We have been looking at the role of transnational organizations
in regards to violence and public authority. Our group has discussed the role
of private security firms in a few different aspects. I would like to observe
the role of transnational corporations and how that affects public authority,
especially among state actors and international organizations; does violence
have a role to play for this?
Last week I explored the topic of the role of legitimate
violence among states. Taking this from a different perspective- How is the
role of legitimate violence and public authority affected when an international
organization steps in to impose rules against transnational corporations that
operate among different state actors? This week there was a news report that
the United Nations wants to legislate against transnational corporations (found
here: http://www.theecologist.org/News/news_analysis/2459002/un_to_outlaw_corporations_human_rights_abuses.html
). If an international organization starts to impose legislature against
transnational corporations, how does that affect the public authority if at
all? If the states that are members of the United Nations give that
organization authority to impose against those organizations without taking
away from the state’s public authority?
From what we talked about in class yesterday, I would argue
that the United Nations does not take away from the public authority of the
states. In fact, the actions it takes are legitimized from the legitimacy the
UN has for the members that are part of that organization. However, this could be observed as a way
states are giving up some of their own autonomy for an international
organization to carry out their own actions.
How does this argument relate to the role of Private
Security Firms? What do you think?
Ashley, the other course that I am taking is SISG-762, Global Governance. The United Nations was the first international organization that we covered. With regard to the United Nations legislating on transnational corporations, the challenge will be how will the UN will be able enforce its legislation. Will the UN have the authority to infringe on a state's sovereignty to intervene and enforce this legislation? Ultimately, the power of the UN is concentrated in the Security Council among the Permanent Five members: the United States, China, Russia, United Kingdom, and France. Because they all have veto power, they can all effectively block UN interventions and enforcement.
ReplyDeleteThe UN's relationship with large multi-national corporations has been variable and often ambiguous. In the early stages (1940s and 1950s), the private sector, in general, was not engaged, and even actively avoided. These days, the UN Global Compact is an example, it has become almost institutionalized knowledge that the private sector is comprised of important (essential?) stakeholders in the world system. How this relationship will be developed is an on-going process.
ReplyDelete