Suchergebnisse

French, Swiss, & Swedish international relations scholars present critical analyses of the US-based neorealist international relations & regime theory for explaining transnationalism, multilaterlism & international organizations (IOs). Dissatisfied with regime theory's realist assumptions & methodological individualism, each advances alternative sociologically oriented approaches. US regime theorists then respond to these critiques. In Some Thoughts on International Organizations and Theories of Regulation, Marie-Claude Smouts suggests a regulation theory perspective for understanding shifts in conventional roles & objectives of the IO. The IO of the future will directly regulate social, economic, & political problems, thereby integrating domestic & international political economy. In Regime Theory and the Study of International Organizations, Pierre de Senarclens reviews a sociological framework for studying the regime that accounts fully for the IO's various functions. Noting regime theory's downplaying of coercive & conflictual power relations & the misguided explanations of hegemonic stability theory for the creation of regimes, analysis also suggests that US scholarship is biased by collaboration with political interest groups. In International Organization and Co-Operation: An Interorganizational Perspective, Christer Jonsson proposes an interorganizational theory, focusing on networks of resources, actors, & public/private ties within IOs. Based on experience with projects in international coordination of civil air transport, refugees, & atomic energy, the theory suggests redefinitions of power, bargaining, mediation, & brokerage concepts & clarifies the roles of individual leadership, international secretaries, & relations between inter- & nongovernmental organizations. In Toward a Sociology of International Institutions: Comments on the Articles by Smouts, de Senarclens & Jonsson, James A. Caporaso (U of Washington, Seattle) concedes that regime theory's preoccupation with realism, disregard for more integrative, sociological approaches, & failure to discuss the issue of conflictual power relations are problematic, but argues that the alternatives suggested here are also troublesome. In International Regimes and World Politics: Comments on the Articles by Smouts, de Senarclens & Jonsson, Helen Milner concurs that neoliberal institutionalism is marred by realist principles, but stresses that this perspective does not represent all of regime theory. These critiques argue for the primacy of the IO over that of regime. Parallels are drawn between their proposals & a branch of US international relations studies emphasizing intersubjective agreement. 5 Figures, 9 Photographs, 119 References. J. Sadler

Die Staaten der Dritten Welt haben versucht, sich in internationalen oder supranationalen Organisationen als eigenständigen politischen Raum einzuführen und gegen äußeren Druck zu behaupten (Neuinterpretation westlicher Normen, Blockfreiheit, kollektive Verhandlungsführung). Sie suchten eine Rolle als Akteur im internationalen System, um Einfluß auf das System auszuüben und ihre Interessen auf diplomatischer, politisch-wirtschaftlicher und ideologischer Ebene wahrzunehmen. Dieser Anspruch führte nur kurzfristig zum Erfolg, weil die Verhandlungsmacht der Dritten Welt über die internationalen Organisationen vor dem Hintergrund von Nord-Süd- und Ost-West-Konflikt geschwunden ist. (AuD-Fsk)

The South exists only where group expression can be found, and universal international organizations represent " cardinal space " par excellence. Third World states have tried to use international bodies to build their own political space and to try to loosen the outside constraints weighing on their development. They have used a threefold strategy : reappropriation and reinterpretation of Western norms for their own ends, non-alignment, and collective bargaining. After a semblance of success in the early 1970s, the South seems to have lost ils bargaining power and ils capacity to shape itself into a political force. The forums in which it holds the majority adopt resolutions which can have no practical consequences, while there is an increase in the bilateralization of public aid and the influence of the international financial institutions with which each country negotiates individually. The Third World does however have its own political culture, a way of perceiving itself as a group of developing countries and of conceiving international relations. The crisis of international organizations is to a large extent a cultural crisis and the result of a North-South/East-West confrontation over social organization models and concepts of man, none of which obtains recognition as applicable to the entire world.

Frankreich geht in seiner Außenpolitik gegenüber der Dritten Welt von einer eigenständigen Globalanalyse des internationalen Systems aus. Mangels wirksamer außenpolitischer Instrumentarien und Hebel kann es Selbständigkeitsbestrebungen von Entwicklungsländern gegenüber den Supermächten und ihren Blöcken jedoch nur moralisch unterstützen. In seinem engeren Einflußbereich in der Dritten Welt, vor allem in Afrika, hat Frankreich es hingegen versäumt, auf der Grundlage der engen Zusammenarbeit mit den betreffenden Staaten ein wirksames entwicklungspolitisches Instrumentarium zur Förderung von Wandel und Modernisierung bereitzustellen. (SWP-Spb)

France and the Third World or How to Win the South Without Losing the North, by Marie-Claude Smouts
France's ambitious policy intentions towards the Third World are based on high moral principe. In Mexico, François Mitterrand clearly stated the aims. These include a refusai to accept that whenever conflicts arise in the « South », thèse should automatically play a role in East West competition ; support for peoples struggling for liberty and social justice ; a conviction that the désunies of « North » and « South » are linked and that no international equilibrium can be achieved without the development of Third World countries. However, France has limited means at Us disposai for the implementation of these policies. In particular, no realistic alternative can be offered to those countries who wish to free themselves from the tutelage of either one of the superpowers, be they in Southern Africa, Indochina or Central America. France's actions are limited to pronouncing what is right and providing an intellectual framework within which solutions to these regional conflicts may be sought. On the other hand in traditional sphere of influence especially in Africa, continuity has prevailed over change. The spirit of cooperation has flourished, but the necessary means have not been provided and France has not actually equipped itself with the appropriate tools. The ambitious Ministry of Development envisaged at the beginning of the Presidential term has not materialised.