A Call for Further Studies on the Dynamics of International Organizations

Abstract

pursuit of United States foreign policy objectives in a multilateral framework must take into account the political and institutional realities of the international body concerned and of intemational organizations generally. Too often those who advocate greater use of multilateral channels conveniently ignore these realities or consider them mere excuses employed by policy makers to explain their inaction or to justify bypassing international organizations. There is no denying the temptation to hide behind such excuses since resort to international organizations often appears less certain, or at best more time-consuming, than the use of bilateral channels or ad hoc international groupings. It is equally true, however, that policy makers are sometimes deterred from using international organizations by chastening experiences in dealing with their frustrating political dynamics. Certain recommendations of the President's Commission for the Observance of the 25th anniversary of the UN and of the UNA-USA Panel report on The United Nations in the Seventies illustrate the problem. Administration has been charged with acting on only those recommendations which suited its purposes. fact is that while not all recommendations were deemed to be practical or appropriate, most were and many have been implemented. Nevertheless, it has proved impossible to find an adequate coalition in the UN to enact others which are strongly endorsed in Washington. Among these are recommendations dealing with peacekeeping, peaceful settlement, microstates, voting reform, streamlining General Assembly procedures, and revitalizing the International Court of Justice. Recently, heightened ecological concerns have inspired fresh thinking on the need to re-examine aspects of national sovereignty if we