Jochen Prantl

Informal Groups of States and the UN Security Council

This article discusses the dynamics between informal groups of states and the UN Security Council. First, I argue that informal groups have proliferated in response to systemic change. Second, these groups serve as a mechanism that allows for exit from structural constraints of the Security Council and voice for stakeholders in a conflict. In effect, they may narrow the operational and participatory gap growing out of the multiple incapacities that prevents the Council from formulating an effective response to crisis situations. Third, the processes of diplomatic problem solving and its collective legitimation have become increasingly decoupled. The former tends to be delegated to informal groups or coalition of states, while the Council provides the latter. I illustrate how these findings affect ones understanding of power, legitimacy, and change in the theory of international relations.This article is the extensively revised version of a paper presented at the Annual Meeting of the Academic Council on the United Nations System in 2003. The project received financial support from the Economic and Social Research Council, United Kingdom (Grant No. R42200024335), and the Centre for International Studies, University of Oxford. The UN Studies Program at Yale University was a frequent host and home over recent years. I would like to express my gratitude for the long-term support and advice of Karl Kaiser, Bruce Russett, James Sutterlin, and especially Neil MacFarlane. I also wish to thank Mats Berdal, Richard Caplan, Sam Daws, Kurt Gaubatz, Marrack Goulding, Jean Krasno, Edward Luck, David Malone, Lisa Martin, James Mayall, Joseph Nye, Adam Roberts, Avi Shlaim, Ngaire Woods, and two anonymous referees for comments and criticism.

Global Norm Diffusion in East Asia How China and Japan Implement the Responsibility to Protect

This article addresses the problem of global norm diffusion in international relations with particular reference to the implementation of ‘the responsibility to protect’ (R2P) in East Asia. Exposing the limits of previous work on norm localization, we develop the framework of the norm diffusion loop. Rather than understanding norm diffusion as a linear top-down process, we demonstrate that the reception of R2P has evolved in a far more dynamic way that can best be described as a feedback loop. We first look into the processes and causal mechanisms that helped to construct R2P as an emerging transnational soft norm; then we analyse the challenges of diffusing R2P from the global to the regional and domestic levels; and, finally, we examine the variation of norm effects within the same region across states, investigating in particular how R2P has shaped Chinese and Japanese policy responses respectively.

Multilateralism in East Asia: The Good, the Bad, and the Ugly

Problems in the study of multilateralism in East Asia include: using concepts and theories derived from European experience, underestimating the regional context for managing collective action problems, and generating a warped view of the processes and institutions that guide or restrain multilateralism. East Asia is a treasure trove for the study of multilateralism, refuting mainstream conventions of transatlantic IR theory. Institutions are far less legalized, as seen in the ASEAN Way. Informal understandings underlie cooperation. Historical memory drives foreign policy decision-making. US rebalancing and Chinese assertiveness create an extremely volatile situation that is neither an architecture nor an order. Instead, the region is still searching for a design to manage relations among major powers on the one hand, and relations between major powers and weaker countries on the other.

Leveraging diplomatic power and influence on the UN Security Council: the case of Australia

ABSTRACT There is scepticism about whether a state like Australia can secure its interests and exercise influence on the United Nations Security Council (UNSC). A case study of Australia’s experience as a UNSC member in 2013–2014 shows that it directly influenced UNSC decision-making in a number of ways: first, in the response to the MH17 incident; second, pushing forward UNSC practice through the first-ever resolutions on both ‘small arms and light weapons’ and police in peacekeeping; and third, as chair of three sanctions committees, influencing the decision-making environment towards greater transparency. While Australia did not achieve all its objectives, it made its views well-known. A second case study demonstrates that Australia’s opportunities to influence UNSC decision-making are not limited to stints of membership. Australia was able to achieve many of its foreign policy objectives in East Timor in 1999 through strategically engaging with key UNSC players through an informal diplomatic grouping: the Core Group on East Timor. Both case studies show that Australia’s diplomatic engagement with the UNSC is desirable, necessary and strategic, whether or not it is a current or prospective member.

Global Promulgation — Regional Implementation?: The Responsibility to Protect in East Asia

This chapter looks at the normative underpinning of effective multilateralism, especially in its application to sovereignty, noninterference and the use of force global norms that are central to global and regional order. In essence, it seeks to shed light on the problem of global norm diffusion in international relations, with particular reference to the implementation of the Responsibility to Protect (RtoP) in East Asia, focusing on China and Japan.

Introduction: International Cooperation under Order Transition

Effective Multilateralism makes the case for a new approach to understand and explain international cooperation and collective action. Existing theories of cooperation assume a stable geo-political order, led by countries with a shared conception of the scope and modalities of global cooperation. These assumptions are no longer justified. The Western liberal order is in a protracted process of transition.1 There is no new hegemon that would be able (or willing) to replace the United States and to push for a redesign of the global governance architecture from scratch. Emerging powers are engaging in global cooperation, in their own way and on their own terms. To summarize, while there seems to be a growing demand for effective global cooperation, there are currently no universally applicable concepts with which to analyse it, nor is there a common language with which to describe it.