperation of different countries during peace missions. In such situations, a clear understanding of the set standards and conceptions becomes a collective bargain. In most peace missions, mutual understanding is not always the case and conflicting issues between two powerful states result in more complications. It was mainly the case that the United Nations faced in an attempt to bring peace in Macedonia (a former Yugoslavian Republic) when China veto thwarted the efforts in a bid to exercise power (Smith, 2005). It happened weeks after China suspended diplomatic bonds with Macedonia to frustrate Taiwan’s investment efforts with the latter. China’s move was condemned as an abuse of power invested in it by the UN. According to the realist view, China used supremacy as a political and power actor in the UN and the role of the international organization to meet its own objective. Lack of central power actors in international organizations to control the members and the sovereignty of countries creates a platform through which powerful states use the IOs for their own gain (Mathiason, 2007).

In addition, the economic role of international organizations is manifested in terms of power of state actors. Countries under the umbrella of Organization of Petroleum Export Countries (OPEC) are controlled by international laws stating that OPEC has the role of regulating the supply and price of petroleum products. However, it is not the case as the United States’ economy and value of the dollar controls the field as the trade currency. The United States is not a member of OPEC but due to its economic power, its currency controls the pricing of petroleum products (Mathiason, 2007).

The growing global interdependence and international trade among nations has brought increased economic ties among states. International Organizations affiliated to the UN, such as World Trade Organization, have a great influence on trade fairs ranging from Third World to developed countries. However, despite the establishment of international laws enforced by the organization concerning trade, the different needs of various countries outweigh the need for collective bargaining power translating into nations utilizing their economic power to control the market. The sovereignty of nations to pursue the common good of its citizens threatening the power of international organizations, such as WTO, which has fewer privileges compared to its members. The trade organizations in this case have been used to propagate and maintain the status quo in terms of economic power of individual countries rather than the intended role, fulfilling the realist perspective (Meierhenrich, 2012).

Realism is skeptical of international organizations ability to carry on its perceived idealism in that the member nations vary in terms of economic and political power which are the major factors determining the exercise of supremacy even in IOs for self-interests (Ellis, 2010). Member and powerful countries use the power vested in international trade organizations, for instance, to expand their own markets. Treaties signed during the push for regional free trade by most international organizations are always seen to benefit the economically and politically stable countries at the expense of others. Economic imbalances deter third world countries from expanding their economies on a global scale and instead act as markets for developed nations with vast technology to produce and manufacture. Therefore, governments of any country yield to the demands of the business class for market expansion by exercising trade laws vested in international organizations. Rather than aiding the weaker and developing nations become competitive, international organizations weaken them by making them even more dependent and unable to pull out of these organizations as a result of aid entitled to them by the international law. On the one hand, international organizations corner the weak nations into a receiver of aids. On the other hand, they make the stabilized countries more powerful (Ocasio, 2005). From a realist point of view, IOs role in helping economies rise and ensuring effective trade competition is used for power purposes by suppressing the growth of weak countries.

Amnesty International is a global non-governmental organization that was initiated for humanitarian purposes. It is mostly involved hand in hand with the UN in almost all humanitarian efforts and especially human rights aspects. In most scenarios where humanitarian assistance is needed, international organizations utilize military assistance either to bring aid or to restore peace in conflicting regions and fulfill the Universal Declaration on Human Rights of 1948 (Smith, 2005). The role of international organizations here is to provide humanitarian welfare. United Nations being an intergovernmental and state-based organization has a mandate of providing military assistance to uphold human rights acknowledgement wherever they are deemed absent in a member country. Amnesty International, on the other hand, is a non-state actor which is not delegated to use military power in such occasions. According to Ellis (2010), realists deem the role of international organization on observing the respect of human rights as harmful and against nations’ interests with a view that the Human Right Declaration disregards the different cultures including norms and beliefs of the global society. Amnesty International as a non-state actor in humanitarian efforts is considered weak in pursuing its role due to manipulation and neutralization by state laws making it liable to power invested in countries.

Conclusion

According to the realist perspective, international organizations are tools through which countries pursue their own interests by exercising economic and political supremacy and manipulating power towards a certain end. The major roles that international organizations are supposed to play in the global arena include security, provision, peace maintenance and restoration, as well as international trade and humanitarian efforts. Intergovernmental organizations, such as the United Nations, being a state actor have been used by countries like China and the United States as a platform to frustrate the economic growth of other countries such as Macedonia and China respectively. International laws upheld by IOs, sovereignty of countries and state laws complicate and hinder the efforts of international organizations to pursue their goals by exercising membership powers and privileges towards self-interests. International non-governmental organizations’ efforts, on the other hand, are thwarted by lack of state power, making them susceptible to manipulation for selfish gains by countries. Trade organizations and treaties rather than pursuing market liberalization, aid developed and economically stable countries to expand their market bringing more economic imbalance.