Article Review Global Governance

Article Review: The Unruled World: The Case for Good Enough Global Governance In the article by Stewart Patrick, the writer argues that because any watertight global organization is not feasible and practicable, “good enough” global governance should do the job. Here, the writer outlines various points. He states the difference between national governance and global governance saying that while the former is straightforward type that is provided for by actual governments, the concept of the latter is complex and ambiguous. Global governance is identified as the collective effort by sovereign states, international organizations, and other non-state actors in issues that transcend national frontiers. The centerpiece of global governance is United Nations, the writer says. United Nation consists of various parts whose effectiveness is questioned by the writer. Security Council, he argues, lags in its implementation of what it promises theoretically. Another point that mars Security Council is its indecisiveness in expansion of permanent members. The writer does not stop with Security Council saying that the dysfunction of UN extends beyond Security Council to UN Secretariat and UN General Assembly. Global Governance, the writer argues has no power to enforce compliance with collective decisions and that it is an ungainly patchwork of formal and informal institutions. Those institutions include Regional Institutions, Ad hoc coalition, Multilateral Alliances, Security Groups among others. There are also increasing number of non-state actors who shape global agendas, define new rules and monitor compliance with international obligations. The writer dismisses the growing number of ad hoc coalitions whose effectiveness, he argues, is temporary. He gives the instance of G-20 whose scope ended after a few years of its establishment. This is in line with the G-7 (now expanded to G-8, which is again attacked by the writer for incorporating Russia with whom rest of the countries do not share ideology) whose receding momentum can be noticed. BRICS is another co-operation that is dismissed by the writer because of inherent conflict between the member states (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa) despite their new-formed coalition which speaks against the Western intervention. Emerging concept of “Global Governance in Pieces” (where complex issues are disaggregated into manageable chunks) and its positive as well as negative aspects are discussed by the writer. While these result in useful division of labor as in the case of trade (WTO Doha Round for example), the instance of World Health Organization (WHO) a specialized UN agency illustrates the example of disaggregated system of global health governance. The issue of climate change is

dealt in pieces – separate initiatives make up a cluster of complementary activities that do not add up to make up for totality. Regional organizations’ impact is discussed next. Regional organizations are acknowledged by the writer as being more important even than UN in managing cross-border challenges, facilitating trade, and promoting regional security. There is an example cited regarding the last point as the regional organization’s (African Union’s) role in peacekeeping on the African continent. Effectiveness of regional organizations also arise from the fact that they are more familiar with the underlying sources of local conflicts and are more sensitive and invested in potential solutions than any outsider. But the writer fears that the burden sharing between the ultimate global governance centerpiece, United Nations, and regional organizations may lead to burden-shifting which the latter might not be able to handle. The issue of Contested Commons which includes Maritime, Outer Space, and Cyberspace Domains is talked about next. These commons encompass the domains that carry the flow of goods, capital, people, ideas on which globalization rests. But the problem as Stewart Patrick points out is being caused due to crowding of commons and that the previous US hegemony/ advantage is falling. The case of South China Sea is an instance wherein the conflict regarding commons is visible. This dispute involves China, Taiwan, Brunei, Malaysia, Philippines, and Vietnam. The solution for this problem can be found following the Ilusilissat Declaration of 2005 among five Arctic nations – Canada, Denmark, Norway, Russia, US. The problem of US, a major power, not being a member of UN Convention on Law of Sea (UNCLOS) renders the convention weak. Outer space, another commons, is becoming congested, contested and competitive. Availability of orbital slot has become scarcer. Regarding outer space, the writer points out that because Outer Space Treaty 1967 lacks dispute resolution mechanism and which is in need of renewal. Infrastructure of cyberspace is limited within sovereign states and private hands. Growing epidemic of cybercrime, growing specter of cyber war among sovereign states, and demand for independent regulation of Internet are some of the pressing issues regarding cyberspace. The pace of technological change is another threat for global governance. International systems are lagging behind in catching up with technological advances like drones, synthetic engineering, nanotech and geo-engineering. Due to the lack of proper co-ordination, conflicts arise in the issue of use of drones especially by US, in the case of bio-weapons development and use. While the increasing number of the clutter (formal and informal institutions) helps division of complex transnational problems the writer is not convinced regarding the

effectiveness of them. Also argued point is that “Global disorder is here to stay, so the challenge is to make it work as well as possible”. For this, the writer advocates the idea of collective action which includes ad hoc coalition of the willing, regional, and sub-regional instruments as well as informal codes of conduct which can be facilitated by diplomats and other interested parties. Although this will not bring about a smooth global co-operation, the writer concludes by saying that “it would be better than nothing, and it might even work”.