Five forum responses 200 words each with works cited. Two classes: International Organizations and Anthropology.
Post 1 International Organizations:
What are some of the biggest challenges IOs face when attempting to preserve security and enact justice? Analyze some of the factors that determine how successfully or unsuccessfully IOs address those challenges.
Paulson (2004, pp.460), makes the point regarding the International Criminal Court (ICC) that, “there have been continued problems in some cases simply speaks to the limited ability of legal decisions to solve complicated political questions”. However, the author also notes that although imperfect, compliance with ICC rulings is “good although not perfect” (pp.460).
The compliance issue speaks to one of the limiting factors of international judicial bodies that try to enact justice. How do you apply or execute justice on a non-willing sovereign state? In it’s simplest form signatories to the ICC must be willing participants. Mayerfield (2003), however writes that the United States is not a willing participant of the ICC because the US fears that the ICC, “..could become a forum for launching politically motivated attacks” (pp. 126).
These two examples show that if not all countries of the world are on board with the concept and mission of the ICC then pockets of non-compliance will exist. I can sympathize with the United States position as it is my feeling as well that the ICC and many IO’s have become overtly political and seek to use the platform of the ICC to coerce behavior and punish that particular IO’s view of wrongdoing. Still as Paulson (2004), posits because the role of the ICC has been codified by international law and norms (socialization) and precedent (for instance Rwanda and former Yugoslav cases) the ICC does serve a deterrent value by potentially dissuading human rights abusers from engaging in the most egregious of activities.
In regard to IO’s, namely NATO preserving security, we first need to acknowledge that the situation and mission of NATO has vastly changed since the end of the Cold War. An alliance first formed to deter Soviet aggression now finds itself grappling with a new threat-terrorism. Nevers (2007), writes that, “NATO’s actual role in the multifaceted struggle against terrorists is minor. This could have long-term implications for alliance” (pp. 34). My experience concurs with Never’s opinions as I have seen NATO become more of an enabling force for the US led “War on Terror”. Because the war is unpopular and controversial in Europe, European member states would not stand for casualties, therefore their contribution is mostly limited to logistics and intelligence support. Never’s (2007), however, also makes the point that the “War on terror” is also largely a law enforcement function and not a military one.
An interesting side not is that some of the new NATO countries, for instance Poland have provided specific combat forces that have contributed. The Brits also use their special forces extensively augment US led operations as well. Still NATO struggles with the change of mission from a bi-polar world characterized by a hard Cold War threat to the new realities of the 21st Century with multiple asymmetric threats. My opinion is that NATO has been slow to react to these changing realities and in some cases risks becoming obsolete.
Post 2 International Organizations:
What are some of the biggest challenges IOs face when attempting to preserve security and enact justice? Analyze some of the factors that determine how successfully or unsuccessfully IOs address those challenges.
International organizations contend with many of the same issues that domestic organizations experience in terms of enforcement and accountability, however, they realize these issues on a much grander scale. For this model, I will use NATO as an example. One of the more considerable challenges they face is garnering the international support and cooperation needed to achieve on of their loftier goals – the global war on terrorism (GWOT) (de Nevers, 2007). To meet this challenge, NATO has had to adjust the boundaries by which they operate. Traditionally, NATO was a military centralized organization but in order to appeal to all states (and appear less militant), NATO now works with both military and political coalitions in order to provide a broader forum for support (de Nevers, 2007). Unfortunately, this has more potential to do more harm than good. With a political forum, states now have the option to potentially turn military campaigns focused on the GWOT into political grandstanding fueled with partisan attacks.
A second challenge NATO must contend with is the struggle to remain relevant in their support and cooperation in the fight against terrorism as the United States shifts to a leading role from a support position (de Nevers, 2007). With varying strategies, it has become increasingly difficult for NATO to maintain dominance in this fight. As such, they have assumed new practices such as cyber and technological defenses designed to thwart or lessen the effects of a terrorist attacks and adjusting their position to better align with the United State’s strategy of offensive counterterrorism (de Nevers, 2007).
Another test of NATO’s ability to preserve security is their approach of bureaucracy versus volunteerism. Support for the United States in the global war on terror is predicated on other states freely and willingly cooperating with our efforts whereas NATO uses treaties with compulsory and enforced stipulations (de Nevers, 2007). However, it goes without saying that a voluntary response is likely to be quicker and stronger than one that is forced and obligatory.
Enacting justice is equally as challenged as preserving security. The ability of the International Criminal Court (ICC) to determine a mechanism to establish and enforce human rights protection on an international scale has been one of their most significant problems (Mayerfeld, 2003). Lacking an internationally accepted definition of “human rights”, the ICC must be prepared to not only experience frustration in enacting justice, but also address the possibility of creating contention among states with varying meanings of human rights. According to Mayerfeld (2003) to assist in meeting this challenge, the ICC has implemented a two-fold approach to guarantee the preservation and protection of human rights. First, human rights laws are enforced on a domestic level with governmental and public officials (as individuals). If that fails, then the ICC and other foreign governments will apply coercion to “assist” the violator into compliance. The two-fold practice ensures accountability for all states, despite denouncing human rights laws based on not understanding what they mean.
Post 3 International Organizations:
In general are the world’s most powerful states and motivated to increase the efficacy and power of international organizations?
Post 1 Anthropology:
I have chosen forum question one for my weeks topic. As defined in our learnings, reciprocity is a relationship between people that involves a mutual exchange of gifts of goods, services or favors. There are three types of reciprocities we have learned about in our lessons; generalized reciprocity, balanced reciprocity, and negative reciprocity. In our culture we encounter these exchanges many times in our lives whether we realize it or not.
Generalized reciprocity is receiving a gift without being expected to return repayment immediately. The first thing that comes to mind when I see this term is birthdays. I have received gifts in the past on my birthday and found myself ensuring that I do them same for them on their special day. It goes without being said in our culture that you should get them a gift, especially if they have gifted you previously.
A balanced reciprocity is a lot like Christmas. Christmas is a large materialist holiday in which people exchange gifts with each other. These exchanges happen immediately which makes them balanced. Both parties receive gifts simultaneously. Another example would be wedding anniversaries. This (in most cases) consist of two spouses exchanging gifts in celebration of their wedding day. In our culture, this is definitely not a generalized reciprocity!
As for negative reciprocity, an attempt to exchange something valued differently than what is being offered, I have a perfect experience to share. I am currently purchasing bulk amounts of ammunition from my coworker for a determined price. My coworker is moving overseas and needs to get rid of it. I know his prices are a bit higher than normal but I do not mind because I know that moving overseas is expensive. I am getting bulk ammo for a higher price, but I am doing a little to help a friend in his stressful move.
Post 2 Anthropology:
There are three types of reciprocity, generalized, balanced, and negative. Generalized reciprocity is the type that we should be most familiar with but may not have understood what it meant. It is characterized as giving without expectation of immediate return, this is most commonly found in friendships and within families. Balanced reciprocity is recognized by the immediate expectation of return. This is the type practiced when purchasing goods from a company or individual, money for item. The third and final is negative reciprocity and is a “one sided” deal or giving more than is expected or possible in return. I am confident in saying that at some point in all our lives we have experienced or performed these styles of reciprocity. I experience or perform generalized reciprocity almost every day. Living and working with a small team we often order food etc for the group. It seems to just make its rounds as well as who’s house we eat at. Living and working in Kurdistan has unique challenges and activities like this help ease the stress. We all used balanced in the sense of purchasing goods but in my life, I also use balanced in the form of bartering. I will trade my coaching services for lessons of other topics so no standard currency is exchanged. On the side, negative reciprocity I used to be a serial classic car purchaser. I would obviously try to get the car as cheap as possible, do some work on it and resell it. I also like to use “negative” as a positive when I see a child selling lemonade or offering to cut grass, yes it still happens where I live, I always like to give them a “tip” that is often highly inflated. It is my way to encourage young entrepreneurs of America to continue, especially if the job is top notch!
Looking for a solution written from scratch with No plagiarism and No AI?
WHY CHOOSE US?
We deliver quality original papers |
Our experts write quality original papers using academic databases.We dont use AI in our work. We refund your money if AI is detected |
Free revisions |
We offer our clients multiple free revisions just to ensure you get what you want. |
Discounted prices |
All our prices are discounted which makes it affordable to you. Use code FIRST15 to get your discount |
100% originality |
We deliver papers that are written from scratch to deliver 100% originality. Our papers are free from plagiarism and NO similarity.We have ZERO TOLERANCE TO USE OF AI |
On-time delivery |
We will deliver your paper on time even on short notice or short deadline, overnight essay or even an urgent essay |