Internatıonal Organızatıon And Global Governance

Yanıt Açıklaması: The balance of power is a “fallback system” of international relations. So, collective security does not refer to a fallback system.

Yanıt Açıklaması: In March 1814, four major powers of Europe, namely England, Russia, Prussia, and Austria came to an agreement and signed the Treaty of Chaumont to form the coalition that would eventually defeat Napoleon.

Yanıt Açıklaması: In March 1814, four major powers of Europe, namely England, Russia, Prussia, and Austria came to an agreement and signed the Treaty of Chaumont to form the coalition that would eventually defeat Napoleon.

Yanıt Açıklaması: According to the the Peace of Westphalia, each sovereign who represented a state was accepted as equal, regardless of the size of lands they ruled or the nobility to which they belonged.

Yanıt Açıklaması: Embedded in Immanuel Kant’s reflections, the world society indicates individuals, non-state organizations, and other actors that make up an idealistic international civil society (Wight, 1992: 37-40).

Yanıt Açıklaması: An important concept about policymaking is policy network . A policy network is a set of nonhierarchical, stable, and interdependent relationships that connect a variety of actors. Choice (d) is the correct answer.

Yanıt Açıklaması: Neorealists emphasize the importance of relative gains. The correct option is E.

Yanıt Açıklaması: The roots of IOs can be traced back to the emergence of the modern international system after the Peace of Westphalian in 1648. Because the early international system had been mainly dominated by European nation states, first IOs emerged in the 19th century in Europe. The Congress of Vienna (1815) created a more convenient atmosphere for the development of IOs. The establishment of the United Nations (UN) has provided an international platform for states. The League of Nations is the first permanent IO that was established for the maintenance of international peace and security. It was only after the First World War that modern IOs started to emerge. Archer considers the Paris Peace Conference of 1919 as the starting point of contemporary IOs. After the Conference, the League of Nations and International Labour Organization (ILO) were established as the leading modern IOs.

Yanıt Açıklaması: The discipline of International Relations refers to the Peace of Westphalia that ended the 30 Years’ War in 1648 as “the dawn of the modern international system.” The treaties signed in Münster and Osnabrück in 1648 indicate the political and diplomatic development that paved the way to the establishment of international institutions. The Peace of Westphalia ended the feudal system based on the primacy of thePapacy and the Holy Roman Empire and led to the emergence of new political entities called “sovereign states.” Thus, it indeed marked the beginning of an international milieu that would facilitate the emergence of nation-states. The correct choice is C.

Yanıt Açıklaması: In March 1814, four major powers of Europe, namely England, Russia, Prussia, and Austria came to an agreement and signed the Treaty of Chaumont to form the coalition that would eventually defeat Napoleon.

Yanıt Açıklaması: Evans and Newham identify the scope of global governance as follows: “Global governance should not be confused with World government, which implies a singular or unitary authority. Nor does it focus exclusively on intergovernmental relationships. Rather it involves the participation of non-governmental organizations (NGOs), multinational corporations (MNCs), citizens’ movements, the global mass media and the global capital markets. There is no single model or form of global governance; it is envisaged as a dynamic and complex process of interactive decision-making covering a wide range of common problems and issue areas”. As is also understood from the information given, all statements regarding global governance in the options are correct, so the correct answer is E.

Yanıt Açıklaması: Although they share some assumptions, neorealism and neoliberalism differ in several respects. First, both approaches assume that international system is “anarchic.” However, while neorealists claim that foreign policy is constrained by anarchy, neoliberals argue that international regimes, globalization, and international interdependence are important tools for managing the relations between international actors. Second, neorealists believe that international cooperation depends on the will and power of nation states; from this perspective, it is difficult to achieve and maintain international cooperation mainly because states strive to achieve their own interests. On the other hand, neoliberals hold that if states have mutual interests in a given issue area of international relations, international cooperation can be achieved in that issue area. Third, neorealists emphasize the importance of relative gains (zero-sum game) in international politics. Neoliberals, however, consider that international actors have common interests so that they can cooperate in a given issue area and maximize their absolute gains

Yanıt Açıklaması: They are non-legitimate transnational actors like criminals.

Yanıt Açıklaması: Kenneth Waltz , the father of neorealism, sees anarchy as a constant state of or the threat of war in the international system (Waltz, 1979: 102-103).

Yanıt Açıklaması: Power shifted to public decision-makers within states, and the role of the royals ended.

Yanıt Açıklaması: The most-often-used concept in the field of international relations is arguably the balance of power.

Yanıt Açıklaması: "I" is adopted by cosmopolitanists wheras II and III are criticism against cosmopolitanists.

Yanıt Açıklaması: The content of the Holy Alliance was an explicit manifesto for the legitimacy of the absolute monarchy’s sovereignty over the people who had recently experienced wthe French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars.

Yanıt Açıklaması: Interest-based (Institutional) theories; 1. Contractualist (Functional) theory (Keohane, 1984) 2. Situation-structural approach (Stein, 1990, Snidal, 1985,Oye, 1986) 3. Problem-structural approach (E?nger et al., 1993, Rittberger, 1993) 4. Institutional bargaining (Young, 1989)

Yanıt Açıklaması: Consequences of the Peace of Westphalia may be summarized as follows: • First, the peace treaties were negotiated and signed by the states dominated by the rulers that were commonly accepted as sovereigns of their realms. • Second, the physical borders of each state were recognized and commonly accepted. Therefore, each of these units represented a political entity. • Third, each sovereign who represented a state was accepted as equal, regardless of the size of lands they ruled or the nobility o which they belonged. • Fourth,thoughno international organization emerged as a body until the late 19th century, the way in which these peace accords were made initialized a method that enabled states to communicate collectively through diplomatic instruments. Thus, it is possible to assert that the Peace of Westphalia laid the foundations of collective diplomacy and established the basis of the Congress System that would help institutionalize the international environment in the following centuries.