Escolar Documentos
Profissional Documentos
Cultura Documentos
The Unruled World: The Case for Good Enough Global Governance
In the article by Stewart Patrick, the writer argues that because any watertight
global organization is not feasible and practicable, good enough global
governance should do the job.
Here, the writer outlines various points. He states the difference between national
governance and global governance saying that while the former is straightforward
type that is provided for by actual governments, the concept of the latter is complex
and ambiguous. Global governance is identified as the collective effort by sovereign
states, international organizations, and other non-state actors in issues that
transcend national frontiers.
The centerpiece of global governance is United Nations, the writer says. United
Nation consists of various parts whose effectiveness is questioned by the writer.
Security Council, he argues, lags in its implementation of what it promises
theoretically. Another point that mars Security Council is its indecisiveness in
expansion of permanent members. The writer does not stop with Security Council
saying that the dysfunction of UN extends beyond Security Council to UN Secretariat
and UN General Assembly.
Global Governance, the writer argues has no power to enforce compliance with
collective decisions and that it is an ungainly patchwork of formal and informal
institutions. Those institutions include Regional Institutions, Ad hoc coalition,
Multilateral Alliances, Security Groups among others. There are also increasing
number of non-state actors who shape global agendas, define new rules and
monitor compliance with international obligations.
The writer dismisses the growing number of ad hoc coalitions whose effectiveness,
he argues, is temporary. He gives the instance of G-20 whose scope ended after a
few years of its establishment. This is in line with the G-7 (now expanded to G-8,
which is again attacked by the writer for incorporating Russia with whom rest of the
countries do not share ideology) whose receding momentum can be noticed. BRICS
is another co-operation that is dismissed by the writer because of inherent conflict
between the member states (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) despite
their new-formed coalition which speaks against the Western intervention.
The issue of Contested Commons which includes Maritime, Outer Space, and
Cyberspace Domains is talked about next. These commons encompass the domains
that carry the flow of goods, capital, people, ideas on which globalization rests. But
the problem as Stewart Patrick points out is being caused due to crowding of
commons and that the previous US hegemony/ advantage is falling.
The case of South China Sea is an instance wherein the conflict regarding commons
is visible. This dispute involves China, Taiwan, Brunei, Malaysia, Philippines, and
Vietnam. The solution for this problem can be found following the Ilusilissat
Declaration of 2005 among five Arctic nations Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia,
US. The problem of US, a major power, not being a member of UN Convention on
Law of Sea (UNCLOS) renders the convention weak.
While the increasing number of the clutter (formal and informal institutions) helps
division of complex transnational problems the writer is not convinced regarding the
effectiveness of them. Also argued point is that Global disorder is here to stay, so
the challenge is to make it work as well as possible. For this, the writer advocates
the idea of collective action which includes ad hoc coalition of the willing, regional,
and sub-regional instruments as well as informal codes of conduct which can be
facilitated by diplomats and other interested parties. Although this will not bring
about a smooth global co-operation, the writer concludes by saying that it would
be better than nothing, and it might even work.