Thank you Brandon and permit me to clarify some of your interpretations. You say,”
“Your primary arguments seem to be that IOs do not have the strength to thwart actions conducted by other states and non-state actors, such as terrorists, and that IOs cannot exist in a multipolar world. Is this essentially correct?”
My primary argument is,
“The questionable successes of past international institutes are less effective in a new multipolar world, if they remain based on Cold War principles and goals.” In this week’s readings, John Mearsheimer concludes, “ that institutions have minimal influence on state behavior and thus hold little promise fro promoting stability in the post-Cold War world (Mearsheimer, 94/95, p. 7). This is a realist approach
“Your primary arguments seem to be that IOs do not have the strength to thwart actions conducted by other states and non-state actors, such as terrorists, and that IOs cannot exist in a multipolar world. Is this essentially correct?”
My primary argument is,
“The questionable successes of past international institutes are less effective in a new multipolar world, if they remain based on Cold War principles and goals.” In this week’s readings, John Mearsheimer concludes, “ that institutions have minimal influence on state behavior and thus hold little promise fro promoting stability in the post-Cold War world (Mearsheimer, 94/95, p. 7). This is a realist approach