Showing papers by "Thomas G. Weiss published in 2014"
TL;DR: A more rigorous conception of global governance should help us understand the nature of the contemporary phenomenon as well as look "backwards" and "forwards" as mentioned in this paper, and such an investigation should provide historical insights and prescriptive elements to understand the kind of world order that we ought to be seeking and encourage us to investigate how that global governance could be realized.
Abstract: Global governance remains notoriously slippery. While the term arose to describe change in the late twentieth century, its association with that specific moment has frozen it in time and deprived it of analytical utility. It has become an alternative moniker for international organizations, a descriptor for an increasingly crowded world stage, a call to arms, an attempt to control the pernicious aspects of globalization, and a synonym for world government. This article aims not to advance a theory of global governance but to highlight where core questions encourage us to go. A more rigorous conception should help us understand the nature of the contemporary phenomenon as well as look “backwards” and “forwards.” Such an investigation should provide historical insights as well as prescriptive elements to understand the kind of world order that we ought to be seeking and encourage us to investigate how that global governance could be realized.
151 citations
TL;DR: This article argued that international relations teeters on the edge of an abyss of irrelevance and argued that one way of encouraging reengagement is to return to debating grand questions that used to be the sustenance of IR.
Abstract: International relations teeters on the edge of an abyss of irrelevance. As an academic pursuit, it has become disparate and fragmented. Those of us in the discipline have ceased to pursue greater clarity in the way that we understand the world around us. Moreover, we have failed as agents of change; that is, as purveyors of opinion and proposals about a better and fairer world order. As such, we no longer serve our students and those practitioners who seek our advice, or, for those of us who take on policy jobs, to push out the envelope of what is considered acceptable. Global governance offers one potentially compelling way of “saving international relations”— though it is not without its problems. This article outlines how and why. The argument unfolds in three parts. The first outlines why and how IR teeters on the edge of an abyss. The second offers a proposal for moving beyond the fragmentation and atomization that afflicts international relations. We suggest that one way of encouraging reengagement is to return to debating grand questions that used to be the sustenance of IR. The third part argues that global governance—appropriately and specifically framed to make it fit for purpose—offers an opportunity to return to these questions and, in so doing, reinvigorate our fragmented and atomized field.
43 citations
TL;DR: The authors explored the underlying fault-lines between the United Nations and the AU by examining interactions between the UN and AU since the latter's launch in 2002, but focusing on the Mali case.
Abstract: The United Nations (UN) and the African Union (AU) have collaborated in building a viable African Peace and Security Architecture and have worked together in a number of armed conflicts over the past decade. Examples include the peace operations in Burundi and Somalia, and the hybrid peace operation in Sudan's Darfur region which is perhaps the most prominent illustration of this collaboration. Although the UN Security Council authorized the intervention in Libya, which was approved by leading regional organizations (the Arab League, the Organization of the Islamic Conference and the Gulf Cooperation Council), it was opposed initially by the AU although the three African states in the Security Council voted for it. Relations cooled as a result and have grown colder still as the UN snubbed the AU and its initial efforts to engage in post-conflict stabilization in Mali. While the AU sought to prove itself as a capable security provider and partner on the continent with its operation AFISMA, France's Operation Serval and the UN's peace operation for Mali, MINUSMA, bypassed the African Union. This article explores the underlying fault-lines between the two organizations by examining interactions between the UN and AU since the latter's launch in 2002, but focusing on the Mali case. The fault-lines emerging from the analysis are different capabilities, risk-averse vs risk-assuming approaches to casualties, diverging geopolitics and leadership rivalry.
40 citations
TL;DR: Rieff as mentioned in this paper argues that the war in Syria has sounded the death knell for humanitarian intervention and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) principle, and that R2P will not resquiescat in pace, according to David Rieff.
Abstract: Pundits claim that the war in Syria has sounded the death knell for humanitarian intervention and the Responsibility to Protect (R2P)—resquiescat in pace, according to David Rieff.1 By failing to i...
35 citations
TL;DR: In this paper, the authors analyse the changing role of emerging powers in light of ongoing intergovernmental discussions about the UN's capacity to foster sustainable development, and present a fruitful collaboration between the Institute of International Relations at the Pontifical Catholic University in Rio de Janeiro and the Future UN Development System Project (FUNDS) of the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies at The City University of New York's (CUNY) Graduate Center.
Abstract: Since the outset, in the aftermath of World War II, the United Nations development system (UNDS) has constituted an essential pillar of the world organisation’s activities, along with those devoted to peacekeeping, humanitarianism, human rights and justice. Adaptations notwithstanding, serious questions remain about its effectiveness and capacity to represent adequately the aspirations of ‘we, the peoples’ – the opening words of the UN Charter – particularly in the global South. Although developing countries have joined forces at different stages in the international arena – including through the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) and the Group of 77 (G77) – to increase their voices within the system, over the past decade a new twist has been added, the visibility of emerging powers. This reality not only reflects the latter’s growing role as providers of development cooperation but also their criticism of the existing architecture for global economic governance. Both individually and through new alignments such as that of Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa (BRICS), emerging powers are engaging more directly not only in the practices of development cooperation but also in key normative debates about how accelerated development and poverty alleviation could and should be carried out, and how major institutions could and should contribute. Recent research shows the extent to which Southern agency has been a source of global norms. Whether or not the phenomenon of emerging powers reinforces the North–South divide or increases the diversity of positions and alignments within the international system, however, remains very much open to debate. The essays in this volume address that debate and are the product of a fruitful collaboration between the Institute of International Relations at the Pontifical Catholic University in Rio de Janeiro (and its affiliated BRICS Policy Center) and the Future UN Development System Project (FUNDS) of the Ralph Bunche Institute for International Studies at The City University of New York’s (CUNY) Graduate Center. In particular, this joint research effort sought to analyse the changing role of emerging powers in light of ongoing intergovernmental discussions about the UN’s capacity to foster sustainable development. By bringing
23 citations
03 Jan 2014
TL;DR: Serrano and Weiss as discussed by the authors discuss the role of R2P in human rights monitoring and fact-finding and conclude that it is a "Cascading" as a Norm.
Abstract: Introduction: Is R2P "Cascading" as a Norm? Monica Serrano & Thomas G. Weiss PART ONE: THE RESPONSIBILITY TO PREVENT REVISITED 1. Human Rights Monitoring and Fact-finding Ekkehard Strauss 2. Preventive Diplomacy and Mediation Eileen Babbitt 3. The Sanctions Battle George A. Lopez 4. International Criminal Justice Martin Mennecke PART TWO: THE RESPOSIBILITY TO REACT, VALUE ADDED 2001-2011 5. Brazil: Slow but Crucial Partner in Rights? Monica Herz 6. India: Whither Democracy, Human Rights and Foreign Policy? Kudrat Virk 7. China: A Permanent Member like the other Four? Liu Tiewa 8. South Africa and Nigeria: On the Concept of 'Every African is His Brother's Keeper' Adekeye Adebajo 9. Turkey: The Dark Horse in Promoting Rights? Philip Robins 10. Norway: NATO, Libya, and Beyond? Cecilie Hellestveit 11. Putting Flesh on the Bones: The United States and R2P Tom J. Farer & Claudia Fuentes 12. Conclusion: Towards Institutionalizing R2P Monica Serrano & Thomas G. Weiss
20 citations
TL;DR: The post-2015 agenda should not look only at development and environment but aspire to what a million global voices canvassed by the UN in 'the world we want' campaign are clamouring for.
Abstract: ‘Sustainable development’ – as currently and politically correctly formulated – provides an inappropriate basis on which to frame a future-oriented UN agenda, and risks perpetuating patterns of assistance in which most UN organisations perform poorly and in the shadow of alternative and more able multilateral and bilateral sources. UN operations should take as their point of departure the comprehensive agenda outlined by the two world summits of 2000 and 2005. This agenda recognises the value-based UN as the only universal-membership organisation, which combines the concerns of satisfying human needs while ensuring security, human rights, justice and sound governance. The post-2015 agenda should not look only at development and environment but aspire to what a million global voices canvassed by the UN in ‘the world we want’ campaign are clamouring for.
13 citations
01 Aug 2014
TL;DR: In this paper, Browne et al. discuss the essence of contemporary UN multilateralism and the UN role and principles governing multilateral assistance, and discuss the need to align UN development efforts and peacebuilding.
Abstract: Introduction: The UN we want for the world we want, Stephen Browne and Thomas G. Weiss, Part I: The essence of contemporary UN multilateralism, 1. UN roles and principles governing multilateral assistance, Bjorn Skogmo 2. Evolution of the UN development system, Craig N. Murphy, 3. Drivers of change for the UN's future role, Richard O'Brien Part II: Grappling with the present and future: results, funding, management, 4. Funding the UN system, Silke Weinlich 5. Evaluating the UN development system, Robert Picciotto 6. Making the UN more accountable and transparent, Richard Golding Part III: The requirements of war-torn states 7. Aligning UN development efforts and peacebuilding, W. Andy Knight 8. The economics of peace: is the UN system up to the challenge? Graciana del Castillo 9. Can peacebuilding drive the UN change agenda?, Michael von der Schulenburg Part IV: Toward a reformed UN development system 10. The UN and the post-2015 development agenda, David Hulme and Rorden Wilkinson 11. "We the Peoples" in the UN development system, Roberto Bissio 12. Revisiting UN development: the prospects for reform, Cecile Molinier and Stephen Browne Conclusion: Post-2015, making change happen?, Stephen Browne and Thomas G. Weiss
11 citations
TL;DR: The importance of emerging powers in the UN development system is undeniable, but their influence over the shape of the post-2015 agenda is less clear as discussed by the authors, and recent survey data by the Future UN Development System (funds) Project is examined in order to better gauge the perceptions of the world organisation's problems and prospects.
Abstract: The importance of emerging powers in the UN development system is undeniable, but their influence over the shape of the post-2015 agenda is less clear. This article examines recent survey data by the Future UN Development System (funds) Project in order to better gauge the perceptions of the world organisation’s problems and prospects.
10 citations
Book•
30 Mar 2014
TL;DR: Weiss as discussed by the authors argues for a diversity of organizational arrangements some centralized, some decentralized and a plurality of problem-solving strategies some worldwide, some local, and proposes a three-pronged strategy: the expansion of the formidable amount of practical global governance that already exists, the harnessing of political and economic possibilities opened by the communications revolution, and the recommitment by states to a fundamental revamping of the United Nations.
Abstract: Problems posed by Syria s chemical weapons attacks, Egypt s ouster of an elected government, and myriad other global dilemmas beg the question of whether and how the world can be governed. The challenge is addressing what former UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan called Problems without Passports environmental, economic, humanitarian, and political crises that threaten stability, prosperity, and even human survival. Everything is globalized everything "except" politics, which remain imprisoned behind national borders. The world has changed, but our basic way of managing it has not. We pursue fitful, tactical, short-term, and local responses for actual or looming threats that require sustained, strategic, longer-run, and global actions. With clarity and passion, Thomas G. Weiss argues for a diversity of organizational arrangements some centralized, some decentralized and a plurality of problem-solving strategies some worldwide, some local. He proposes a three-pronged strategy: the expansion of the formidable amount of practical global governance that already exists, the harnessing of political and economic possibilities opened by the communications revolution, and the recommitment by states to a fundamental revamping of the United Nations."
4 citations
TL;DR: The authors explored the move away from an agreed culture of cooperation to a contested one of competition as a result of militarization, politicization, and marketization in the post-Cold War era, concluding with a plea for a "learning culture" oriented to responsible reflection rather than rapid reaction.
Abstract: Humanitarian action in war zones was never easy but has proved especially daunting in the post-Cold War era. This essay begins with the dominant traditional humanitarian culture as a metric to explore the move away from an agreed culture of cooperation to a contested one of competition as a result of militarization, politicization, and marketization. These three aspects are not the whole truth of the humanitarian project, but they are essential components. It is crucial to understand how the international humanitarian system functions if one hopes to improve its operations and attenuate, if not eliminate, the culture of competition and counter-productivity. The essay concludes with a plea for a "learning culture" oriented to responsible reflection rather than rapid reaction.
29 Jan 2014
TL;DR: The authors argues that International Relations teeters on the edge of an abyss of irrelevance and proposes a proposal for moving beyond the fragmentation and atomization that afflicts international relations and argues that global governance offers an opportunity to return to these questions.
Abstract: International Relations teeters on the edge of an abyss of irrelevance. As an academic pursuit it has become disparate and fragmented. We have ceased to pursue greater clarity in the way that we understand the world around us; moreover, we have failed as agents of change that is, as purveyors of opinion and proposals about a better and fairer world order. As such, we no longer serve our students and those practitioners who seek our advice. The text outlines why and how International Relations teeters on the edge of an abyss. It offers a proposal for moving beyond the fragmentation and atomization that afflicts international relations. It also argues that global governance offers an opportunity to return to these questions.
01 Jan 2014
11 Jul 2014
TL;DR: Humanitarians are no longer simply seen as selfless angels as discussed by the authors, their motivations and mastery, their principles and products are questioned from within and from without, and a learning culture for practitioners and a consequentialist ethics more oriented to responsible reflection than rapid reaction is required.
Abstract: Humanitarians are no longer simply seen as selfless angels. Their motivations and mastery, their principles and products are questioned from within and from without. Understanding the ongoing transformations in contemporary humanitarianism requires examining the nature and evolution of humanitarian culture away from an agreed culture of cooperation to a contested one of competition. The latter reflects militarization, politicization, and marketization. What is required is a learning culture for practitioners and a consequentialist ethics more oriented to responsible reflection than rapid reaction.