Archer definition an international organisation can be defined as a formal, continuous structure established by agreement between members ( governmental and/or non- governmental) from two or more sovereign states with the aim of pursuing the common interest of the membership [Archer 1983: 35 emphasis in original
Cooperation, integration, alliances and regimes Cooperation requires that the actions of separate individuals or institutions – which are no in pre-existent harmony – be brought into conformity with one another through a process of policy coordination (Keohane 1984: 51). states do cooperate because they share interests, ideals, norms, values and shared belief systems. A cooperative relationship demands that there be some level of trust between the two or more parties
Mrs.Thatcher famously said in Bruges in 1988 that her first guiding principle for the future development of Europe was : willing and active cooperation between independent sovereign states [ Salmon. and Nicoll 1997: 210] which she contrasted with the concentration of power at the centre of a European conglomerate. John Groom [ Groom and Taylor 1990 :3] has said that by co-operation he understood relationships that are not overtly or structurally coercive. Put more positively our concern is with legitimised relationships between different actors in world society.
Laffan the intensity of relations between the participating states and the manner in which those relations are organised and managed. Intergovernmental co-operation occurs only within clearly defined limits and is controlled by the member states …[ it is] not intended to impinge greatly upon national sovereignty…[such organisations] do not create a centre of power and authority independent of the participating states [Laffan 1992 : 3]
Ernst Haas [1971:6] sees integration as : explaining how and why states cease to be wholly sovereign, how and why they voluntarily mingle, merge and mix with their neighbours so as to lose the factual attributes of sovereignty while acquiring new techniques for resolving conflict between themselves. Leon Lindberg defines it : process whereby nations forego the desire and ability to conduct foreign and key domestic policies independently of each other, seeking instead to make joint decisions or to delegate the process to new central organs. [ Lindberg 1963 : 6]
Institutions/Regimes as international social institutions characterised by behavioural patters based on international norms and rules, which prescribe behavioural roles in recurring situations that lead to a convergence of reciprocal expectations (Rittberger and Zangl 2006: 6). We can also identify two types of international institutions: international inter-governmental organizations and international regimes Formal and informal
rules, norms and procedures that regularise behavior and control its effects… sets of governing arrangements [and] principles, norms, rules and decision making procedures around which actors expectations converge in a given issue area [ Keohane and Nye 1989:19]
Origin/Evolution Political [t]he first two relate to the existence of objective facts or conditions the world must be divided into a number of states which function as independent political units a substantial measure of contact must exist between these subdivisions and other requirements, which are subjective in nature : the states must develop an awareness of the problems which arise out of their coexistence,and, on this basis, come to recognise the need for the creation of institutional devices and systematic methods for regulating their relations with each other. [ Claude 1956 : 19] Many schemes :Dante, Dubois, Grotius, Sully,Penn, Kant etc
19 th century – Concert – concert together/repose The Hague 1899/1907 War and peace 26/44 Convention for the Pacific Settlement of International Disputes
Functional OCTROI RHINE PRACTICAL :director-general, international civil servants,appeals,toll duties, common treasury area of international affairs within which sovereign states have a common interest in cooperative endeavour.[Claude 1956 :40] Collective, cumulative, continuous New agenda?
WAR Growth Napoleon into Russia in 1812 453 000 men American Civil War (1861-1865) 1556000 soldiers served in Federal armies : 359528 killed 275175 injured 800000 in Confederate forces : 258000 killed 225000 injured $15bn. WWI emergence of fear of war being as important as fear of defeat London 1916-1917 : 500 killed + 1200 injured WWI 8.5m killed + 21m. injured Civilians vulnerable Air power
WWII Mid-February 1945 135 000 killed on one combined use of force at Dresden March 1945 B-29 bombers fire storm in Tokyo 80 000+ killed 40 000+ injured Truman arguing that bomb was a military weapon, having few doubts that it would be used, argued that invaded Japan would cost 400 000-1m.US lives Just more efficient Radical? Took a while for it to sink in But : scale of destruction + scope of delivery + accuracy NUCLEAR