Chapter 1: Definition and General Assessment of International Organizations and Regionalism

Main Features of International Organizations

International organizations are institutional, legal, and political entities established by the main subjects and actors of international relations, States, at regional or global levels. The idea that leads to their establishment is based on the understanding that dealing with certain international and regional issues via ad hoc conferences and congresses is not adequate and sufficient and, thus viable institutional mechanisms are called for.

What is an International Organization?

International organizations are international legal persons which are established by an international agreement duly signed and put into effect by the governmental bodies of at least three States. The constituting documents, which are usually called statutes, accommodate provisions regarding the main structure, features and working principles of the organization. These include the basic aims, purposes, goals and principles of the organization, the membership criteria, the main bodies/organs and their powers, as well as the decision-making and voting procedures. The existence and continuity of the legal personality of the organizations become concrete through the physical, institutional and functional assets devoted to, or obtained by, them. Any international or regional organization which has a limited, functional and permanent legal personality enjoys the rights, privileges, duties, responsibilities and obligations given to it by its statute and participates to international political and legal relations with its competent bodies and personnel. Although possessing an international legal personality is crucial for organizations to take part in international politics, the opposite is not necessarily true. Indeed, there are regular “summit” meetings or entities that do not hold a legal personality and yet are quite influential in international politics. The G-7/8 is indeed one of the most active and effective decision making and standard-setting global actor although it does not possess a legal personality.

Why are They Established?

Although States continue to be the most important actors and subjects of international relations and law, international organizations, once established by States, are also increasingly becoming a global policy-maker to the detriment of States. In this respect, regional organizations are particularly relevant because globalisation at the same time means fragmentation and regionalisation, which compels States to act collectively and even to convene under certain umbrellas against global, international and regional challenges and uncertainties. Organization as functional interfaces of cooperation are usually established for three general concrete reasons particularly at regional levels: Military alliance, economic cooperation and dealing with common “technical” issues.

Military Alliances

States tend to establish, or become a member of regional military alliances in order to strengthen their security. Once a group of States agree that such concerns are to be dealt with institutional mechanisms, they usually sign a treaty establishing a defence pact and declare that an attack against any of them is in fact directed to all of them. The legal basis of such regional organizations is provided by the UN Charter. The Charter, which prohibits threat and use of force in its Article 2/4, permits States to defend themselves against an armed attack individually or collectively (Article 51). More importantly, Article 52, which is the true legal basis of regional security organizations, allows States to establish “regional arrangements or agencies for dealing with” regional and international peace and security, provided that they are “consistent with the Purposes and Principles of the United Nations”. NATO and Warsaw Pact are the most known examples of such collective self-defence organizations which characterised the Cold War. Regional military alliances are not mere collective security mechanisms against possible external threats or uses of force. They are internally also based on a common political, economic and ideological world view.

Economic Cooperation Organizations

It is assumed and expected that establishing institutional mechanism among States which are not only tradepartners but have interdependent and even complementary economies would have a win-win affect. As such organizations mostly reduce and even lift trade barriers, tariffs and other restrictions and thus increase trade volumes, they not only improve the welfare of the citizens of the member States but also foster the regional economy as a whole. The idea of regional economic organization is going through a re-organization. Economic co-operation is transforming into economic co-production, regionalism is gradually being replaced by regions-based global actors and States.

Tackling Joint/Common ‘Technical’ Problems

States increasingly prefer regional organizations also because of the assumption that technical problems can only be handled and tackled collectively. the basic motivation and argument that common “technical” solutions are to be found for common “technical” problems is itself a bit problematic. For it is based on an assumption that there are politically neutral and even apolitical problems, the solutions of which are to be, and can only be, found by technicians and bureaucrats. Every rule, norm or standard bound to solve a problem in a certain way is in fact the solution of an actor (group). Norm and standard-setting means setting/imposing the norms and standards of a certain understanding and preference, so of a certain actor. The highest available standard is something different from the highest possible standard. As such hegemonic States are usually the main sources or contributors of the root-causes of the problem in question, their suggestions usually shares the burdens with co-members unevenly to their best advantage. In short, although common problems definitely need joint institutional solutions, such endeavours cannot be analysed as politics-free technical steps to the good of all.

Theoretical Approaches

International actors such as States, organizations and other emerging non-State actors do shape politics. Theories are important components of political science despite their all shortcomings. Best known and most quoted theories of international politics are realism and liberalism (idealism, rationalism). There are also a wide range of theories that oppose these two, which are usually referred to as critical theories/approaches, such as Marxism, feminism, constructivism and so on. All of these general theories of international relations are also adjusted to international and regional organizations. Realism argues that organizations are a result of States’ seeks of security. Liberals (idealists, rationalists) think differently. They suggest that States are not (potential) enemies but (potential) partners, as they basically stand for providing welfare and peace to their respective citizens. Critical theories usually emphasises the uneven and hegemonic nature of international and regional relations. They argue that organization of relations at all social and political levels has a hierarchical rather than cooperative character. Although each and every theory provides us with a better understanding of the reality either directly or indirectly, the opposite is also true. So it would be better to grasp and use them all as a whole but not rely on any single of them.

Institutional Structures and Functioning

Organizations set up their bodies and organs in line with their purposes, goals, principles and even number of members. They all, almost as a rule, basically have three main bodies: Secretariat, plenary assemble and specially authorised body. Secretariat is the body that in fact both supplies and represents the legal personality of the organization. It is the only body that is not composed of the representatives of the member States but rather employs officers working for, and accountable to, the organization itself. The routine daily work of the organization is done by this body which also coordinates all relevant internal and external activities in line with the aims, rules and principles set out in the statute of the organization. These dual (both internal and external) roles of the Secretary General make the position diplomatically even more important. Plenary assemble is the sole body that contains the governmental representatives of all member States. It approves the budget, admits new members, and amends the statute and so on. Although some of its decisions particularly regarding internal matters of the organization are binding, most of its external decisions are mere recommendations. Almost all organizations have a core specially authorised body which is usually called council or board and is equipped with special powers. Despite all legitimate and pragmatic justifications, specially authorised bodies occupy a central and decisive role in the functioning of organizations.

Membership

Membership first and foremost means holding all legal rights and privileges that stem from membership such as participating at the meetings, operations and decisionmaking processes of the organization on an equal footing. Organizations designate their membership criteria and application procedures in their statutes. Organizations, on the other hand, are also open to observer members which are sometimes called “contact States”, “dialog partners” etc. There are two distinctive characters of this status. First, observers, unlike full-member States, are not party to the statute and therefore do not hold especially the voting right. Second, observer status is not confined to States. It is also granted to non-State actors such as other international and regional organizations, unrecognised. In principle, only States can be full-members of intergovernmental organizations. Nonetheless, there are organizations which are open to the membership of any “country” or even “territory”, provided that other criteria are met. These are usually “technical” organizations which claim that they simply want to take on board as much relevant party as possible and function thoroughly. Organizations lay down their own specific membership criteria usually in the first chapter of their statute together, and in consistent, with their objectives, goals and principles. it may easily be concluded that geographical criterion has a central role in regional organizations but should not be understood strictly in physical geographical terms. This criterion is materialised in line with the nature, scope, principles and goals of a given organization. Membership applications are generally negotiated and finalised by the plenary assemblies where all full-members are represented. The final decision is generally taken by a qualified majority, which means that organizations are quite strict and even cautious towards potential newcomers. Most organizations envisage a transition process before the expulsion legally takes place so that no obligations arising from membership remains unfulfilled.

Voting Rights and Decision Making

Organizations adopt various voting and decision making systems. In fact, they also adopt different systems in different organs depending on their respective natures, compositions and powers. What is more, a specific organ may also adopt different voting procedures for different types of issues. The voting rights issue is generally settled by a basic principle though: One-State-one-vote. There are two decision-making models in organizations: Consensus and voting. Consensus is a model where decisions are taken without voting. Each and every member holds the right to express its opinion on a draft resolution. Objections, suggestions, proposals and amendment requests are voiced until a compromise and consent is reached at. In the voting model, each member casts its vote on a draft resolution and the decision is deemed to be taken if the affirmative votes exceed a certain number or ratio. In simple majority, the affirmative vote requirement is more than half of all votes cast. In qualified majority, affirmative votes should be more than half of the votes cast. Finally unanimity, contrary to the general understanding, does not require affirmative votes of all members but simply seeks that no single negative vote is cast. So absences or abstentions are ignored which in turn means that members that do not effectively want to block (“veto”) a resolution may well prefer either not participating the voting or being present but casting a blank vote. Regardless of the method adopted, once taken, the resolutions enter into force and becomes valid and binding for all members. A unique example in this respect is the League of Arab States. The decisions of its principal organ, Council, which consists the representatives of all the members, binds only member States that cast affirmative vote.

Budget

Organizations require material, physical and economic means to carry out their activities and perform their duties. This is because the expenses incurred to run and fund daily work, activities and fixed costs such as personal salaries and infrastructural expenditures are all to be met by the organization itself. That’s why organizations have their own budgets generated and set with the contributions of the members. Organizations have two basic kinds of budgets. Budgets that depend on the yearly contributions of the members as well as on other regular revenues and incomes of the organizations are mostly called regular budgets. Organizations may also need additional financial means for unusual or extraordinary activities and expenditures. Ad hoc budgets are raised in such cases with the contributions of willing members. There are members who contribute to ad hoc, as well as regular, budgets in order to increase their respective influences within and outside the organization. Likewise, members sometimes contribute to ad hoc budgets with very small and even symbolic amounts just to demonstrate their positions and alignments. In short, budgeting systems of organizations are too not of mere economic and financial character but also have political dimensions, repercussions and effects.

Buildings and Premises

Organizations and their officers need a working place. These physical and spatial means for performing their daily activities also provide the organization with a permanent address. The host State which remains the sovereign of the relevant field in question in principle allocates and devotes it to the use of the organization and accepts to supply and ensure all infrastructural means, as well as the security thereof. It also agrees to grant visa to all those who want to pay on official visit to the organization, ensure their security and escort them to and from the premises where appropriate or asked. The premises and the personal enjoys all applicable diplomatic immunities and privileges. Maintaining the order within the premises in under the responsibility of the organization. Nevertheless, as the organization uses not only the territory but also the infrastructure of the host country, its whole set of operations and transactions directly affects the latter. This compels parties to work cooperatively.