New opportunities in common security and defence policy: Joining PESCO

Responding to concerns about burden-sharing and aiming to improve internal defence cooperation, act more quickly and harness resource synergies, the European Union (EU) initiated the Permanent Structured Cooperation (PESCO) in 2017. PESCO, however, is controversial. On the one hand, the United States (US) wants greater burden-sharing by European allies whilst concerned about greater European military autarky that would undermine US influence over NATO, Europe/EU and EU member states. Onthe other hand, at least one European NATO ally wants to leverage PESCO precisely as an instrument to shore up European “strategic autonomy”. This tension over competing European defence futures leaves participation by third countries in limbo. Arguably, third-country participation would hinder greater European defence autarky. The article makes the case for the mutual benefits of third-country participation, focusing on Canada. Canada has a major stake in the outcome. NATO is Canada’s most important multilateral institution and Europe is Canada’s second-most important strategic partner, after the US. Canada’s unequivocal strategic interests in Europe have long informed its expeditionary priorities -- from the two world wars, when Canada coming to Europe’s defence long before the USproved existential for both parties, to nowadays. Since the 1970s, Canada and Europe have worked consistently together bilaterally beyond NATO to advance regional stability and mutual security interests. Canada’s and Europe’s defence futures are thus interdependent. Excluding third countries from participating in PESCO would have detrimental consequences for Canadian, European and transatlantic defence interests. In contrast, with third country participation, PESCO will be instrumental to effective transatlantic and transeuropean defence integration.

Eurasian Economic Union is an international organization or multidimensional institution. Ontological discrepancies and political consequences

The subject of this research is the ontological nature of the Eurasian Economic Union (EAEU). An attempt is made to determine the conceptual philosophical-political characteristics of this organization in the light of particular and universalistic approaches. The author examines and describes the impact of ontological characteristic upon the process of formation and functionality of the international organization and multilateral institution. In future, the dual nature of EAEU can carry political and practical consequences for the Eurasian integration – the question of expectations and outcome from its participation in the indicated integration project, degree and nature of influence upon the domestic policy of EAEU member-states may arise sooner or later. The author's special contribution consists in formulation of the problem of long-term existence of the Eurasian Economic Union from perspective of identification of its ontological characteristics. For achieving success in this regard, integration must represent a universalistic paradigm founded on the principle of pan-unity (universality), when any integration structure is a part of infinite whole, the Universe, endued with the basic characteristics and patterns, and interconnected with all other parts. However, if integration wends the path of particularism, it would be founded on the positivistic methodology, which in turn, considers “external realities” and their structures as measurable. Each participant of the integration would seek to comply with the own national interest, which first and foremost is aimed at preservation of national sovereignty. In this regard, the term “international organization” no longer reflects the nature of such integration structure to the fullest, and thus it can be referred to as “multilateral institution”.

Remarks by Mariana Durney

I will take Karen's challenging question about the goals of a multilateral institution as the starting point for analyzing whether the promise of multilateralism in Latin America has been honored, if the current crisis is related to those goals (or their absence), and whether multilateralism still holds any promise for the future. In my analysis, key elements of Ruggie's definition (institutional form, coordination, generalized principles) will also be at stake. Thus, objectives and principles are at the center of this discussion.

Asian Insfastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) Sebagai Bentuk Hegemoni Baru Tiongkok

Since the rise of China as a 'great power' in the 1940s, China has continued to expand its economic power. His role which was felt to be insignificant in the world multilateral institutions or Bretton-Woods institutions made China initiate a new multilateral institution which was considered to have a bureaucracy that was easier than the Bretton-Woods institution. In addition, the financial condition of the World Bank which is considered inadequate for the Asian infrastructure development needs and the failure of America to host China so that the American allies want to join the AIIB make China more convinced by its decision to establish AIIB. AIIB initiated by President Xi Jinping and announced its establishment in 2014. In 2015, 57 founding countries officially signed the Article of Agreement (AOA) as the basis for the formation of the AIIB. In this study, the researcher will explain the motivations behind the formation of the AIIB. This research explained through a quantitative descriptive method so that the researcher will explain the purpose of establishing AIIB in detail. As a result, by analyzing through the perspective of Dependency Theory, the dependence of third world countries on the AIIB would indirectly bring about hegemony from China.

Efektivitas Multi-bi Aid pada Greater Mekong Sub-region (GMS) Triangle Project

The existences of geographical factors, push factors and pull factors generated the intensity of migration in Greater Mekong Sub-Region (GMS). The region which consists of Cambodia, Lao PDR, Myanmar, Thailand, Vietnam, and part of China’s territory had various problems in the migration process. A predominant problem of migration is rendered by the absence of law framework. Therefore, there were a practically illegal migrant and human trafficking. This research will explain the assistance to recover migration’s problems in GMS given by Australian Government (cooperated with ILO). The type of assistance is categorized as multi-bi aid which is the assistance given by the bilateral donor to a multilateral institution. The assistance was released in the form of a project named GMS Triangle Project with the aim of creating migrant protection in GMS. To analyze the implementation of that project, the author uses the concept of multi-bi aid and review effectiveness through the concept of aid effectiveness proposed by Paris Agreement including ownership, alignment, harmonisation, managing for a result, and Mutual Accountability. The result of this study describes how multi-bi aid methods are embodied in a form of project and effectiveness are different for each receiving state in GMS.

Sugar

The story of sugar provides the earliest modern examples of international trade institutions. The Imperial Department of Agriculture for the West Indies (1899) and the Sugar Union (1902) were created to respond to the precipitous drop in the global price of sugar and the ensuing social unrest. This chapter investigates how these institutions were constructed by people who took different imperial agendas and linked them to various understandings of the market and assumptions about nature. The Imperial Department, as part of the Kew Gardens network, served the new idea of economic botany. It relied on colonial law and concepts of private property to make plants, knowledge, and experts publically available within the British Empire. Whereas the Sugar Union was a multilateral institution committed to free trade, it developed legal innovations that transformed sugar cane and beet into a global commodity by reconstructing an international market and buttressing the British Empire.

Recognition and transformation: Beyond media discourses on the BRICS

Based on literature review and interviews with journalists, we argue that the BRICS countries are constructing a collective vision, guided by logics of recognition and of transformation. The production of discourse reaches its high point during the BRICS leaders’ summits. To go beyond analysis of the discourse revealed in the media, this article examines projects, thereby aiming to qualify and label the justificatory discourses, in order to develop an understanding of intentions. The BRICS countries have become a reference point as the press increasingly makes comparisons between these countries. The notion of recognition, present in the political elites, also appears as a part of the public imagination and in the press. The leaders too seek transformation. The first official multilateral institution founded by the BRICS countries was the New Development Bank. Current efforts indicate the development of common scientific and technological research initiatives and official support for the establishment of an innovative BRICS Network University. Initiatives will appear as these countries try to consolidate their position.

Reciprocal Institutional Legitimation

This chapter develops the idea, advanced in the preceding chapter, that the legitimacy of institutions is ecological—that whether one institution is legitimate can depend upon its connections to other institutions. It shows how a state’s participation in the right sort of multilateral institution can enhance its legitimacy and improve the moral quality of its decisions regarding war-making, and how the legitimacy of multilateral institutions can be enhanced if the right sort of states participate in them. An important implication is that whether an institution is legitimate may not be determined solely by how it treats or relates to those under its jurisdiction, but rather on how it relates to other institutions.

China’s Impact on the Global Balance of Power

President Xi’s “China Dream” is underpinned by the country’s expanding trade and aid initiatives. While many welcome such opportunities, Beijing’s assertive foreign policy has exacerbated tensions. Meanwhile, America’s rebalancing toward Asia is seen by China as a containment strategy. China’s response has been to launch its “One Belt, One Road” initiative to support infrastructure development along historic land and maritime routes across Asia and the Middle East to Europe. Beijing’s plans have been substantiated by large amounts of lending and a new multilateral institution. China is no longer willing to accept the United States as the dominant regional power, yet it is unclear whether America is prepared to surrender any portion of its primacy. It remains to be seen whether the disputes over the sovereignty of regional islands will lead to conflicts or a conciliatory process that will allow the region to remain stable and prosper.