Anthropology and International Organizations
College essay writing service
Four forum responses two class topics: Anthropology and International Organizations. 200 words each with works cited.
International Relations (International Organizations)
(a) Do you think IGOs create a convergence of state interests?
Often times a certain tension exists between IGO’s and the states that they represent because their constituencies are often different. Ruth and Keohane (2005, pp. 33), illustrate this point when they write that, “When senior officials of the World Bank, such as former chief economist Joseph Stiglitz, severely antagonize the U.S. Government, they are forced to resign”. The World Bank (WB), serves the interests of powerful nations, like the United States, who fund them to make low interest loans to developing countries. In theory this should be a win-win situation. But, like any lender or investor, the bank wants to make sure that they are making safe loans on favorable terms. While the borrower seeks to borrow money at low rates to invest in a project that will lead to modernization in a developing region, which ultimately one would hope, leads to economic independence, growth and stability. The tension comes when the lender and the borrower disagree on terms and conditions. In this case those political leadership, who may a price if loans go bad and their domestic constituency are unhappy with the process, exert influence on the executives of IGO’s to operate in a way that is seen as favorable domestically. If the IGO executive is seen to go “native” then they may need to be reigned in (IE –fired).
In the case of the borrower of course they want development funds loaned at low rates. In the developing world corruption is also an issue, and borrowed money may not end up being used for it’s intended use. Borrowers may argue that the level of risk of doing business in their respective region provides a level of risk because of weak political and banking institutions that is unseen in the West, but, are just the norms in that part of the world.
Ultimately then a level of tension arises between the IGO, who’s mission is to assist (in this example) a developing country modernize and the powerful country who funds the IGO who wants return on investment and the ability to demonstrate to tax payers fiduciary responsibility.
Despite this inherent tension a degree of convergence will emerge around shared objectives. The powerful state seeks stable, secure trading partners, but, the only way to get there is through investment, often times risky investment. The developing country seeks to modernize, but in so doing become to a degree beholden to the lenders terms. However, in the end the mutually agreed upon benefits often outweigh the risks, which naturally leads to a convergence-albeit an uneasy one at times.
(b) Do you think IGO membership results in socialization.
Greenhill (2010, pp. 140-141), concludes that, “IGOs can therefore be thought to provide a forum for the transmission of human rights norms from one state to another”. Empirical evidence shows that membership in an organization that supports and advocates for human rights bestows a certain measure of accountability upon member states. In layman’s terms if you belong to a club you don’t want your conduct to be at odds with the clubs stated objectives. This is because through the process of dialogue and partnership a socialization process occurs where member states begin to behave and act based upon the agreed upon norms of the larger group. In effect no-one wants to be the outlier who is singled out for admonishment upon the world stage-therefore, whether a state wants to or not it is often more productive to conform to the international norms than to be labeled a pariah state. Ruth and Keohane (2005), make the point that initially this socialization process may because a state fears sanctions or other consequences and may be a coerced acceptance. However, nevertheless as state behavior becomes more consistent with international norms a certain socialization process takes place over the longer term.
International bodies where issues can be discussed, debated and where violators can be singled out for consequences serve a vital process of socializing all members to the agreed upon norms.
(c) Do IOs more generally help foster accountability among states?
Yes. IO’s such as the World Court the International Criminal Court and human rights groups can hold violators feet to the fire. Modern examples include the leadership of the former Yugoslavia (FyROM), warlords in Africa, and Sadaam Hussein. For these IO’ to be effective however they must be delegated powers by their respective member states and allowed to carry out their missions.
Ruth and Keohane (2005, pp. 42), write that, “Power wielders can be called to account for failing to fulfill their official duties or for failing to serve the interests of those affected by their actions. And they can be called to account by those who authorized them as well as by those affected by them”. IO’s provide a forum where those effected by a leader or a states actions can petition for redress. These IO’s have “teeth” in that the organs of power of the rest of the international community have pledged to back them up.
When despots and other authoritarian leaders know that they can be called to account by their people and indeed the world community in a foreign location for actions that take place domestically under their watch then the potential consequences for unlawful actions may outweigh the short term risks. Based up this leaders must think about their actions and generally comply with international norms of behavior (see answer #2) or risk answering for their actions in the future.
(a) Do you think IGOs create a convergence of state interests?
Absolutely they can create a convergence of state interest. IGOs implement ideas of cooperation to resolve problems and conflicts. From this cooperation that is transmitted through social globalized assimilation of ideas between the socialization. I found out how some of the convergence of state interests happened as well. Persuasion is the major mechanism which ideas change within IGOs and can be intentionally or not intentionally (Bondanella 2009). Persuasion can be naturally introduced or with a great intention to change the mind who is representing a specific state different than the other. Persuasion typically occurs in social interactions between actors who have drawn different conclusions regarding the nature, merits, and/or implications of X action or policy, and in which one or more of those parties attempt, through arguments, to get their interlocutors to rethink their conclusions. (Gheciu 2005) That means if an actor (state persuading) convince the other actor (receiving) that a factor X that is in their interest leads to factor Y that is an idea of the state is persuading then a converge of state interests is in play. Also whatever leads to wealth, power and security create convergence. (Finnemore 1996) As well as some cultural difference between states but some of them modify the ideas to assimilated them to their culture. Bondanella also indicates that IGO that covers more issues have greater convergence between states. For example, United Nations since they have more sub structures than others IOs specializing that structures in specifics problems, conflicts or resolutions.
(b) Do you think IGO membership results in socialization?
I think every act into a membership of any kind is the result of socialization. Socialization has been defined as “a process of inducing actors into the norms and rules of a given community” (Checkel 2005) That’s the current definition of socialization, but in International relations is at the global level where the representation of states acting in according in the way of to do the right thing. States act in a social collectivity, they do what they see as appropriate for themselves in a specific type of situation. (March and Olsen 2006) All socialization do not end in the convergence of state interest but is the path for persuasion and to act according to their partners. Also, states agree to get a membership and follow norms in a strategic reasoning involving social or material results and after they are members continue to follow the norms socializing to find other results when the original incentives no longer are present. (Checkel 2005) They get into the membership in the result of socialization with an interest where they are gaining power, wealth, and security but after that interest is met they still need to use the membership for other gainings. As well socialization can bring memberships when powerful countries use diffusion. Diffusion is the process by which an innovation is communicated through a way that transmits to the members of a social system. (Rogers 1995) Innovations of ideas can bring members to the IGOs through diffusion that is concept socialization.
(c) Do IOs more generally help foster accountability among states?
IOs greatly generally help foster the accountability among stats since treaties, multilateral agreements and cohesion to the organization. But according to Grant and Keohane NGOs try to hold accountable the IGOs for cause and effects of world problems. IGOs do not agree with NGOs when they try to hold them accountable because they are managed by states that finance their existence including IGOs and NGOs. (Grant and Keohane 2005) The Same theory of Factor Push where NGOs push the IGOs to respond for a change of policies. IGOs especially are very present sanctioning on trades related issues and on security issues where needs to pacify some states on low-level conflicts. (Grant and Keohane 2005) IGOs are there to foster peace between states but at some level only. They cannot order others states since their identity as independent states still there and they are not part of Federation, they just part of an organization with similar ideas or interest.
Please answer this question with no word limit:
Why do economic sanctions against states tend to fail?
HIV is a powerful disease that attaches to the walls of cells. Once the HIV Virus has attached to the cell wall, it is capable of being replicated by the cells nucleus. When the virus comes into contact with new cells variations occur. Multiple copies of the cell contains the HIV Virus and it’s variations are replicated naturally by the spieces body. Anti-viral drugs are introduced into the species body as a means to stop the replication process. T-cells are necessary for the immune system. Once the T-cells become infected with the HIV Virus they begin to die out. Often times, medications that are intended to prevent the replication process of the infected cells harm the body more than the HIV Virus. The T-cells that are infected with the HIV Virus are blocked by the medication from replicating themselves. The immune system now declines due to the block by the medication and the body does not have the capability to fight of other infections or diseases that may enter and attack the body. The Evolutionary Theory describes an enteral process that involves the passing of DNA through generations. It explains the possibility of genes within species progress or evolve through generations to rid the DNA of deformities. The HIV Virus however, is replicated within the species body, and creates more deformities and mutations of the cells that make up the species DNA. The natural bodily process of replicating cells takes over and copies the infected cells. One the HIV Virus attaches to different cells it has the ability to mutate. This forms a different type of the virus, which is than replicated naturally by the body. The replication process does not stop. This makes treatment or even finding a cure for the HIV Virus extremely difficult.
I have read the content from the PBS video on the evolution of AIDS. With this, I have learned that HIV, the AIDs causing virus, can easily adapt and evolve to its ever changing environment. The virus attaches itself to cells in the body and from there will start to incorporate itself into the genes. Eventually, once enough cells are affected, and then body will soon be unable to support its immune system. From here, a simple cold can be much more dangerous and life threatening since the body cannot fight off anything. In modern medicine, we can use anti-viral drugs to slow the process of HIV. This is where the evolution of the virus has come into play. Once the medications are introduced, the virus can evolve or mutate to adapt to counter the anti-virus drugs. This is basically the virus adapting to the environment around it to survive.
The best way for us to continue to fight the ever adapting strains, we must understand evolutionary theory. Evolutionary theory is the area that focuses on further development and refinement of the modern synthesis of evolution and genetics1. If we could identify exactly how the virus is/will evolve, it would make it easier to eliminate. Scientist could recognize the mutation before it starts; they could counter the newly evolved virus before it can spread to more cells in the body. Due to the fact that HIV can adjust to counter drugs, understanding how this takes place and how to battle it future will prove to be beneficial in eliminating or suppressing the virus completely.