13, 16,17,18,19,20

13: The legacy of League of Nations

It was created after the IWW because the balance of power systems was compromised and they had to replace it
with a collective security. The structure is similar with UN;s one. Its council was transformed in UN Security
Council, The League Assembly became General Assembly. One of the most innovative features of the League was
an impartial international secretariat. The responsibility for mandates( ex: Palestine, Ruanda-Urundi etc were under
its administration of the great powers but under League supervision) was an idea continued in Trusteeship Council.
UN “revised version of the League”. In comparison with the UN, the League had the lack of military capability to
assure collective security(failure of League to stop Japanese aggression in Manchuria), deficiency of power
available to it, weakness of the Convenant’s obligations, fright of its members. UN abandoned the League’s
principle of unanimity replacing it with the right to veto of the members of the Security Council. UN renounced of
League system of minority protection and emphasized individual human rights and also economic, social, cultural
dimensions of peace.

Genesis of the United Nations: Similarity between both organizations: US played the main role in their creation.
Roosevelt wanted a new organization built on League experience. Like Woodrow Wilson who came with the idea of
an organization which have “system of unilateral action, exclusive alliances, spheres of influence, balance of
power”. Roosevelt was the first person who came with the idea of “United Nations” which could spread information
through “ free ports of information” around the world and should control located military bases. After US entered in
the II WW 26 allied states issued the “ Declaration of United Nations” which called for a new postwar system
for general security and affirmed their commitment to the principles of Atlantic Charter. An Advisory Committee on
Postwar Foreign Policy was established with Secretary of State Cordell Hull, but most of the work for UN future
was conducted by a political subcommittee chaired by Under-secretary Sumner Welles. USA had also to convince
its main allies for UN creation: Churchill wanted regional organizations in Europe(Pacific and Americas), was
skeptical of the idea of “Big four”(US<USSR<UK<CHINA) collaboration and was doubting if China deserved
equal status. Stalin was feared that the organization will be dominated by the US and its allies, of the capitalist west.
He believed that USSR can defend better through its own military strength with the help of the sovereignty and
territorial integrity. USSR elaborated the “Moscow Declaration of the Four Nations on General Security” through
which they agreed with a postwar international organization, based on sovereignty equality principle. It was decided
that “Big three”(US<USSR<UK) should have a veto right. Hull assured that the membership of the committee was
non-partisan.
The Fulbright Resolution in the House was passed on 21 September 1943 ‘favoring the creation of appropriate
international machinery to maintain the peace.” The Senate's Connolly Resolution on November 5 stated that the
US should be a principle member for maintaining the peace. Administration bipartisan benefit : the issue of the UN
was kept out of the 1944 US Presidential election campaign and the country did not split on US participation in the
new organization in the way that it had over League membership during the presidential campaign of 1920. One of
the major flaws of the League was that not all the great powers were members undermining the principle of
collective security. The veto was the price that had to be paid to ensure that all of the three wartime allies joined the
new organization. The serious debate about the organization of UN was at Teheran in 1943: allies should be the
“world policemen”. In July 1944 the Bretton Woods Conference in Washington established the principal
organizations of the postwar economic order: institutions: the International Bank for Reconstruction and
Development was established to provide capital, The International Monetary Fund to support the international
financial system. Other organization established in 1943: Food and Agriculture Organization, International Civil
Aviation Organization. At the Dumbarton Oaks Conference in Washington in August 194 were established the main
features of UN: France was now included as a permanent member. At Yalta in February 1945: a veto could be
exercised by a party to a dispute, but only to prevent enforcement action, the number of representatives in the
General Assembly, agreement on a trusteeship role for the UN.

Tremous at San Francisco: At San Francisco decisions at the conference were taken by a two-thirds majority, with
each amendment voted on clause by clause. The small states did not understand the veto issue=> San Francisco
Statement: it listed the items that were to be considered procedural rather than substantive, and therefore not subject
to the veto. This gave rise to what was known as the ‘double veto’. No permanent member of the Security Council
could use its veto to stop the Council considering an issue. The Economic, Social and Cultural Organization-
principal organ, Human rights received more attention, they incorporate a ‘Declaration Regarding Non-Self-
Governing Territories’. The Conference ended on 26 June, when 51 states signed the UN Charter.

16: Norms are not converted into laws and regimes. The main actors that conducted the Responsibility to Protect
through the labyrinth of UN can be divide into norm entrepreneurs, champions and brokers. The Kosovo and
Rwanda interventions of the UN was too little and too late to stop the murders. In 1999 NATO managed to stop
Kosovo war but in this situation observers saw the 78-day bombing effort as being too much, too little, too late aand
too counterproductive. In both cases Security Council failed to act and authorize the use of deadly force to protect
vulnerable populations.
Norm entrepreneur: The secretary-General, Kofi Annan strengths the idea of a better intervention in mass
atrocities, “state frontiers . . . should no longer be seen as a watertight protection for war criminals or mass
murderers. He argued that human rights concerns transcended claims of sovereignty at Millennium Summit.
Norm champion of R2P was Canada. Foreign minister Lloyd Axworthy initiated the establishment of the
commission in response to Annan’s challenge in the fall of 1999. Norway and Switzerland and major foundations
such as the Macarthur Foundation and other actors such as the ICRC worked closely with the ICISS to support the
idea.
The norm broker was the International Commission on Intervention and State Sovereignty offers an understanding
of the tension between intervention and state sovereignty and to find common ground for military intervention to
support humanitarian objectives.
From ICISS to the World Summit:

17: Regional integration: modern global political economy is organized on regional basis. Globalization(trade,
foreign investment, international institutions) are directed toward regional partners. From a global advantage point
regional trade institutions are sub-optimal and may show severe obstacles to wider integration. Distant partners tend
not to be security threats. Regions can be created and destroyed, like nations. The bipolarity in Europe from 1945 to
1990 assimilated countries into the Eastern or Western bloc. Since 1990 we can speak again of Central
Europe(Mitteleuropa) in a different way from 1945. Regional integration is a widespread phenomenon that
transpires in almost every part of the world. Almost every member of the World Trade Organization (WTO) is a
member of at least one regional trading arrangements (RTA). The early integration initiatives in the 1950s and
1960s were between advanced countries (North–North integration) or among the developing countries of the South
(South–South integration). In the mid-1980s a new breed of integration emerged among countries with different
levels of economic development. EX: The North American Free Trade Agreement includes Mexico, Canada and the
United States).
Bruce Russett definition of regions: physical proximity and separateness, interdependence and homogeneity. A
second def is to ask how interconnected a set of entities is (more in economic terms) : A region in this sense is a
zone where there is a high density of economic transactions relative to other units. The third criterion for identifying
regions is homogeneity.
Is Europe a homogenous entity, more so than say Latin America which has notable similarities in terms of
language, religion and ethnic backgrounds? R: if we were interested in the degree to which this homogeneity
predicted violent behavior toward one another, we would find that wars were relatively common occurrences
among European countries. The last several decades of European integration is the huge role played by political-
institutional factors: EX: the movement from a decentralized inter-state system towards an institutionalized
supranational polity, the important Treaty amendments of Maastricht and Amsterdam, and the everyday role of
Community institutions such as the Court of Justice, the Commission and the Council of Ministers. Whether one sees
institutions as transforming the nature of inter-state politics ( à la Stone Sweet and Sandholtz) or as playing a more
modest role in a larger system of delegated authority(as Moravcsik) sees it, it would be impossible to omit
institutions from the list of criteria for judging regional integration today.
Alternative of regionalism is globalization or functionalism and bilateralism. Functionalism represented an approach
to collective problem-solving along lines suggested by the task, not along territorial lines. Bilateralism is a method
of dealing with other countries on a one-for-one basis. EX: South Korea, Taiwan, Singapore, Hong Kong) dealt with
the international system on a bilateral basis.
Is regional integration a developmental process, that is, one in which a set of integrating units moves through
numerous phases in orderly fashion, or is it more haphazard and non-linear? Economists have identified a set of
stages, starting from free trade area and moving through customs union, common market, economic union to full
economic integration.
Is there an analogous sequence, however imperfect, for political integration? R: The least integrated form of
relationship is unilateral adjustment to the actions of others.
If policy integration is sufficiently advanced, political institutions may be required to structure and routinize
decision-making, reflecting a more advanced level of integration. With majority decision-making, it is possible for
states to lose out, that is, to be in the minority when policies are made.
Functionalism and neofunctionalism were the progenitors of the field of regional integration. The first has to do
with the power of transnational society, the role of interest groups, professional associations, producer groups and
labor unions, cultural and scientific organizations. Functionalism represents a type of social pluralism. The second
principle has to do with the role of supranational institutions. Social and economic interests, no matter how intense,
may be lacking in organization, knowledge of group predicament, capacity to mobilize interests and access to
policy-making influence. A well-developed demand side is necessary for integration, but it is not sufficient.

18: Economic and political activities increasingly cluster in regional patterns. Western Europe, North America and
East Asia regions are the most prominent zones of global economic integration. The European Union (EU) has
consolidated its status as the champion of regional integration in Europe over the past four decades. The scope of its
activity has expanded from coal and steel in the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) to trade and
investment, agriculture, transport, environment, some aspects of social policy, and finally to economic and monetary
union. The European Commission has substantial power to make proposals and shape legislation that affects
member states . The Council of Ministers, composed of representatives of each of the member states, has the power
to pass regulations that are directly effective in the member states . The European Court of Justice (ECJ) is
spearheading the integration of the economy by rendering judgments that implement the four freedoms of the
Treaty: goods, services, capital and labor . The European Monetary Union (EMU) is in its final phase and is
complete for all practical purposes. A European Central Bank (ECB) exists as well as a common currency, the euro .

Regional integration in the Americas started in the 1950s with the failed attempt to create a Latin America Free
Trade Area (LAFTA). A second wave of integration started in 1988 with the Canada–US Free Trade Agreement
(CUSTA), which became the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) in 1993. Another attempt was the
Common Market of the South (MERCOSUR), established in 1991 by Argentina, Brazil, Paraguay and Uruguay. The
MERCOSUR aims at completing a customs union at the current stage, and its ultimate goal is a common market.
East Asia lags far behind even the Americas in terms of institutionalization Association of the Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN) has proven to be the only sustainable regional cooperation organization in the region. The Asia
Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) had been the sole regional organization in which all the willing East Asian
countries participated in regional economic cooperation. Others: The East Asian Economic Caucus (EAEC). APEC
has avoided becoming a legalistic institution. It has retained this character in spite of US efforts to push APEC in the
direction of legalization and institutionalization.
19: EU, there is a complexity of institutions that represent not only the member states, but also the voters,
functional
groups, and regional and local governments.
1. European Council : After 1974 it was decided to hold meetings at least twice a year of the heads of
state/government of the European Communities (EC) and the President of the European Commission.
These meetings made the European Council responsible for policies in Pillar Two (Common Foreign
and Security Policy) and Pillar Three (Justice and Home Affairs). Its meetings outline the main guidelines for action
by the European Union (EU). The meetings are hosted by the prime minister or president from the country holding
the Council Presidency.
2. Council of the European Union (Council of Ministers) : From enlargement in 2004 there are nine
configurations, a reduction from 22: General Affairs and External Relations (GAER, mainly attended by foreign
ministers); Economic and Financial Affairs (Ecofin, attended by finance ministers); Agriculture and Fisheries;
Transport, Telecommunications and Energy; Competitiveness; Justice and Home Affairs (attended by interior
ministers); Environment; Education, Youth and Culture; Employment, Social Policy, Health and Consumer
Affairs. How the Council deals with matters before it, depends mainly on the treaty basis. Most decisions are by
consensus but when a vote is needed, there are three options: Unanimity was the rule until the 1980s, a simple
majority and a qualified majority vote. Until 2004 the president was elected by alphabetical rotation every six
months, from 2004 a six-month rotation has been agreed. Commission proposals to the Council are sent to the
Committee of Permanent Representatives.

3.The European Commission: The European Commission is the guardian of the treaties that make up the EU, and
has a special role in making EU legislation. Its administration is divided into 23 directorates-general, each dealing
with a particular functional area such as Justice, Freedom and Security, Economic and Financial Affairs, Agriculture
and Rural Development, Enlargement, and External Relations. The Commission has four functions: to ensure the
application of the provisions of the treaties and of the EU institutions; to formulate recommendations or opinions
when required by the treaties, or where the Commission deems it necessary; to use its own powers of decision as set
out in the treaties and to take part in preparing acts of the Council and of the EP; to implement rules laid down by
the Council, according to the competence conferred by the Council.
4. The EP: The parliament’s seat is Strasbourg in France although many meetings, especially of committees, are
held in Brussels in Belgium. Shares legislative powers with the Council of the EU and can accept, reject or amend
legislation sent by the Council, and has to accept some forms of legislation for them to become EU law. It can
dismiss the European Commission. It examines the EU budget which has to be accepted by the EP to become valid.
It appoints the European Ombudsman, and has to be consulted on other appointments, such as those to the European
Court of Justice. It can now suggest laws to the European Commission. Its approval is needed for EU agreements
with third countries and for the appointment of a new Commission.
20. Civil society engages complex regulatory networks that involve multiple types of actors, including global
governance agencies. Civil society today also relates to transplanetary regulatory institutions directly and in their
own right, and not merely as adjuncts of states.
One def of civil soc: for some analysts civil society refers to a general quality of a given human collectivity. From
this perspective a ‘civil’ society is one where people relate with each other on a basis of openness, tolerance, respect,
trust and non-violence. Civil society is taken here to entail a political space where associations of citizens seek,
from outside political parties, to shape societal rules. Activities of civil soc are a decree of citizenship,initiatives are
made collective, c.s. associations scope is to affect the rules.
Another def: as a political space, an arena where citizens congregate to deliberate on the actual and prospective
circumstances of their collective life. This conception overlaps considerably with notions of ‘the public sphere’ and
‘deliberative democracy’.
Another def: the sum total of associational life within a given human collectivity, encompasses every non-official
and nonprofit organisation outside the family, including bodies like recreational clubs that lack an overtly political
character. Collective life of human beings involves more than states and markets.
Another def: as the aggregate of so-called non-governmental organisations. NGO;s : tend to exclude collective
actions.
Regarding cultural diversity civil society engagement of global governance varies between, for example, the actions
of pygmy groups in respect of World Bank support of the Chad-Cameroon oil pipeline, and Japan-based peace
associations advocating a ban on landmines. Religious and secular organisations often co-exist uneasily in civil
society relations with the UN.
Electoral-legislative strategies and civil society operations involve very ways of exacting accountability from
governance authorities. The heavy weight of big business in contemporary advocacy operations may pose a major
challenge to democratic global governance, but this problem is not addressed by wishing business-based citizen
associations out of the definition of civil society. Civil society initiatives can have negative consequences. These
‘uncivil’ potentials are most blatant in activities with criminal, fundamentalist, militarist, racist and terrorist
qualities. After all, Al-Qaeda, Aum Shinrikyo, Gush Emunim, the Interahamwe, the Ku Klux Klan and global
paedophile networks are also ‘associations of citizens that seek, from outside political parties, to shape societal
rules’. Often civil society organisations fail to undertake searching evaluations of their own conduct. Much further
work is needed to enhance transparency, consultation, evaluation and correction in the operations of civil society
organisations as they engage globally.

Global governance institutions generally favour a concept of civil society as NGOs inasmuch as bureaucracies
generally find it more convenient to deal with other bureaucracies. Civil society actions in respect of global
governance vary enormously in size, duration, geographical scope. cultural context , ideologies (conformist to t),
strategies and so on. In terms of issues of concern, the wide spectrum of civil society associations involved in global
affairs includes animal rights activists, anti-poverty movements, business forums, caste solidarity groups, clan and
kinship mobilisations, consumer advocates, democracy promoters, development co-operation initiatives, disabled
persons alliances, environmental campaigns, ethnic lobbies, faith-based associations, human rights advocates,
labour unions, local community groups, peace drives, peasant movements, philanthropic foundations, professional
bodies, relief organisations, research institutes, sexual minorities associations, women’s networks, and youth
groups. As this list again emphasises, civil society in the conception adopted here takes multiple cultural forms and
extends beyond NGOs to other types of actors.
It is important that research and policy consider the full range of possible citizen initiatives in respect of global
governance. Regarding cultural diversity, the content and style of civil society engagement of global governance
varies greatly between, for example, the actions of pygmy groups in respect of World Bank support of the Chad-
Cameroon oil pipeline, and Japan-based peace associations advocating a ban on landmines.
In sum, then, this book takes no a priori position on the desirability or otherwise of civil society involvement in
global governance. The starting point is that global governance suffers major shortfalls in accountability and that
civil society could, in principle, help to close these gaps. However, the actual nature of civil society influences on
global governance accountability, positive and/or negative, cannot be established in advance. The relationship
between civil society and accountability in global governance is anything but straightforward. the accountability
challenges that the global governance arrangement in question faces, including in particular the shortfalls that
remain after considering channels other than civil society (such as governments, parliaments and mass media);