According to the Mearsheimer, institutions are nothing but are a tool to gain more hegemony and power and this tool is used by Developed countries like US. By using institutions these states gain relative power and make sure that other states won’t reach to the same level. Mearsheimer wrote in his article that states are strategically egoistic and rational and try to maximize their hegemony.
On the other hand, Robert O.Kohane and Lisa M. try to oppose these ideas by pointing out some flaws in Mearsheimer’s article. They not only critiqued Mearsheimer’s ideas but also challenged the methodology he used to approach Institutional theory. According to them, institutions play an important role in maintaining peace in the world. They explain their point of view by giving examples of UNO and EU.
By reading this article, it comes to know that one cannot answer every question in world politics by simply approaching one theory. Robert O.Kohane and Lisa M pointed out many cases where powerful states didn't try to gain the sovereignty of other states for example, Switzerland who always kept itself free from security completion. On the other hand, there are also many cases where institutions are failed to influence the behavior of many states, for example, Iraq war. I believe the best way is if states try to seek the mid-way approach in international politics. In order to get a peaceful world, the states must coordinate and cooperate with the international institutions but should not totally depend on them.
One would like to expound on one point that Keohane and Lisa criticize Mearsheimer about his generalizing claims and the absence of evidence for them. However, their evidence such the case for Switzerland or Argentina itself does not explain the role of institutions in the policy of these states not to indulge themselves in power politics. One believes that their argument needs to be critically assessed before drawing conclusion about its validity.
ReplyDeleteI liked that you provided the background of this piece, in the sense that this was a response to Mearsheimer. This reminded me of what Zoha (if I'm not mistaken) wrote about last time in her blog in which she stated that all academics do is write.
ReplyDeleteHowever one could also argue that the international institutions are controlled by the great states who use to it their benefit by ensuring that their interests are furthered while any opposing views are eliminated. For example the WTO has many governing laws that further the interests of let's say the United states, for example selling aids medicine at a higher price in Africa where thousands die due to such policies. The developed nations have argued against them but the WTO only listens to the US who is a great power and can support it financially. So we should also look at which states support which institution also.
ReplyDeleteI agree that states should cooperate with international organizations, but that they should not be dependent on them. After all, if we are to believe the realists, states exist in a self-help system.
ReplyDelete