Suchergebnisse

"Reprinted from the Department of State bulletin of June 21, 1965." ; Cover title. ; Mode of access: Internet.

Regionalism has a long history as an important instrument of American foreign policy. Yet such a statement does not do justice to the variations in goals, means, and settings that have affected United States policy toward participation in and cooperation with regional organizations. These differences have been the cause of serious debate in the past and are becoming so again as we approach the 1970's.

Functional independence of international institutions is a sine qua non to their effective operation. Current international law reveals that international organizations have a legal capacity and certain privileges and immunities bestowed upon them by their member states to ensure their independence and that of their staffs. One vital component of functional independence is the freedom of travel for all members of the international staff. In examining the features of freedom of travel necessary for international organizations to discharge their responsibilities effectively, C. W. Jenks wrote:The freedom of movement which is necessary comprises more than the absence of any special restrictions; it includes the usual facilities for official travel, such as diplomatic or other special visas, priorities where these are necessary, exemption from immigration regulations and formalities, and similar measures; taken cumulatively these facilities involve a considerable saving of time and energy and are therefore an important element in securing the expeditious and unhindered travel necessary to the prompt discharge of international responsibilities.

ARE regional and global approaches to world order compatible or competitive ? Policy-makers and scholars pose this question with increasing frequency. Yet too often assessments of the relative capabilities of regional and general international organizations fail to distinguish the different demands such issues as threats to the peace or modernization create for widely divergent institutions. Enthusiasm for regionalism waxes and wanes with events. As Inis Claude observes, "The advocacy of regionalism can be, and often is, as doctrinaire and as heedless of concrete realities as the passion for all-encompassing organization."