Anda di halaman 1dari 14


Actors of the international society

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

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
September 2001.

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

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
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).


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
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.

5.2.2. 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
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

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
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

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
century were
replaced with the internationalized wars between

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
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

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
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

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.

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
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
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


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
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
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

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

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
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

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.

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.