CARIÑO, MARIANNE GAIL Z.

AB POLITICAL SCIENCE IV-A

1. Do international organizations matter for international relations and politics?

Yes. It matters for international relations and politics because it serves as an

avenue for states to connect with one another. It is often what states follow. These
organizations set the rules for behavior and activity among state and non-state actors in
the international system.1 International organizations wield much more power because
member-nations want to belong to the group and volunteer to the norms of the
organizations.2 It holds much more weight and has much more of a chance of making a
difference on the international stage. At the end of the day, nations will only listen to an
IO if there is incentive to do so.

International Organizations play a vital role in world politics as they work

for the protection of peace and international security, the protection of health, fair
terms of employment, the supervision of atomic energy, or global rules of trade.
International organizations promote cooperation between nation-states as they serve as a
forum for discussion and dialogue; they set up rules for the international system, establish
mechanisms of supervision, and impose and authorize sanctions. They sometimes even
gain a certain degree of autonomy or in other words, they are more than the sum of their
members.3 Also, they provide expertise and know-how and in many cases play an
important role in the implementation of governmental policies.

2. What are the effects of international organizations to international relations?

It helps nations for easier cooperation with one another. With the establishment of
international organizations, these nation-states have come to the conclusion that only
institutionalized cooperation with other nation-states serve their interests best and
helps to solve problems which they cannot solve on their own as the problems are
often transboundary.

3. Why do international organizations exist?

International organizations exist for a variety of reasons, such as controlling the

proliferation of conventional and nuclear weapons, supervising trade, maintaining
military alliances, ending world hunger, and fostering the spread of democracy and
peace.

4. What are their roles in solving global problems?

The roles of international organizations vary on what kind of problems arise in the
global or international aspect. It should serve as a forum for the determination of

1
http://internationalrelations.org/international-organizations/
2
https://byuipolsc375.wordpress.com/2013/01/12/do-international-organizations-matter/
3
https://www.omicsgroup.org/journals/international-organizations-matter-2169-0170-1000e118.pdf
CARIÑO, MARIANNE GAIL Z. AB POLITICAL SCIENCE IV-A

international public interest, promote the participation of nonstate actors, and work to
expand and reshape the international legal framework.

First, international organizations provide a mechanism for great-power

collusion. Great powers usually benefit from the existing order and have an interest in
maintaining it. After all, the fact that they are great powers suggests that they are
doing well under existing rules and institutions. International organizations may not
be useful if great-power interests collide, but do permit great powers to control other
states in international systems. Second, international organizations are useful for
making minor adjustments within the existing order, while the basic underlying
principle and norms remain uncompromised. An enduring international order must be
flexible to account for changes in national interest and for rising and declining states.
Third, international organizations can be agents of international socialization.
International organizations legitimize the existing order, thereby gaining the
acceptance of the status quo by those who are dominated. Finally, “international
institutions are the ‘brass ring’ so to speak: the right to create and control them is
precisely what the most powerful states have fought for in history’s most destructive
wars” (Schweller & Preiss, 1997: 13)4

5. Where do they fit in international relations literature?

They fit in the theories of Realism, Liberalism, Constructivism, and Marxism.

 Realism is one of the main theories in the study of international relations. Realists
make a number of points, but their main focus is on the concepts of power and
security as they relate to states in the international system. Realists argue that power
and security are what really matter in international relations. And because of this
attention to power and those who emphasize state security, for many realists,
international organizations serve only to help a state reach its objective in that idea of
security or increased power. Thus, for a realist, international organizations either
don’t matter very much, particularly compared to individual states, or if they are
worth noting, it is only in that IOs function for the interests of the states. And while
the state may at times cooperate with other states on international matters, to many
realists, once we are speaking about actions against a state’s true interest,
international organizations will be highly unlikely to be influential (Pease, 2012: 57).
Realists do not believe that an international organization can stop powerful countries
from doing something, particularly if their interests are not aligned on a said issue
(Pease, 2012).
 The international relations theory of liberalism takes a very different position
regarding international organizations and international law. For a liberalist who
advocates the possibility of cooperation in international relations, international
organizations are quintessential, as they not only allow a physical platform and space
4
http://internationalrelations.org/international-organizations/
CARIÑO, MARIANNE GAIL Z. AB POLITICAL SCIENCE IV-A

for state cooperation, but within the international organizations’ charter is often a set
of requirements that states and non-state actors have regarding this cooperation in
international affairs. International organizations are not formed for calculated
interests of one state (solely for their own power) (there there is not a need for a
hegemon to exist for an international organization to continue functioning), but
rather, these organizations are created because of their need with regards to
international issues (Pease, 2012). Thus, for a state, they have a lot of positive
incentives to join an international organization.

Furthermore, they challenge the idea that the international system is all about the need
for military power (Pease, 2012). Thus, for liberals, international organizations are
avenues for diplomacy, cooperation, and international peace. They often point to
various achievements on human rights, environmental policies, among other issues
such as economic cooperation and interdependence to illustrate the positive role of
international organizations in international affairs. In fact, not only do international
organizations allow actors to come together to solve issues, but their presence more
specifically helps to circumvent the “collective action problem” issue, where, by
working together, much more can be accomplished than if each state or actor works
individually (Pease, 2012).

Liberalists argue that the more interdependent countries become with one another, the
more of a need there will be for international organizations to help in the sharing of
information, and with regards to coordination and cooperation efforts (Pease, 2012).

And unlike realists’ views of international law, “[f]or liberals, the rule of law is the
foundation of society and international law is the foundation of global society”
(Pease, 2012: 72). International law is a key element in the evolution of international
human rights, international environmental issues, as well as other themes such as just
war theory (with the formation of international courts such as the International Court
of Justice (ICJ) and the International Criminal Court (ICC).

For liberalists, international organizations not only get over the ‘collective action’
problem issue of anarchy, but they also help advance economic conditions in the
word, help foster common norms, they allow multinational corporations to have a role
in bringing socitiest closer to one another through the international market, and lastly,
based on the issue of the rule of law, international organizations have offer just to
those who are victims of rights abuses (Pease, 2012).

 Constructivism is seen as one of the newer, yet also highly influential international
relations theories. Constructivism suggests that international relations, and within that
international organizations, are in and of themselves not necessarily pessimistic and
towards issues such as power and security, nor are they innately positive and
cooperative in their nature. But rather, relationships and institutions are viewed a
certain way depending on the actors. As Hurd (2014) explains, “actors behave toward
the world around them in ways that are shaped by the ideas that they hold about the
world, and that these ideas are generated by past interactions (23). Therefore, while
CARIÑO, MARIANNE GAIL Z. AB POLITICAL SCIENCE IV-A

the past helps form how actors interact, this is not permanent like a realist or liberalist
may have one belief; interactions, as well as negative or positive perceptions, are not
infinite, but can be altered (Hurd, 2014).
 Feminism in international relations looks at the role of gender in international affairs.
They example how leaders view gender, policies related to gender, as well as human
rights abuses based on gender. In addition, they also bring to light the role of women
in international relations; historically, since unfortunately and quite sadly, as some
such as Pease (2012) argue, “[d]iscussion of women’s roles, contributions, and issues
are rare and tend to be trivialized because the female experience is not as valued as
the male experience” (93). Thankfully, due to the work of feminists, this has been
changing, and women and their countless positive actions in international affairs are
now beginning to be given the equal importance that they so rightly deserve. In terms
of feminist theory and international organizations, feminists attempt to examine how
gender plays a role in terms of international organizations, whether it is through
NGOs, jobs in such organizations, issues of equal pay, or their role in policy
formation on issues that are taking precedent at international organizations (Pease,
2012).
 Marxism as it relates to international relations and international organizations looks at
the role of economic power as it relates to international affairs. To some marxists,
international organizations are merely tools used by more economically powerful
states to impose their control and influence over less economically strong states.
Thus, those who are economically dependent on other states and international
organizations are often the ones who suffer in the international system. Thus, even the
economic system itself, in the case of capitalism today, is viewed by some as another
form of exploitation and control, as they are seen by some “to promote capitalism”
(Pease, 2012). International Organizations such the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund have received a great deal of criticism by Marxists and others for
what they see as the promotion of capitalist-liberalist policies, often as the expense of
what is best for the citizens of that state, with some suggesting that the international
system–in the context of human rights and development–cannot and will not improve
as long as there are conditions (which often are manifested in liberal market
economic policies) that are set by international organizations such as the World Bank
and International Monetary Fund (Pease, 2012: 87).

6. How do these international organizations accomplish their goals and objectives?

They accomplish their goals by carrying out what they are meant to do and
carrying out their roles because they create goals for a reason and for it to be achieved
after all.