DOCSLIB.ORG

Can the World Be Governed?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Can the World Be Governed? Can the World Be Governed? Studies in International Governance is a research and policy analysis series from the Centre for International Governance Innovation (cigi) and WLU Press. Titles in the series provide timely consideration of emerging trends and current challenges in the broad field of international governance. Representing diverse perspectives on important global issues, the series will be of interest to students and academics while serving also as a reference tool for policy-makers and experts engaged in policy discussion. To reach the greatest possible audience and ultimately shape the policy dialogue, each volume will be made available both in print through WLU Press and, twelve months after pub- lication, accessible for free online through the igloo Network under the Creative Com- mons License. Can theWorld Be Governed? Possibilities for Effective Multilateralism *** Alan S. Alexandroff, editor Wilfrid Laurier University Press acknowledges the financial support of the Government of Canada through its Book Publishing Industry Development Program for its publishing activities. Wilfrid Laurier University Press acknowledges the financial support of the Centre for International Gov- ernance Innovation. The Centre for International Governance Innovation gratefully acknowl- edges support for its work program from the Government of Canada and the Government of Ontario. Library and Archives Canada Cataloguing in Publication Can the world be governed? : possibilities for effective multilateralism / Alan S. Alexandroff, editor. (Studies in international governance series) Co-published by: Centre for International Governance Innovation. Includes bibliographical references and index. ISBN 978-1-55458-041-5 1. International organization. 2. International cooperation. 3. International rela- tions. 4. International economic relations. 5. Security, International. I. Alexandroff, Alan S. II. Centre for International Governance Innovation III. Series. JZ1318.C36 2008 341.2 C2007-907600-9 Co-published with the Centre for International Governance Innovation. Cover image by Stefan Hermans. Cover design by Blakeley. Text design by Barry A. Norris. © 2008 The Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI) and Wilfrid Laurier University Press Every reasonable effort has been made to acquire permission for copyright material used in this text, and to acknowledge all such indebtedness accurately. Any errors and omissions called to the publisher’s attention will be corrected in future printings. ●ϱ This book is printed on Ancient Forest Friendly paper (100% post-consumer recycled). Printed in Canada No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system or transmitted, in any form or by any means, without the prior written consent of the publisher or a licence from The Canadian Copyright Licensing Agency (Access Copyright). For an Access Copyright licence, visit www.accesscopyright.ca or call toll free to 1-800-893-5777. Contents *** Introduction Alan S.Alexandroff | 1 Incentive Compatibility and Global Governance: Existential Multilateralism, a Weakly Confederal World, and Hegemony | 17 Arthur A. Stein A Grand Coalition and International Governance | 85 Richard Rosecrance America and the Reform of Global Institutions |110 G. John Ikenberry Two Challenges to Institutionalism |139 Daniel W.Drezner International Institutions and Collective Authorization of the Use of Force |160 James D. Fearon Multilateralism on Trial: From the 2005 UN Summit to Today’s Reality |196 Ferry de Kerckhove Facing the Global Problems of Development | 241 Paul Collier Can the Trading System Be Governed? Institutional Implications of the WTO’s Suspended Animation | 289 Robert Wolfe vi | Contents Slipping into Obscurity: Crisis and Institutional Reform at the IMF | 353 Eric Helleiner and Bessma Momani A Comment on the Effective Possibilities of Multilateralism | 389 Patricia Goff Conclusion | 403 Alan S.Alexandroff Contributors | 417 Index | 423 Introduction Alan S. Alexandroff * * * In the foreword to a May 2007 publication of the Centre for International Governance Innovation (CIGI), John English, the think tank’s executive director, summarizes CIGI’s mandate as follows: CIGI strives to find and develop ideas for global change by studying, advising and networking with scholars, practitioners and governments on the character and desired reforms of multilateral governance. (Dayaratna-Banda and Whalley 2007) With evident editor’s prejudice, I believe this volume on global governance reform fits well within that mandate; I also believe it achieves a degree of success. The evolution of the volume and its chapters on global governance reform require some elaboration. Assembling the authors and their various perspectives on global governance reform took considerable effort, as I describe more fully at the end of this Introduction. One task, however, engendered some notable discussion among the authors and CIGI officials: identifying an appropriate title for this collection of global governance issues. At CIGI’s 2006 annual meeting, at which a number of the authors presented their papers, several had time between panels to ponder an 2 l Alan S. Alexandroff appropriate “cap” or “umbrella” for the volume. Out of those discussions and several subsequent editorial ones, and not without some controversy, the volume carries the main title, Can the World Be Governed? One concern raised in the discussions about the title was whether readers might imagine this volume to concern itself with world government or perhaps some form of global federalism. Ferry de Kerckhove raises this perspective directly, noting that it is expressed by idealists who urge “a transformation from a multilateral system at the service of national interests to a true system of world governance” (236). This is not, however, what the authors focus on in this book—indeed, given their theoretical, policy, and practical interests, such a focus would be unlikely. As contemporary “students” of global politics, and with many international relations specialists among them, they recognize the continuing critical importance of sovereignty and national interest in international relations. Thus, the principal attention throughout the book is on multilateralism—what Arthur Stein describes in the following broad foundational terms: Although unilateralism remains an ever-present possibility and although international organizations reflect the power and interests of their mem- bers, the growing number of such organizations, as well as international laws and agreements, over the past century makes multilateralism an existential reality. (49–50) Stein also suggests that the contemporary global structure of states is a form of “weak confederalism.” Multilateralism, then, is the key to global governance and its reform. Yet multilateralism is not restricted to a common or simple definition. As broadly understood in these pages, multilateralism includes multistate international organizations but, more broadly and additionally, principles, rules, and norms that apply to these states. Looking at multilateralism in the context of global governance, as we do throughout this volume, is designed to assess the adequacy of a number of key international organizations of global governance, generally in a formal, but increasingly also an informal, institutional form. But whereas international lawyers—one strong audience examining international organizations—have been drawn principally to the institutionalization, if not the legalization, of international organizations in the post–World War II Introduction I 3 era, political scientists, including many of the authors in this volume, have approached international institutions much more broadly.1 Where the lawyers focus on the names, addresses, and secretariats—in other words, the more formal international institutional aspects—political scientists broaden the multilateralism focus. As Stein describes elsewhere (forth- coming), political scientists expanded their examination to include first regimes and then institutions, or the “rules of the game,” where, among other things, both formal and informal organizations reside. Indeed, Richard Rosecrance divides international institutions into not just formal and infor- mal ones but “hard” and “soft” and even “medium” institutions before concluding that a Great Power coalition—again, an informal organization— “when it can be achieved, is the most effective international regulator” (86). For Rosecrance, the coalition is the operative institution. Thus, not only do the chapters in this volume include analysis with formal/informal dimensions but also analysis in which organizations, principles, norms, and rules are relevant to looking at multilateralism and the adequacy of global governance and reform proposals. Equally, in the circumstances in which these organizations and behaviors—the “rules of the game”—seem wanting, a number of the authors suggest what kinds of reforms might improve global governance—that is, global economic development, security, or prosperity—in the wider terms international relations scholars have identified. In analyzing and recommending reforms of current multilateral insti- tutions, the authors naturally engage the significant global governance reform literature. Stein tackles analytically the reform wave; indeed, many of the chapters are grounded in the reform proposals in this literature or made by policy makers. With authors examining so many dimensions of multilateralism, including international
Load more

Recommended publications
  • He True Aim of China in Setting up the AIIB Challenging the International Financial Tsystem Or Securing Multilateral Credibility? Author Jianmin Jin by Jianmin Jin
    COVER STORY • Global Growth Strategy • 3-1 he True Aim of China in Setting up the AIIB Challenging the International Financial TSystem or Securing Multilateral Credibility? Author Jianmin Jin By Jianmin Jin The Chinese-initiative Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) has been generating many headlines on the economic front of late — not without justification given its impact, sizeable enough to blow a big hole in the international development financing order. There is a wide range of opinion regarding the true aim of China in taking the lead to establish the AIIB, such as challenging the international financial order, securing geopolitical influence, securing benefits for the national economy, and establishing a new facility to mediate between capital surplus countries and capital deficit countries. My conclusion after examining the economic relationship between China and the rest of the world and various information coming out of China is that the true aim of China is both economic and diplomatic/ political: the former to secure the multilateral creditworthiness that is unavailable to China on its own, the latter to “exercise cooperative influence” (neutralize the idea of “China as a threat” by providing other countries with economic benefits through economic channels). New Silk Road Vision: “Stepped-up” Version regions, infrastructure was slow to develop, and the open-door policy of the Open-Door Policy was limited in scope. Moreover, the neighboring countries there were largely developing countries, so expectations for attracting capital and The Chinese initiative to establish the AIIB is founded on a regional technology appeared slim. development strategy: the “New Silk Road” strategy, or the “One Belt But 30 years later, things have changed.
    [Show full text]
  • 1 “The Insular Advantage: Geography and the Durability of American
    “The Insular Advantage: Geography and the Durability of American Alliances” John M. Schuessler Bush School of Government and Public Service, Texas A&M University Joshua R. Shifrinson Frederik S. Pardee School of Global Studies, Boston University October 2018 Abstract: President Donald Trump has not been shy about playing hard-ball with close allies. This has led to concerns that Trump poses a unique threat to American alliances. Theoretically, these concerns are consistent with an influential line of argument that points to strategic restraint and reassurance – via binding institutions - as what sets American alliances apart. The fact of the matter is that Trump is not the first American president to play hard-ball with close allies, which leads to a two-part puzzle: What explains the United States’ track record of alliance coercion? And how has its alliance network remained so robust, given this track record? Our argument centers on geography, specifically the fact that the United States is the insular power par excellence. Insularity, we argue, affords the United States two strategic advantages. First, it is free to roam. Second, it is an attractive security provider for states in geopolitically crowded neighborhoods. Together, these advantages account for the United States’ track record of alliance coercion, as well as the limited damage that has been done to core alliances in the process. We demonstrate the value-added of our argument with a case study from the early Cold War, during NATO's formative period. From his election campaign onward, President Donald Trump has not been shy about playing hard-ball with even close allies.
    [Show full text]
  • From Poverty to Power, 2Nd Edition
    PART FIVE THE inTERnaTIOnal SYSTEM WHO RULES THE WORLD? 241 THE INTERNATIONAL FINANCIAL SYSTEm 244 THE INTERNATIONAL TRADING SYSTEm 260 THE INTERNATIONAL AID SYSTEm 289 HOW CHANGE HAppENS: THE 2005 GLENEAGLES AGREEMENTS 311 INTERNATIONAL RULES AND NORMS 313 THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM FOR HUMANITARIAN RELIEF AND PEACE 317 HOW CHANGE HAppENS: LANDMINES, AN ARMS CONTROL SUCCESS STORY 333 CLIMATE CHANGE 335 GLOBAL GOVERNANCE IN THE TWENTY-FIRST CENTURY 351 WHO RULES THE WORLD? Global institutions such as the World Bank, the IMF, and the United Nations, transnational corporations, rich country governments, (and even interna- tional non-government organisations such as Oxfam) are sometimes viewed as the most powerful and dynamic forces in the fight against poverty and inequality. This book has argued, on the contrary, that the main actors are poor men and women and their national governments – a combination we have called active citizens and effective states. This is not to deny the power of global institutions. In tackling global poverty and inequality they can, by both action and omission, be either part of the solution or part of the problem. They can foster efforts to build an effective, accountable state and an active citizenry, or they can under- mine or even crush them. This part of the book examines those aspects of the international system most relevant to the fight against poverty and inequality, and explores how global institutions can be placed at the service of development. The web of international institutions, laws, regulations,
    [Show full text]
  • Why the Liberal World Order Will Survive G
    ROUNDTABLE: RISING POWERS AND THE INTERNATIONAL ORDER Why the Liberal World Order Will Survive G. John Ikenberry he international order built and led by the United States and its part- ners is in crisis. In the Middle East, East Asia, and even in Western T Europe, long-standing regional orders are in transition or breaking down. Global international agreements and institutions—across the realms of trade, arms control, environment, human rights—seem to be weakening. For seventy years the United States has stood at the center of a Western-oriented, liberal international system, organized around openness, rules, and multilateral cooperation. After the cold war this American liberal hegemonic order spread outward and seemed to offer the world a universal logic for global politics. But that unipolar moment has now passed. Today, the United States and the Western industrial democracies, roiled by nationalist and populist upheavals, have turned inward and appear less committed to their own post-war liberal international project. The crisis of the American-led international order would seem to open up new opportunities for rising states—notably China, India, and other non-Western developing countries—to reshape the global order. But in what ways are rising states seeking to reform or reorganize the rules and institutions of the post-war era? Do they seek to rise up and integrate into the existing international order or do they seek to transform it? Are they “stakeholder” or “revisionist” states? Over the past decade, these questions have stood at the center of debates about the future of the global system. Indeed, the Obama administration placed the chal- lenge of integrating rising states at the center of its foreign policy.
    [Show full text]
  • Review of Local and Global Impacts of Volcanic Eruptions and Disaster Management Practices: the Indonesian Example
    geosciences Review Review of Local and Global Impacts of Volcanic Eruptions and Disaster Management Practices: The Indonesian Example Mukhamad N. Malawani 1,2, Franck Lavigne 1,3,* , Christopher Gomez 2,4 , Bachtiar W. Mutaqin 2 and Danang S. Hadmoko 2 1 Laboratoire de Géographie Physique, Université Paris 1 Panthéon-Sorbonne, UMR 8591, 92195 Meudon, France; [email protected] 2 Disaster and Risk Management Research Group, Faculty of Geography, Universitas Gadjah Mada, Yogyakarta 55281, Indonesia; [email protected] (C.G.); [email protected] (B.W.M.); [email protected] (D.S.H.) 3 Institut Universitaire de France, 75005 Paris, France 4 Laboratory of Sediment Hazards and Disaster Risk, Kobe University, Kobe City 658-0022, Japan * Correspondence: [email protected] Abstract: This paper discusses the relations between the impacts of volcanic eruptions at multiple- scales and the related-issues of disaster-risk reduction (DRR). The review is structured around local and global impacts of volcanic eruptions, which have not been widely discussed in the literature, in terms of DRR issues. We classify the impacts at local scale on four different geographical features: impacts on the drainage system, on the structural morphology, on the water bodies, and the impact Citation: Malawani, M.N.; on societies and the environment. It has been demonstrated that information on local impacts can Lavigne, F.; Gomez, C.; be integrated into four phases of the DRR, i.e., monitoring, mapping, emergency, and recovery. In Mutaqin, B.W.; Hadmoko, D.S. contrast, information on the global impacts (e.g., global disruption on climate and air traffic) only fits Review of Local and Global Impacts the first DRR phase.
    [Show full text]
  • Outline Lecture Three: Decolonization Vs. Neocolonialism I) “A World Safe
    Outline Lecture Three: Decolonization vs. Neocolonialism I) “A World Safe for Democracy”? a) Amritsar, India in 1919 i) Demonstrations against the Rowlatt Bills ii) General Reginald Dyer’s response and rationale on behalf of the British Raj (1) George Orwell’s “Shooting an Elephant” b) Versailles and China’s May Fourth Movement 1919 i) What were the catalysts behind the May Fourth Movement? ii) May Fourth’s Ambivalent relationship with the West (1) Western-inspired ideals of democracy and self-determination (2) E.g. Chen Duxiu’s New Youth c) Impetus for Social Reforms i) Many saw anti-imperialism and anti-feudalism as synonymous ii) Associated traditional China’s feudal society with gender inequality (1) Call for women’s entry into the public sphere II) Revolutionary Movements in China 1911-1949 a) Key Dates: i) 1911 Revolution–Sun Yat-sen’s overthrow of Qing (Manchu) Dynasty and founding of the Republic ii) 1919 Beginning of May Fourth Movement iii) 1926-1928 Chiang Kai-shek’s Northern Expedition and national unification iv) 1937-1945 Sino-Japanese War v) 1949 Communist take-over of the mainland under Mao Zedong; Nationalist Party under Chiang retreat to Taiwan b) Dr. Sun Yat-sen and the Founding of the Republic i) Experience and exposure of an expatriate and exile ii) Three Principles of the People (1923) (1) First Principle: Nationalism (2) Second Principle: Democracy (a) Egalitarian ideals since antiquity (i) Mencius’s justification for Gemin or “revoking the mandate” (b) Five-power Constitutional Republic (3) Third Principle: Livelihood
    [Show full text]
  • Non-Alignment and the United States
    Robert B. Rakove. Kennedy, Johnson, and the Nonaligned World. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 2012. 315 pp. $31.99, paper, ISBN 978-1-107-44938-1. Reviewed by Simon Stevens Published on H-1960s (August, 2014) Commissioned by Zachary J. Lechner (Centenary College of Louisiana) The central historical problem that Robert B. of a policy of “engagement” of the “nonaligned Rakove sets out to solve in Kennedy, Johnson, and world.” The subsequent souring of relations was a the Nonaligned World is how to explain the re‐ consequence of the abandonment of that ap‐ markable transformation in the relationship be‐ proach under Lyndon Johnson. Central to tween the United States and much of the postcolo‐ Rakove’s argument is the distinction between nial world over the course of the 1960s. The assas‐ Kennedy’s approach to states in the Third World sination of John F. Kennedy in 1963 was met with that were “aligned” in the Cold War and those that genuine grief in many postcolonial states, reflect‐ were “non-aligned.” Common historiographic ing the positive and hopeful light in which the characterizations of Kennedy’s policy toward the United States under Kennedy had been widely Third World as aggressive and interventionist viewed. And yet by the second half of the decade, have failed to appreciate the significance of this the United States “had come to be seen not as an distinction, Rakove suggests. In the cases of states ally to Third World aspirations but as a malevo‐ that the U.S. government perceived to be already lent foe. Polarizing accusatory rhetoric unusual in aligned with the West, especially in Latin America the early 1960s became unremarkable by the and Southeast Asia, the Kennedy administration decade’s end, emerging as a lasting feature of was intolerant of changes that might endanger world politics, a recognizable precursor to con‐ that alignment, and pursued forceful interven‐ temporary denunciations of the United States” (p.
    [Show full text]
  • Of the Conventional Wisdom
    M A SS A C H USE tt S I N S T I T U T E O F T EC H NOLOGY M A SS A C H USE tt S I N S T I T U T E O F T EC H NOLOGY April 2008 MI T C EN T E R F O R I N T ERN at ION A L St U D IES 08-04 of the Conventional Wisdom The Audit of Wilson, Bush, and the Conventional Wisdom Evolution of Liberal Foreign Policy In this series of essays, MIT’s Center Tony Smith for International Studies tours the Tufts University horizon of conventional wisdoms that define U.S. foreign policy, and put them to the test of data and history. By subjecting particularly well-accepted he first subject to discuss in considering the future of the liberal inter- ideas to close scrutiny, our aim is Tnationalist agenda is the importance of the democratization project to re-engage policy and opinion leaders on topics that are too easily passing to the definition of Wilsonianism. The second is the meaning of multilat- such scrutiny. We hope that this will lead to further debate and inquiries, eralism. In the first case, Thomas Knock and Anne-Marie Slaughter argue with a result we can all agree on: in a forthcoming volume that democratization was never an important part better foreign policies that lead to a more peaceful and prosperous world. of Wilsonianism; that, instead, multilateralism is the key to liberal interna- Authors in this series are available to the press and policy community.
    [Show full text]
  • Poverty and the Struggle to Survive in the Fuuta Tooro Region Of
    What Development? Poverty and the Struggle to Survive in the Fuuta Tooro Region of Southern Mauritania Dissertation Presented in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree Doctor of Philosophy in the Graduate School of The Ohio State University By Christopher Hemmig, M.A. Graduate Program in Near Eastern Languages and Cultures. The Ohio State University 2015 Dissertation Committee: Sabra Webber, Advisor Morgan Liu Katey Borland Copyright by Christopher T. Hemmig 2015 Abstract Like much of Subsaharan Africa, development has been an ever-present aspect to postcolonial life for the Halpulaar populations of the Fuuta Tooro region of southern Mauritania. With the collapse of locally historical modes of production by which the population formerly sustained itself, Fuuta communities recognize the need for change and adaptation to the different political, economic, social, and ecological circumstances in which they find themselves. Development has taken on a particular urgency as people look for effective strategies to adjust to new realities while maintaining their sense of cultural identity. Unfortunately, the initiatives, projects, and partnerships that have come to fruition through development have not been enough to bring improvements to the quality of life in the region. Fuuta communities find their capacity to develop hindered by three macro challenges: climate change, their marginalized status within the Mauritanian national community, and the region's unfavorable integration into the global economy by which the local markets act as backwaters that accumulate the detritus of global trade. Any headway that communities can make against any of these challenges tends to be swallowed up by the forces associated with the other challenges.
    [Show full text]
  • SOUTHEAST ASIAN GLOBALIZATION Responses To
    Loh & NIAS Democracy in Asia series, 10 Öjendal (eds) SOUTHEAST ASIAN RESPONSES TO GLOBALIZATION Restructuring Governance and Deepening Democracy SOUTHEAST ASIAN RESPONSES TO GLOBALIZATION Edited by Francis Loh Kok Wah and Joakim Öjendal It is now apparent, especially in the aftermath of the regional financial crisis of 1997, that globalization has been impacting upon the Southeast Asian economies and societies in new and harrowing ways, a theme of many SOUTHEAST ASIAN recent studies. Inadvertently, these studies of globalization have also high- lighted that the 1980s and 1990s debate on democratization in the region Responses to – which focused on the emergence of the middle classes, the roles of new social movements, NGOs and the changing relations between state and civil society – might have been overly one-dimensional. GLOBALIZATION This volume revisits the theme of democratization via the lenses of globalization, understood economically, politically and culturally. Although globalization increasingly frames the processes of democracy and develop- restructuring governance and ment, nonetheless, the governments and peoples of Southeast Asia have deepening democracy been able to determine the pace and character – even the direction of these processes – to a considerable extent. This collection of essays (by some distin- guished senior scholars and other equally perceptive younger ones) focuses on this globalization–democratization nexus and shows, empirically and ana- lytically, how governance is being restructured and democracy sometimes
    [Show full text]
  • What Is the Liberal International Order?
    Policy Essay | Liberal International Order Project | 2017 | No.17 What is the Liberal International Order? By Hans Kundnani In the last five years or so, U.S. and European foreign policy think tanks have become increasingly preoccupied with threats to the set of norms, rules, and institutions known as the liberal international order, especially from “revisionist” rising powers and above all authoritarian powers like China and Russia. But even more recently it has also become increasingly apparent that support for the liberal international order Although Western analysts and policymakers in Europe and the United States is declining as well. often to refer to the “liberal international order,” the This has become particularly clear since the British phrase is far from self-explanatory. In particular, it is vote to the leave the European Union last June and the not obvious in what sense the liberal international U.S. presidential election last November — not least order is “liberal.” The lack of precision about what is because the United Kingdom and the United States meant by the liberal international order is a problem are two of the countries historically most associated with liberalism and were generally thought to be most because it obscures the complexities of the concept committed to it. and inhibits self-criticism by Western policymakers, especially Atlanticists and “pro-Europeans” who seek However, although the phrase “liberal international to defend the liberal international order. order” is widely used, it is far from self-explanatory. The liberal international order has evolved Theorists of the liberal international order understand since its creation after World War II and has different it as an “open and rule-based international order” that is “enshrined in institutions such as the United elements — some of which are in tension with each Nations and norms such as multilateralism.”1 But this other.
    [Show full text]
  • The Presidency of George W. Bush Has Stimulated Extensive Research on the Part of Academic Scholars. the Pronouncement of A
    Brooke A. Wyatt Unilateralism as a Foreign Policy Strategy: Its Application and Indoctrination The presidency of George W. Bush has stimulated extensive research on the part of academic scholars. The pronouncement of a “new doctrine” comprised of ideas like preemption, and the notion that the war on terror cannot be won on the defensive has caused many to speculate whether or not this new grand strategy for national security will dominate other areas of the United States’ policy making as well. A variety of proposed explanations and predictions have been made regarding the ostensibly new and atypical actions of the US. Scholars like John Ikenberry and Joseph Nye argue that Bush Doctrine tactics and the “show of arrogance on foreign policy” (Nye, 2002) are exclusive to the Bush administration and represent only a temporary departure from the US’s best interest approach, multilateralism. Ikenberry argues that radical neo-conservatives have pushed the US to a more unilateralist strategy, but the end of their influence on policy will allow the US to once again resume multilateralism as the optimal and seemingly only option (Ikenberry, 2004). John Ruggie defines political multilateralism as “…a form of engagement that coordinates relations among three or more states on the basis of generalized principles of conduct.” He elaborates to say that the application of multilateralism in foreign policy must include firstly: “an investment in the creation and maintenance of international institutions who serve to facilitate coordination” and secondly: “compliance with rules, norms, principles, and decision making processes of these institutions in an equal balance with all other complying states” (Ruggie, 1993).
    [Show full text]