Gilpin: A Realist Perspective on International Governance

Gilpin, R., 2002. A Realist Perspective on International Governance. Governing Globalization: Power, Authority and Global Governance, 237-248.

Realist believe that the territorial state continues to be the primary actor in both domestic and international affairs. While there are other players, the state makes the most important decisions. Realist reject the popular belief that economic and technological forces have eclipsed the nation state and are creating a global economy and society in which political boundaries and national loyalties are no longer relevant. Even in a highly integrated global economy, states continue to use their power and to implement policies to channel economic forces in ways favorable to their own national interests and the interests of their citizenry. There is no evidence that a transformation in human affairs has yet occurred or is even occurring. It is unlikely that, if the state does disappear, that it will be replaced by a global governance structure. Gilpin argues that, even though econ and tech advances lead to more world order, they do not overcome the fundamental anarchic nature of the int’l system.

Three views of global governance: Focus on new medievalism. Based on the assumption that the state and the state system have been undermined by economic, technological and other developments; the state and state system are being eclipse by non-governmental actors and by the emergence of an int’l civil society.

They conclude that such changes erode hierarchical organizations and undermine centralized power structures. The once dominant hierarchic order of nation states is being supplanted by horizontal networks composed of states, non governmental organizations and international institutions.

Counter with the fact that the nation state has been around for over three centuries and that NGO activity only begin heavily two decades ago. No one can know the future nature of NGOs. Could be that there are bad NGOs that develop. The Basel accord achieved much, but it does not prove that governance can replace government. The US used the Basel Accords and drove them to their personal ends. Governance without teeth is not effective.