0 penilaian0% menganggap dokumen ini bermanfaat (0 suara)
25 tayangan14 halaman
Structure of the International System can be defined as the configuration of power to block the relations between actors. The hierarchy of the international actors (powers / states of the system) is determined by the structure of the system. The notion of International System and not system of states finds an explanation in the fact that the definition is done taking into account the logic of powers.
Structure of the International System can be defined as the configuration of power to block the relations between actors. The hierarchy of the international actors (powers / states of the system) is determined by the structure of the system. The notion of International System and not system of states finds an explanation in the fact that the definition is done taking into account the logic of powers.
Structure of the International System can be defined as the configuration of power to block the relations between actors. The hierarchy of the international actors (powers / states of the system) is determined by the structure of the system. The notion of International System and not system of states finds an explanation in the fact that the definition is done taking into account the logic of powers.
5. The structure and process of the International System 5.1. The definition of the International System
The structure of the International System can be defined as the configuration of power to block the relations between actors. At an analytic level the notion of structure is used in order to establish the limits of the actions exercised by actors being in a conjectural situation. Examples of structures are the capacities and relations of power which prevails in a system at a given time; these determining the character of the relations between nation and through this the nature of the international system. In reality, the analysts who concentrate their interest on the structure of the system and on its functioning as a factor of order in international relations (especially the realist structuralists) seek to study the responsibility of the conversion of the logic of the system into logic of conservation and defense of the given order. The analysts of the international society which focus on the structural logic dont necessarily pursue a conservative finality. The hierarchy of the international actors (powers/states of the system) is determined by the structure of the system. In conclusion the structure can be defined as the configuration of power generated by the power of the system.
5.1.1. International system or system of states
The reduction of the actors which form the structure of the system and the problems of hierarchy is very important, because only they detain the structural force necessary to establish the rule of the game on global level in the international system. The use of the notion of international system and not system of states finds an explanation in the fact that the definition of the structure is done taking into account the logic of powers, not being able to neglect the transnational aspects involved in the control of the power derived from the big powers. Logically we should use the term of international system rather that of the system of states, the first notion being a more complex one (being constituted of the system of states and of the transnational society), while the second notion sees in the system of states just the concrete type of transnational society. A. 2 big powers dispose of structural power: according to Susan Strange the structural power presumes control over security, - production, -finances, - knowledge (science, technology, culture). The historical analyses realized on the growth and disappearance of powers; demonstrate to us that the most important is the hard of power, namely the control of security and production. The actual global analysis indicates the fact that the dimension of the soft of power (like communication, finances) is currently vital. At the end of the Col War the historical pessimism comes back, focusing on the control of security; this fact is even more obvious after 11 th September 2001. 2
B. The multidimensional character of power: Considering that in the recent decades inside the international system exist a lot of actors which dispose of the attributes of a structural power, we can affirm that nowadays the power of the international system has a multidimensional character. This idea has been promoted by lots of scholars. Susan Strange supports the idea that not only the states can fulfill the quality of a structural power; this statute can be received even by some criminal associations like the mob. Robert Gilpin also considers that there exists a convergence between the power of the state and its transnational corporations. C. Hierarchy and the balance between the great powers are two fundamental structural elements which make order in the international anarchy, transforming it from a simple chaotic plurality of states into a system of states. These 2 elements assure a relative order, order which leads to a better understanding and predictability of the processes of the international system.
5.1.2. The Balance of Power in the international system
It occupies an important place in the Western political thought and a particular place in the Theory of International Relations. When is approached the order of the international system, 2 questions are asked: one referring to the number of the powers which form the structure of the international system and the criteria which are used for the establishment of the typology of the international systems. The Majority of the authors speak about 3 types of international systems constructed around the theory of the Balance of power: unipolar, bi- and multipolar system. A. The unipolar (single-pole) system or imperial system: this responds to the logic of the imperial power. A single power establishes the agenda, dictating the norms and controls all the resources of the power. The hegemonic power reunites in its hands the power of coercion (superior to the power of other units of the system) imposing its own system of values. Here we can speak of a hegemonic system because the relations of domination are constructed in a vertical way. The stability of the system enters in crisis in the moment when the logic of functioning alters, the horizontal relations between the units of the system degrade, because it own power is eroded from inside (domestic wars, destruction of resources) and because it takes place a change of the system through the penetration inside of some elements with an external character (like the appearance of the Turks in the European hegemonic system after 1453. All these elements lead to the erosion of the hegemonic power. As a consequence of the ascension of the USA, more scholars consider that we are face to face with a new unipolar logic. Robert Gilpin considers that the USA after 1945 has reached the status of hegemonic power. Raymond Aron says about the USA that its an Imperial Republic. B. Bipolar system: is given by the balance between the big powers. This way in a system meet two such powers which dispose of equal capacities superior to the other units of the 3
system. They dispose as well of a mechanism of establishment of a bipolar world, like: nuclear discouragement in case of the Cold War. This is a system where 2 powers establish the agenda and the norms of imposition through coercion inside the system. The system can be homogenous, in the conditions when the 2 powers have different values; in these conditions, one of the powers imposes to the other one its own system of values, (This was the situation during 5 decades in the time of the Cold War, when the USA imposed its own system of values in the capitalist bloc, while the USSR in the communist bloc. In case of the bipolar system the change of the system of power appears in different conditions: in the case of the erosion of bipolar system, when appears the perspective of war between the 2 superpowers; than the erosion of leadership in the case of one or both of the powers; the generalized erosion of the system thanks to the establishment of new relations between the states liberated under the guardianship of the blocs. These relative evolutions of the bipolar system can be used to analyze the evolution of the international society after 1945. C. Multipolar system: is given by the balance between more powers. The historical examples from the 18 th -19 th centuries are situated within the multipolar system, a system dominated by 5-7 great powers, which approximately had equal capacities. This way the force of coercion was more divided like in the case of the bipolar system, and the mechanism of balance was given by the idea of alliance. The alliance is in contradiction with the hegemonic tendency of one of the powers, which in many cases leads to the use of force to reestablish the balance between the powers. In this case the heterogeneity of the system is being threatened by the permanent incertitude of not respecting the values of the alliances. From this point of view there are more types of multipolar systems: a) Heterogeneous multipolar system is the European system of the 1930s, being dominated by three systems of values: liberalism, communism, fascism. b) Homogeneous multipolar system: is associated to the European system of states appeared after the Congress of Vienna from 1815 (named European Concert. The change of the system had resumed to the oscillation of states from one alliance to the other, fact which lead to wars between the power, and as a result to the appearance of new powers. Depending of the classical typology of states which combine the number of powers with the ideological criteria, the analysts of the international relations have developed a series of models. The model of Morton Kaplan based on 5 initial models: the system of power, the bipolar rigid system, the flexible bipolar system, the international legal system and the international universal system- gave birth to some new situations. The problematic of the polarity of the international system- whether bipolar or multipolar- occupies an important place in the preoccupations of the theoreticians of the international relations. Some authors consider that the bipolar system is more stable (Kenneth Waltz), others stating that the most flexible and most efficient is multipolarism (Raymond Aron and Morton Kaplan). Other authors consider that the balance of the powers is a mark of instability of the post-war international system (Stanley Hoffmann and Hedley Bull).
4
5.2. The process of the International System
The process constitutes the dynamic aspect of the international system, in the interactions which serve to the erosion of the structure, as well to the change of the system. A system has 2 components: structure (static component) and process (dynamic component). The structure indicates how authors situate in face with others. Its fundamental variables are the number of actors and the distribution of power amongst them. The process designates the rule of interaction between the actors of the system. The fundamental variables of interaction are the type, identified by the continuous conflict or by cooperation and the intensity, which can be traduced by the volume of interactions during of a determined period.
5.2.1. The definition of the process of the international system
It represents the rules of interaction which stay on the basis of the relations between the actors of the system; the type of interaction and its intensity are 2 fundamental variables of the process of the international system. The global logic own to the transnational society is extremely complex, especially when we talk about the intensity of interactions and its multiple interpretations. A. The type of international interaction: a.) International interaction consists in relevant political processes of communication and changes between the actors of the international system. b.) The process of communication and change is in a continuous conflict or cooperation; conflict and cooperation are those two fundamental antagonisms which result from the interaction of the actors. These two opposing parties are in permanent move, being like an applied thermometer to the international society. When this thermometer reaches a higher level- reaching a maximum level of danger from the international society- this registers the highest level of conflicts of interests in the society, thus appearing the wars. When the thermometer is on a low level, the conflicts of interests disappeared, the international society knowing a period of harmony, the processes interacting in one. Thus its reached the appearance of the global interest, interest which is subordinated to the previous desires and aspirations of the states. B. The intensity of the international interaction evolves between the 2 extremes: conflict and cooperation: a.) a maximum level of conflict which degenerates into an armed conflict; b.) a level of conflict in which persists the discord c.) a level of cooperation where the actors perceive the necessity of coordination of the interests; d.) a level in which is missing the discord and where rules the harmony, having an effect the process of integration between the states, creating veritable zones of peace. 5
5.2.2. Conflict as a basic interaction: war
Conflicts or international crisis are characteristic to periods of explosion of violence and constitutes the relish of the international relations. Even though in our days the international interactions of cooperation are dominant in relation to those of conflict, these latter are being the one which capture the attention, especially when it reaches to their supreme limit: war. A. Definition of conflict: psychology, sociology- international relations offer a multitude of definitions to the concept of conflict a.) History of international relations considers that by conflict we can understand the shock between two opposed wills, which decide to use elements of adversity in order to assure the triumph of their decisions; represents situations the situations in which two or more players assume all risks in order to enter into the possession of a good through conquest and conservation; represents a tensioned situation which entails the birth of certain collective emotional reactions at the statesmen. A series of risks can be identified as a consequence of international conflicts: the existence of certain divergent interests which are defended by the use of divergent instruments, inclusively force; because of the attitude of the conflicting parties as the time passes the conflict evolves. b.) Theory of International Relations (influenced by the thought of Karl J. Holsti) considers the conflict as the achieving of a situation of organized violence, which starts whether because of an incompatible position over the litigation of the conflicting parties, or because of certain diplomatic and hostile military actions of these belligerent. The belligerent parties states, groups of states- adopt a conflict behavior when its undertaken actions become incompatible with the interests or objectives of a party. The main aim of the conflict is to bring benefits to a party and prejudice to the other, an act which in the theory of games is called zero sum game. The classic example is litigation for the control of a territory. Of course there exist incompatibilities in other areas as well: like the incompatibility between the system of values, the how the minorities are treated, proliferation of arms. The control imposed by the Arabs and Jews to Jerusalem constitutes a good example of incompatibility of values between two nations or two cultures. c.) The sociology of international relations considers that a conflict its a state of opposition between group and individuals, conflict which arises from the desire to take over a good or from the desire to emancipate mutual incompatible values. B. The origin of conflicts: is guided after 2 criteria: the criteria of seizure (strategic territories, natural resources; criteria of incompatibility (religious, ethnic, ideological, adherence to a clan). In many cases these two criteria are inseparable. (Example Kosovo conflict, where to religious and ethnic incompatibilities overlapped the criteria of 6
possession of symbolic territories. Kosovo was the cradle of the medieval Serbian state; therefore these two criteria are of a maximum actuality even in our days. Conflicts related to communitarian identity are more accentuated in African (Biafra conflict), in Asia (conflict between the Tamils and the Cingals in Sri Lanka), these conflicts erupting even in Europe. The conflict from Yugoslavia had at its origins this conflict between communitarian identities, leading to the disintegration of Yugoslavia into state structures based on ethnic criteria. In the last years appeared a series of new potential dimensions of conflicts, especially those regarding the surrounding environment. The forms of manifestation of conflicts which have as their basis an environmental cause are one of the most diverse, taking over the resources being able to generate into revolt, the so called revolts of bread. Because of the repressions take place massive migrations, just as it happened in many occasions at the Horn of Africa; the migrations have created a certain shock between the identities of the sedentary groups and of those settled after the migrations; the shocks between different nationalities of a state can reactivate a latent conflicts between the states. The cadence conflict it pasturing in the zones of maximum pauperization, implying populations and states. Its real evidence the direct involvement of the population in conflicts which degenerate into violence. If in the 20 th century, 90% of the conflicts were military and 10% civilian; in the XXIst we assist to a reversal of these percentages. The impact of the armed conflict has more and more graver consequences that is why they are trying to limit it. The development of technology and the cruelty of some practices, like the mining of territories, which affects directly the civilian population, constitutes one of the central subjects being on the agenda of peace of the actual international societies. In conclusion we can define conflict as a situation where the actors have opposing interests, whether for the lay hands on goods, or whether for the realization of incompatible values, coming even to the use of force for the achievement of the above mentioned objectives. C. Long-term conflict went through changes during time: we ca n talk about a process of development of conflict. This process was marked by tensions, a process traduced through an attitude of distrust and suspicion of the population and of the politicians before the activity and expectations from each other. For example the permanent tension which was born because of incompatible objectives between the Syrians and Israelis over the control of the Golan Heights- required diplomatic and military intervention in order to prevent to reach to an armed conflict. Another example is that of long-term conflict between Greece and Turkey for the division of the island of Cyprus. A conflict can have two exit ways: whether by its extinguishment through diplomacy, or by the escalation of the conflict into a latent tension and than its degeneration into a crisis. D. The crisis constitutes a stage of the conflict, characterized by the repeated explosion of misunderstandings. A conflict can last for decades, like the Arabic-Israeli conflict, and the other one from the Korean peninsula, or it can perform through occasional hostile 7
actions which feeds tensions on one side or on the other. A traditional example of crisis is that of Berlin from 1948-1949, which opposed the USA and the USSR. Cuban crisis another example. The distinctive elements of a crisis are different from the perspective of the policy makers: surprise effect in the action of the enemy, the perception of amnesia and of the negative consequences which can bring to their inactivity. Crisis is a moment of truth in the development of the conflict, the belligerent parties maintaining or changing their initial strategic position. In many cases, the crisis doesnt do anything but reaffirms the initial status quo between the parties. In few cases the crisis degenerate in armed conflicts training a new dimension of the conflict: war. Of those 251 situations of international crisis, from the period 1945-1989, only 50 have degenerated in wars. E. The war is the basic interaction of the conflict. War is the situation of conflict between 2 or more states, which reach to an extreme evolution when they use force. The idea of war in the international system its not the same as the formal logic of war between the states. The majority of the wars with an international character from the last two decades had an internal character (Angola, Somalia, Nicaragua) or transnational (the Israeli- Palestinian conflict). a.) The war constitutes the military dimension of conflict-(this is how Clausewitz perceived the idea of using force in the XIXth century. Karl Holsti named it armed conflict, while Hedley Bull considered it a political violence organized by the political units between and for interests. For the theoreticians of the international relations, war is a subject of a great interest. There exist authors who consider that to war was not accorded the theoretical interest what is deserves, the empirical works that had been written during the years about the causes of war and common factors were very minimal. b.) The conceptualization of the phenomenon of war is a central subject at the majority of the theoreticians, and war, associated to conflict and to crisis, is a phenomenon which has generated many empirical works inside the discipline of the international relations. The studies published till our days are situated in the behaviorist field, this focusing on the causes of war, the correlations between the aggressive behavior and other variables, like in the field of instruments and mechanisms of conflict resolution like: diplomacy, international organizations. These studies focus on the sensibility character provoked by the effects of the war; even though the period 1945-1989 was an era of prolonged peace, after the military confrontations were registered millions of deaths. c.) The years Cold War were a long period of peace for the powers from the international system and allied countries. Is the period when war suffered spectacular transformations in relation to the former ages: the wars mostly affected the smaller countries from the Third World; the vast majority of these wars had a civilian and domestic character. International wars between the powers of the system used in the 19 th century were replaced with the internationalized wars between 8
countries from the Third World. Internationalization of the war was favored by the external implication, through the presence of military forces on the territory (Cuban soldiers in Angola), by indirect implication, through assistance and accordance of financial help (American support against the Sandinists from Nicaragua), and last but not least because of the formation of a more larger and larger weapon market at a global level. The confrontation between the blocs favored the process of internationalization through the support given by the super-powers to their allies, to camps which were confronting in civil wars in Angola, Mozambique, or to states involved in regional wars-Israeli-Arabic war. d.) The end of the Cold War did not put an end to armed conflicts: For example regarding its geographic position, Europe is the region from the globe, which theoretically does not represent risks of conflict, maybe with the exception of Northern Ireland; but the Yugoslav crisis contradicted the rule. A statistic shows that in 2001 there were 24 armed conflicts, but none of these responded to the classical model of international war. Generally there were domestic wars, where the incompatibility of the belligerents has concentrated on a territorial litigation or on the fight against a government on power, without large support. Among the open conflicts which took place between 2002-2004, we can name the conflicts from Chechnya and Ossetia in Russia, than the conflicts from Abkhazia Georgia, than those from the Middle east-Iran, Iraq, Israel, Turkey, Afghanistan, India, and those from Asia: Pakistan, Indonesia, Myanmar, Philippines, Sri Lanka; Africa: Angola, Burundi, Algeria, Congo, Rwanda, Somalia, Sudan; South America: Colombia, Peru, Argentina, Bolivia, Chile. e.) The war between USA and Al-Qaeda represents the type of a new conflict, in which confront on one side a power that seeks universal hegemony and on the other side a power or groups of power which tries to contest this status and to push the international system to a situation of anarchy. This war led to the change of the initial perception of the relation between crisis and conflict. According the American perception the crisis is which determines the coalition and not vice versa; from this results a complete denial of the most important alliances like NATO, and of certain instances of international law, like UN. Also the USA gave up definitively the doctrine of triggering the answer only after being attacked, replacing it with the doctrine of preventive action. According to Stephan M. Walt preventive action is a strategy without logic from at least 6 reasons: the preventive war is necessary to be continued; encourages states to form a constant opposition to the US; is necessary more than in other conflicts of very precise information; it leads compulsory to the occupation of territory which is hard to be managed post-conflict; it leads to dangerous precedents, which might encourage other states to follow their example; preventive war threatens the civil Angolan Civil war 9
liberties. Those two approaches of conflict- action on its own and preventive action determined the USA to acquire with the necessary means to these missions and to develop its capacity of undertaking more conflicts simultaneously. f.) The beginning of the 21 st century represents a draft of conflicts which will threaten the world in the future- conflicts between demographic explosion, technological development and the need of primary resources. From Kaliningrad going through Central and Eastern Europe, Middle East, Caucasus, Central Asia, the Himalayan borders, the Malacca straits, Formosa and the Korean Peninsula, draws a banana of the crisis of the future. In this zone confronts Russia with its immense mineral resources, Europe, USA and Japan with the technological advance and China or India with their important demographic potential. Russia and its former Soviet republics from Central Asia dispose of immense mineral resources, resources essential on a medium and long term in the equation of development. Acknowledging this trump, which can keep her in the top of the great decision makers of the world, despite the internal difficulties with which is facing, Russia seeks to create around her a self-defense shield, exercising a major influence upon the international system through Kaliningrad to Europe, through Ukraine and Moldova (transnistrian enclave) to Central and South-Eastern Europe- zone where EU and NATO are in competition in order to get a privileged position through the republics from Caucasus and of Iran and the zone of Middle East and North Korea, region threatened by American and Japanese pressure. China and India are two powers which together hold the 40% of the population of the world. Even though among them has created a tensioned situation at the Himalayan front, and the issue of Tibet is not leaving India insensitive, just like the Kashmir problem did not remain indifferent to China, the two big powers are aware of their asset, being two major market which will weigh as much as the primary resources in the equation of development. These two play chess with other, in the same time trying to develop their technology through medium states like: Pakistan, North Korea for China, and Vietnam for India; they try to compete with the USA, Europe and Japan, these representing the most developed spaces from a technological point of view, but the existence of resources and markets is still vital. These spaces with a powerful technological advance seek to be present in the axis of the banana of future crisis, through the Baltic States, through that of the former Soviet republics from Europe: Belarus, Ukraine, Romania, Moldova, Georgia, Turkey, Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Vietnam, South Korea and Taiwan), these regions will become zones of storage of primary resources and also regional centre of pressure over the zones with demographic potential. Although, theoretically in this equation of owning primary resources, of the number of population and of the technological development confront 6 big poles of power. In reality the confrontation takes place between the leaders- USA in the camp of technological advance, China with its demographic power, and Russia as an 10
owner of mineral resources. This trio of confrontation has transformed over time into bipolar formula (USA against Russia and China).
5.2.3. Cooperation as a basic interaction
On the other extreme of international interactions is situated the cooperation. According to the cooperative dimension of the international relations, interactions are diverse and complex, being approached in analytical terms by the Theory of International Relations and defined by the majority of actors as the actions of the anarchic image from the international relations. The intensity of cooperation varies from punctual diplomatic negotiations and consequences derived from these, to the creation organizations in which states can assume together sovereignty, initiating this way a process of integration- like in the case of the EU. A.) The cooperation between governments, organizations and individuals through millions of transactions: Even though the majority of studies of international policy have concentrated on the causes of wars, the routine forms of cooperation shouldnt be ignored. Cooperation and collaboration make our life easier and more comfortable and more efficient. The theory of games demonstrate to us that the international actors calculate the costs and benefits, their personal interests being more defined and stronger in a common space. These calculations are even more efficient as they should answer to the common threats which refer to the preservation of the surrounding environment, terrorism, narcotics, and mass diseases. In other cases these calculations can be the answers of some advantages resulted from a minimum technological-administrative collaboration: like aviation norms, norms of correspondence and international circulation. B.) Cooperation has become a principal and a norm of behavior in the international system. According to the article 1.3 of the UN Charter, international cooperation leads to the solution of international problems with an economic, social, cultural or humanitarian character and also to the development and stimulation of the respect of human rights and fundamental rights, without making a distinction between race, sex, language or religion; this representing the ration of existence of the UN. Therefore, international cooperation is both a rational calculation and a legal norm. The relation of cooperation through its implications attracts a sum of consequences: the creation of mechanisms of coordination and consultancy for objective reasons (individual incapacity to oppose to problems) and for subjective reason (the perception derived from the feeling of moral duty). These constitute the elements which oppose to the situation of tension which appears in situations of conflict. The conditions which favor the establishment of relations of cooperation are the existence of interests, the equal distribution of cists, risks and benefits among the parties, and the trust that the party will fulfill its obligations, the interaction between reciprocity and mutual trust. 11
5.2.4. Types of cooperation can be distinguished in function of the approached criteria:
A. The criteria of fields of activity: political cooperation, economic and technical cooperation. a.) In the field of political cooperation can be mentioned the mechanism of bilateral relations established between France and Germany in the 60s, which aimed the creation of a mechanism of political consultancy at the highest level between the two countries. This mechanism of political cooperation was copied by other states. Spain established similar mechanism with its neighbors. After 1996 Romania established with Hungary a system of mechanisms of mutual consultancy at the highest level. Some groups of states were attracted and motivated by international cooperation. (For example the Nordic countries coordinate their political actions in the frame of the UN. b.) The field of economic cooperation is much more developed. We can take into account the system of monetary cooperation set down at Bretton Woods, the other system of tariffs and coordinated commerce of GATT, and last but not the least the commercial system coordinated by the WTO (World Trade Organization). c.) The field of technical cooperation is in a full expansion. Here enters the military planning done between the members of the NATO, or the cooperation in the field of environment between Romania and Bulgaria. The UN Environment Programme is another example of technical cooperation. B. The criteria of formalization of cooperation. It can be made a distinction between the highly formalized forms of cooperation and those medium formalized (namely the treaties or international organization and informal cooperation, based on political accords. The last two forms of cooperation served the European Communities to tackle its economic relations with its former colonies, by the Yaound and Lome Convention. As well the European Community established with the beginning of 1970 a mechanism of coordination of the foreign policy of the member states: European Political Cooperation. C. The criteria of the involved actors. The most simple is to distinguish between : a.) Bilateral cooperation established between 2 states b.) Multilateral cooperation specific to international organizations From another perspective we can speak about cooperation on the following levels: interstate level (realized through bi- and multilateral cooperation), governmental under state level (through cross-border cooperation between regional structures; the transnational level is realized through the participation at international cooperation projects, and the super state level is established through the relations of cooperation carried out by an international organization (like the alphabetization campaign realized by UNESCO).
5.2.5. International cooperation for development
12
It assumes the mobilization of the rich countries to back up the developing countries; this action presumes the transfer of resources leased to developing countries, an action that has the finality of helping the states being in difficulty. The modern conception of help is based on the providing grant to countries being in difficulty, this being a permanent practice within the international relations; this conception appeared after the 2 nd World War. The policy of the USA has guided after this theory, supporting the national reconstruction of its allies through the Marshall Plan. The massive decolonization from the 50s and 60s put into practice new process- assistance for development- process which can be traduced by the claim of the right of assistance for the exit from the crisis of the developing countries; these are financially and materially assisted by cities and superpowers. The entrance of new states to UN determined the organization to adopt a strategy of assistance for development based on the proposals from the 9 th Chapter of the UN Charter. In 1960 the General Assembly of the UN adopted a resolution entitled United Nations Action for Development, which proposed the transfer of resources from North to South. By assistance for development is understood the transfer of resources performed by the public organs or organs of management to underdeveloped countries. These respond to 2 criteria, having as an immediate finality economic development and the increase of the level of life from underdeveloped regions. There arent considered development assistance the investments and the supplies related to exports.
5.2.6. Bilateral and multilateral cooperation for development
A. Bilateral cooperation it comes from whether from a government and it can be traduced through donations and official credits, or from an NGO, these being than directed to a government or to a private institution from on underdeveloped country. The principal granter, in bilateral terms is the group of countries integrated in the OCDE. After 1990 the EU has become the principal granter. The cooperation put into practice by the EU through the European Development Fund, just as by other international public institutions can be integrated in the field of multilateral cooperation. B. Multilateral cooperation is realized through international financial organs like the IMF (International Monetary Fund), World Bank, regional banks of development, multilateral funds circulated by the UN (International Fund for Agricultural Development), or other organizations like WHO(World Health Organization). The difference between bi and multilateralism consists in the fact that in the first case the donor has a great capacity of control over the receptor. Not without arguments many authors have considered the cooperation being an important instrument in the development of foreign policy, the donor helping only its former colonies, neighboring countries or regions where it has some kind of security interest. Once with the given assistance the donor countries can put some conditions to the recipients. For example the 13
receiver must use a part of the assistance to cover the costs of export came from the donor country. The conditioned help is not just an attribute of the state or of the financial organizations, the adoption of their help being conditioned by the receivers of the programs of structural adjustments, programs which many times are done in the detriment of the majority of the population. The cooperation for development of the UN is planned on more decades; this way in 1960 has been put into practice a program of assistance for the next decade; this being a first exercise, the program from 1970 gaining much more consistence through the program entitled the 2 nd decade of development (1970-1980); this had as an objective the encouragement of the donor countries to transfer to the underdeveloped countries 0.7% of their GDP under the form of official help for development. Unfortunately this objective hasnt been accomplished only by half, the average of the official help for development in reality being between 0.22 and 0.35% of the GDP. Although till decades had taken place lots of international cooperation for development the original objective hasnt been reached yet- the globalization of economic and social development. The actual tendencies are contrary, aiming the marginalization of the poor population from the Southern countries and the concentration of wealth to three regions: USA, Europe, and Japan. Therefore, the cooperation for development which had to be an interaction of the international system in reality has lead to the tripolarization of the system.
5.2.7. Cooperation can derive into integration
In the process of integration the majority of authors sustain the assignment of the competences of the member states to common organs, namely the transfer of the power of the states to independent bodies of states; there also exists the possibility that these bodies to make the decisions which are contrary to those taken by the representatives of the states and which become compulsory before the national legal orders. This definition with a supranational character has to be reported to the unique space in which operate these interactions, namely the EU. Here had taken place a transfer of sovereignty in pre- determined fields like: commerce, agriculture, fishing policy; than it has to be reported to the European Commission, which takes the most important decisions; the adoption of the communitarian law. The process of construction of the EU animates Ernst Haas, who deepens his knowledge regarding the European integration. Haas sees the political integration as a neo- functionalist, where the political actors transfer their loyalty and respect towards a new authority or a community superimposed over the national one. 14
This type of relation can be found in the case of the EU. The question mark put frequently regarding the existence or non-existence of interests and of European identities has highlighted as well many of the daily difficulties experienced by the EU. The substrate of integration, I mean emotive Europe or utilitarian Europe marks the limits of the political integration, these gaining pure utilitarian effects, effects that are hardly accepted by the political integration. Unlike Haass viewpoint, Karl Deutsch reports integration to the concept of security community. This concept refers to group of persons whom have integrated. By this it is understood that inside a territory exists the feeling of adherence to a community; this belonging is given by organizations and practices sufficiently extensive and profound to assure the peaceful changes between the populations. According to Deutsch, a security community exists only when exists the certitude that the members of that community will not make appeal to violent measures, but rather to peaceful ones in order to resolve their differences. If everybody would be integrated in a security community, than the perspective of war would be removed definitively; in this case the integration would be possible only in zones of peace. Unlike Hass, Deutsch considers that the basis of integration is formed by the system of independent states which creates an integrated communitarian frame, as it is realized by the USA and Canada. These opinions are differentiated by the following elements: the transfer of sovereignty to independent institutions in the case of the supranationalist definition, the creation of common identity in the case of neo-functionalism and the elimination of war in the case of the definition of the security community. These three viewpoints are essential for the process of integration in the actual international system and form part of the daily realities known to the world after 1945; off course there cannot be excluded the other elements of differentiation.