Theories of Intl Relations Blog Posts

International Organizations are institutions drawing membership from at least three states, having activities in several states, and whose members are held together by a formal agreement. Many international organizations are intergovernmental such as the United Nations, World Health Organization, and World Labor Organization, NATO, and OPEC. Each are formulated of multiple governments which forms the international organization and serves a main purpose regarding international relations. There are also big corporations that make up international organizations such as Apple, Toyota, Coca-Cola, Amazon, Nike, and many others. Each international organization has many different functions such as collecting information and monitoring trends, delivering services and aid, and providing forums for bargaining and settling disputes.

When it comes to international relations each institution works together with other states to provide a service whether it’s politically or economically to achieve goals and objectives within the authority of each state members.
International Organizations plays a major role in Globalization as there is an increase in the flow of goods, services, people, money, and ideas. In Pease section on Liberalism on International Organizations states that, “International organizations help states overcome collective action problems and promote economic prosperity and global welfare” (Pease p.72). International organizations can provide security, trade opportunities, stronger relationships, and a more powerful voice in the international arena with regarding international relations. An example of this would be the United Nations as the UN provides resources to promote development, improve living standards of people, and human skills. The United Nation also promotes international cooperation against terrorism and prevents genocide attacks.

However, there can also be flaws in International Organizations such as the World Trade Organization in the way they conduct the affairs of the organization where big companies and influential governments dictate policy. This can be viewed as unfair as the World Trade Organization mainly acts in the interests of governments and other big corporations, which means that they do not work to guarantee the rights of consumers and developing countries suffer the most as the rules are unfavorable due to their weak influence on policy. This is best described in Pease section on Realism on International Organizations as it states, “International organizations can also play an intervening role in great power calculations (Hurd 2017, 19–21) …These organizations are used by the hegemon and great powers to further their interests in the international system” (Pease p.59). The daily operations of most international organizations are managed by specialized international bureaucracies and the authority rests within state members. Many International Organizations often work closely with other organizations as a way of providing public support, monitoring the effectiveness of international aid, and providing information and expertise. Each International Organization plays an important role in international relations as they all work together to achieve common objectives and help promotes positive cooperative behavior within individual states and the rest of the world.

Works Cited
Pease Realism on ios. Kelly-Kate S. Pease – International Organizations_ Perspectives on Global Governance-Routledge (2018) (wooster.edu)
Pease Liberalism on ios. Kelly-Kate S. Pease – International Organizations_ Perspectives on Global Governance-Routledge (2018) (wooster.edu)
International Organization | National Geographic Society

Environmental policy is defined as any measure by a government or corporation or other public or private organization regarding the effects of human activities on the environment, particularly those measures that are designed to prevent or reduce harmful effects of human activities on ecosystems. International environmental policy has increased due to the rise in globalization and the effects of human activities on the environment. Many environmental issues have made its way beyond national borders and can only be solved through international cooperation. International environmental policy covers issues such as climate protection, sustainable energy policy, preservation of biological diversity, and the conservation of forests, seas, and soils. With regarding the United Nations, they founded their environmental policy program the United Nations Environmental Program in 1972.

 The United Nations environmental strategy for environment education and training is as followed, “In this strategy, environment is understood to encompass the natural and built environment, socioecological and economic aspects of environmental issues, and political dimension of environmental protection. In this context, environmental education and training includes aspects related to a wide variety of environment and development issues that affect and are affected by human activities and natural phenomena.” The United Nations has provided the main platform for international negotiations and agreements on environmental policies and objectives. These conferences were effective in setting an international agenda for regional and national environmental policy making that resulted in treaties and protocols. In Beardsworth article on climate change he states, “Climate action requires political action simply because, without political action, the scale of the challenge as well as the time within which this action must be achieved cannot be met (P.380).” Individuals and scientist who care about the environment can only do so much, however, with political and government backing more can get done to help improve the environment for now and into the future. However, there are some issues pertaining to getting every nation globally to cooperate on cutting down on some climate change issues such as emission of carbon dioxide into the atmosphere. Trying to convince other international leaders and governments to comply in ordinance has been a difficulty as some of these countries’ economies rely on these high emitting factories, and some just don’t care about the greenhouse gases their countries are producing.

 Beardsworth states, “politics of climate change shows how nationalism and the global and cosmopolitan dimensions of internationalism must work together if political action in response to climate reality can be remotely successful, and it has argued that this action is dependent, first, on the powers, responsibilities, and leadership of states (P.384).” If the world continues to burn fossil fuels at current rates, earth average temperatures may rise to catastrophic levels without any political help. International cooperation has been modest; however, global temperatures and fossil fuel emissions continue to rise globally despite years of negotiations aimed at reducing greenhouse gases. Each individual country needs to listen to the researchers and individuals who want to help fix the environment before it’s too late to reverse our effects on the environment and take the matter seriously. In international relations working with each cooperating nation will go a long way in trying to reduce greenhouse gas emissions and other factors contributing to the ongoing climate change crisis.

Works Cited

Beardsworth, Richard. Climate science, the politics of climate change and futures of IR. 2020

UN environment strategy for environmental education and training | UNEP – UN Environment Programme

Feminism is defined as a range of socio-political movements and ideologies that aim to define and establish the political, economic, personal, and social equality regardless of gender. The stereotypical archetype of the male being the alpha or provider is a thing of the past, as in modern-day society women have more rights and freedom to do and be who they want in society today in most countries. However, there is still a fight for equal opportunities today as women are still looked upon of being lesser than a man, and in other countries women still have no say or freedom in their lives. Women have the same abilities as men to work in high-powered positions, become part of political parties, fight for their country, and run international business alongside their male counterparts without any bias. Almost all modern societal structures are patriarchal and are constructed in such a way that men are the dominant force in making the majority of political, economic, and cultural decisions. Feminism has manifested and spread worldwide and is represented by various institutions committed to activity on behalf of women’s rights and interests. Feminism seeks to achieve equal treatment and opportunity for women in order to achieve similar opportunities across different fields of work and culture and equal respect in a variety of roles.

Feminist contributions to International Relations can best be understood through their deconstruction of gender both as socially constructed identities and as a powerful organizing logic. In Jacqui True’s chapter on Feminism, she explores three forms of feminism: empirical, analytical, and normative, in which all describes how there is a lack of representation of feminists’ perspectives in international relations. True states, “Feminists argue that conventional International Relations theories distort our knowledge of both ‘relations’ and the ongoing transformations of the ‘international’…These International Relations theories overlook the political significance of gendered divisions of public and private institutionalized within and by the state and state-system” (True P.232). This in turn causes an absence in women’s decision-making within institutional structures which inhibits their advocacy. Women are generally excluded from positions of power and decision-making. Feminism in international relations and international politics is based on the call upon the men to look at the position of the women in international politics and reflect on their thoughts and feelings about the involvement of women in international politics.

The influence of feminist in international relations has been steadily developing and international issues and international policy communities such as the United Nations and many other various institutions. They all have become more responsive to the requirements of the liberal feminist and ensuring the opportunity of equality among women and male counterparts. Women played a very major role in the development of any society which is why feminist theory is very important to the field of international relations. True states, “Feminist International Relations contributes to expanding and strengthening existing theories and analyses including liberal, critical theory, postmodern, constructivist and green theories of international relations” (True P.233). Women have a major role to play in any type of issue that the world needs which is why their importance to international relations is crucial to ensure the protection of the human rights, protection of the environment, life sustaining development and other critical issues.

Work cited

True, Jacqui. Chapter 9. Feminism.

In John Herz’s Idealist Internationalism and the Security Dilemma, he describes “Security Dilemma” as groups or individuals within a state, being concerned about their security and well-being from being attacked, subjected, dominated, or annihilated from other groups or individuals” (Herz p.157). This in turn can cause surrounding states to monitor their own security in fear of the growing precautions of the other state. This is where the question of whether security and safety of the state is important, or does it cause chaos and worriedness within each state? An example of this would be the United States and Soviet Union during the Cold War. There was major panic within not only both nations but also each of their allied nations over the ideologies of Democracy and Communism, and the constant threatening of nuclear missiles which later translated into the Cuban missile crisis in 1962. Herz states in his section on Idealist Internationalism that, “turning against each other had as one of its major reasons the security dilemma of politically unintegrated units, and their ensuing competition for power…Nationalism in the major nation-states now became allied with ideas of national or racial inequality and superiority; liberal- humanitarian nationalism wandered to the East” (Herz 163). Such ideologies in many states and in turn caused a global panic between each state and their respective allies.

Each state and its allies were all concerned about their security and were all ready to risk the entirety of their nations in this tense conflict. Each state raced to build their nuclear stockpiles and made its citizens of the state prepare and practice for a nuclear attack, which became a normal thing to do at the time until the resolution of the cold war. Is putting the health and well-being of your state worth a nuclear disaster on a global scale? Or is it important to be prepared for these situations to help protect your state and allies? Herz state’s, “The theory of the anachronism of state and sovereignty, of wars and power politics, simply overlooks the opposite tendency growing out of the technical interdependence of the sovereign units in the world: Faced with this growing interdependence but also with the security dilemma, their attempted way-out is to expand their individual power, economically (in order to be self-sufficient in war), strategically (in order to safeguard its defense requirements), etc.” (Herz 173).  For these exact reasons is why security dilemma is seen as both good and bad. There is benefits economy wise as there is a need for more individuals to help manufacture these weapons of mass destruction, so more factory jobs are created. And looking at strategic wise you know have many spies in both states and its allied states to gain intel to keep your guard up and ready for any offensive tactics by the opposing states.

The opposing states doesn’t know whether the state that has increased its security and weaponry will use its increased military capabilities for an attack in the future. For this reason, they will either choose to increase their own military capabilities in order to reestablish the balance of power or they will launch a preemptive attack to prevent the opposing state from upsetting the balance in power of all states. Herz states, “collective self-defense becomes a pretext, however understandable and justified such regionalism may be, in East or West, from the standpoint of security. For the security dilemma today is perhaps more clear-cut than it ever was before” (Herz 180). There is a question of whether or not the security dilemma plays a role in modern foreign policy. I believe that even today it still does as the US has increased its military power and influence throughout the years and making advancements in security but also Russia and other major states such as China has also increased their military power and influence as well. A modern-day example would be Russia and its invasion into Ukraine. Russia wants to assert their dominance of military power and security, and the US always wanting to be involved has supplied Ukraine with weaponry and support to help fight off the opposing Russian forces which they have succeeded at by pushing Russian soldiers back. Herz’s writing on security dilemma goes into depth over the topic of there still being a want between all states to be the biggest and the best which is why security dilemma is relevant to today with regarding foreign policy making.  

Work Cited

John H. Herz. Political Realism and Political Idealism. 1951