World Health Organization Learn from EU Lessons in Civil

Question: Describe about the World Health Organization Learn from EU Lessons in Civil? Answer: In the era of globalization, there is a substantial rise in the interconnectivity in the world. Almost every sector of every country is being globalised the transport sector, communication sector, and even the worlds economies. With the passage of time, there was an increase in the number of states and that also accompanied by a drastic increase in the number of intergovernmental organizations and the nongovernmental organizations. The intergovernmental; organizations are defined as the international organizations which amalgamates the states as the members. The decision-making authorities of these organizations are the representatives who are from the member states government. The intergovernmental organizations are important to a country because these organizations have surpassed the international borders and thereby may affect the governmental and transactional factors of a country. Now, a question that may arise, why there are some intergovernmental organizations like the Organiz ation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) and Organization of American States (OAS) are significantly influential and powerful while organizations like Northern Forum, Union Latina are not? Purpose Statement In the study of international relations, people can see that some of the theories do not see organizations as important or influential in terms of bringing about change to the chaos that appears in global situations. These situations are like as small as if a ship can dock in a port in one country when it is from another, to as large as, How can we stop or mitigate fighting in Syria? Or How can the global community address the spread of Ebola and Zika? need leadership and consistent application of rules and discussion. So, it is important to understand the potential organizational influences already established. It is also important to understand the power they have and what are considered as their limitations. We know that some organizations are more broadly defined in terms of their value, influence and ability to influence others in some situations. Controlling international patterns of thought and response are also important for people to know in global interactions. It is also important to know and be able to gauge what organizations do not have real influence and to understand why they are limited in their ability to apply influence. Knowledge, scope of the organizations intended mission, and the ability to apply these in the international arena are also important aspects to consider. This information is vital to understand the international organizations and the way of affecting the decision-making activities by knowing which organizations are influential. This is, in part, because there can be fluctuations in the ebb and flow of global concerns and in the ability of organizations and people to influence them. Therefore, it is necessary to understand the vision and mission of an organization to understand the ability and strength of an organization. In order to, understand the differentiation between the strengths and influences of two intergovernmental organizations. Finally, it would be helpful to build a better understanding of what brings about the cooperation seen with some organizations internationally. Cooperation is a commodity necessary to bring about influence and cooperation. The United Nations and the World Health Organization are important with member states, but like many, these organizations may or may not have influence to change policies and global concerns. We know that not every situation will occur in the same way or with the same needs, even if the same general aspects are present. War is usually a pretty clear general term, yet the reasons, participants, conditions, and military capabilities, victims, and targets are not. Health care and disease are also common terms. Decision-making should not be the same either and influence on such decisions should also be as varied as the situation. How does each of these organizations build influence to help gain success for their mission? For the study of international relations and dec ision-making, we know there are many different inputs and actors. Some of those actors are individuals, some are states, and some are institutions that have been established to help make good decisions. Some of the organizations have influence and others do not. The question is why does some of the organizations have influence and power while others have either less or none? Literature Review The fact that the world has grown smaller is not just apparent, but vital to understand. Business began the process by having outlets, plants, distribution, offices, subsidiaries, and branches in more than one country. Now, it is not uncommon to find some businesses in nearly every country in the world. These international companies are wide ranging and not limited to one industry or only a few industries. Finance, food, beverages, steel, clothing, shoes and accessories, computers, communications, automobiles, human resources and so many other industries are global with companies moving in between states fluidly and easily. The international community has to establish ways to control and bring order and fairness to this relatively new international expansion because people, governments, communities, and institutions including for and non-profit organizations are involved. A terrorist attack in one country can have dramatic repercussions in another. Natural disasters in one region can impact the business and lives of people in another region, sometimes half a world away. Is this a dramatic way of looking at the need for international institutions to help control the sometimes chaotic world we live in? Yes, but it is also realistic and important to consider. So what is an international organization? According to Ring (2010), IR literature has defined international organizations as "purposive entities, with bureaucratic structures and leadership, permitting them to respond to events." These organizations can be governmental agencies and non- governmental agencies (NGOs), humanitarian organizations and businesses. The NGOs and governmental agencies are those this paper will deal with, but it is important to realize that organizations like the Red Cross and Doctors without Borders are large, international, and are important in many decision making situations. International organizations like the United Nations (peace), World Trade Organization (WTO) for trade, and World Health Organization (WHO) dealing with issues of health are among the most influential organizations in the world. Often international organization is used interchangeably with world government organizations which have memberships (i.e. United Nations) (Ring, 2010). One real ity for some countries concerns the internet, companies, and the ability to obtain products and resources from one country, even if one does not live there. Taxation is important to governments because it provides the means for raising money to keep up services, infrastructure and aid for citizens. Tax policy organizations like the International Fiscal Association (IFA) do not have member states. They instead have membership that includes businesses, academics, and tax professionals (Ring, 2010). These are often relegated to lesser status because they do not have state membership. However, their potential to impact business and governments is important to consider. Disputes are another important area for international organizations. Conflict between states and businesses can occur and in areas as diverse as military interventions, and trade issues. International relations scholars often become focused on the disputes that occur internationally, but seldom shed light on the dispute process, only outcomes. However, organizations like the United Nations and WTO have installed dispute resolution processes into the organizations and made the accessible for all members (Shannon, Morey, Boehmke, 2010). The expectation is that these resolution methods will shorten disputes because the systems are set up to do this. Not all can provide resolution. Immanuel Kant in his essay, Perpetual Peace (1795), argued for international organizations to help curb conflicts and fighting among nations. It is necessary to consider the success of such relationships within the international organizations to see if they do deter conflict (Chan, 2004). There are some indications that membership in these organizations do build interdependency and solid interactions. This is because in part, there are some common interests involved. The Kant treatise laid out six rules to gain and maintain peace among states. These included things like No treaty of peace shall be held valid in which there is tacitly reserved matter for a future war, and No state shall by force interfere with the Constitution or government of another state. The second definitive article in the essay is, The law of nations shall be founded on a federation of free states. (Kant, 1795) One would hope that the use of international institutions would be based on such foundations. States choose to fight when there is an inability to negotiate an end or resolve a conflict (Shannon, Morey, Boehmke, 2010). Membership is supposed to preclude a commitment to the organization and the processes they provide. There is also some commitment to abide by rules ad resolutions reached within the international organizations. There are also influences from these organizations that provide non-governmental power. In the current state, trade and business have a firm interest in resolving conflict, between governments and between trading partners. Non- governmental agencies often work to resolve issues between others in political situations, environmental situations and in their roles and missions. These types of organizations have dramatically increased over the last century (Betsill, Correll, Dodds, 2007). WTO and other organizations like it, internationally, have legitimate power, given to them by the member states that belong to them (Smith, 2013). Public international laws are established within these organizations and it is within the recognition and use of such that power is created and expected. However, not all organizations can accomplish all their missions of resolving conflicts or establishing acceptable international rules and laws. Issues that occur can change the dynamics of situations and also in how laws are applied. China has moved into the arena of influence, creating changes in the dynamics of trade and trade resolution, as an example. They have different communications with world powers and leadership after joining the WTO (Wang, 2013). This influence can change the way other countries trade with Chinas other business partners and competition. In the context of the potential of the WTO waiver as a legal instrument to reconcile conflicting norms and interests, it is a rgued that conflicts between WTO law and other international legal regimes are often an expression of underlying conflicts of interest and that these should be addressed in political processes (Feichtner, 2009). This can lead to new ways of dealing with all types of trade, including production, distributions, sales, and marketing. The WTO has revamped some of its policies to help further define the power it can yield. It can provide sanctions, so this is an important focus for this paper. In reality, the problem for every global institutional organization is the politics involved. The ebb and flow of the world politics affects every organization. Some can stick closely to their missions; others lose the mission as they adjust to the different needs of the world. Two that can represent this are the United Nations and the World Health Organization. The United Nations mission of peace is hampered by some factors of structure and power. The World Health Organization (WHO) is more successful in its mission, but has its voice silenced by monetary issues. The WHO provides research, alerts and information on the spread of health issues and disease. Most countries find the WHO a help in defining threats to health and identifying health problems. WHO is an organization that not only helps to fight the health related issues but also to build awareness about the facts that can significantly affect the health status of a country or nation. The WHO has been highly successful in some areas. One of the successes has been in the area of tobacco control. The organization helps promote primary health care, reaching into countries where there is limited cooperation. We have seen how the alerts of such diseases a bird flu and Ebola have helped shaped policies in many nations. However, it does meet the standards of membership states who are assessed dues based on the countrys wealth and population. This only makes up about twenty five percent of the WHOs revenues. These assessed contributions are, by definition, government funds (Feig, Shah, 2011) while the rest is given by voluntary contributions, private and government. There are funding sources from other UN bodies like UNICEF AND UNAIDS. Based in Geneva, the organization includes professionals in fields of medicine, public health, scientists, economics, and emergency relief. It has six regional offices, offices in countries, territories, and places where they are needed. T he WHO focuses on health and health issues, makes statements and supports the statements with facts and information that helps both governments and individuals understand the risks and concerns of public health and how to mitigate and prevent health tragedies (World Health Organization, 2016). The United Nations, by comparison has a broader scope and more areas of focus. As an organization that was originally charged with helping to provide conflict resolution and maintain justice and respect for obligations arising from treaties and other sources of international law (United Nations Charter of Nations, Preamble, 1945). However, with the structure that includes the Security Council with five members who have extreme veto powers, the United Nations is often stymied in its efforts by the disagreement and ideology differences of those five members. Since they are permanent members, the likelihood of this changing is limited at best. These members are the most successful at providing peacekeeping troops in areas needing to maintain peaceful interactions in the aftermath of fighting. The real success of the United Nations lies in its humanitarian efforts. The United Nations, with its mission of resolving conflict, is most successful at its efforts on behalf of education, health, and human rights (Krumwiede, 2005). UNICEF, UNAIDS and other such organizations have proven to have more influence in the world, both economically and politically. With this focus shift, the UN can affect more change, making improvements to human rights. From the focuses of these two organizations, one can show the political observer the power of influence might not be in the wealth, but in the knowledge and the emphasis of the human in the mission. Organizations like NATO with its military power and the World Bank or IMF with the wealth of member states are feared and not always appreciated. However, organizations that provide support for the education, improvement of the human condition, and where possible, the improvement of both, can be more likely to navigate the political frontier than an organization like the IMF that bullies states into compliance in exchange for dollars. Not only are the organizations like WHO and UNICEF welcomed into countries, even non-member states, but also their mandates and statements are taken with profound attention. So what makes these two organizations, though not all parts of the UN, so influential? Moreover, are they necessary institutions? One way to look these institutions is to examine a recen t event where the WHO was important in the solution and education. When the Ebola virus became a major problem in the western areas of Africa, the spread of the disease to other areas of the world became a near certainty. Additionally, the death toll in the region as rising quickly with limited ways to prevent its continuing spread. There were no vaccines to help stop the spread. The WHO responded with facts, not rumors. They deployed technicians and experts to areas in seventy different field sites. Coordination of efforts, creating strategies, and infection control were among the most important of the organizations work. The organization was welcomed into many countries including third world countries, where governments were struggling with the disease. Therapies and treatment plans, then helping spread the vaccines available helped stop the spread of the disease. The organization continues to monitor those areas where the Ebola virus occurs and moves to help with engagement of communities to prevent the infection and social issues that arise from it. Conclusion On a concluding note, it can be said that, the research will completely focus on the factors that give rise to this difference between these organizations. Primarily it can be seen that it depends on the field of operation, the political support or the acceptability of the organization. Therefore, after determining the reasons for this difference the researcher will also try to formulate certain solution to mitigate or eliminate those differences. The work of the WHO on the issue of Ebola helped to calm the social issues and the spread of rumors and fear from such a horrible disease. UNICEF has created many of the worlds educational programs that help educate the children of all over the world. These organizations succeed through the power of knowledge and expertise. Their influence can be traced to the foundations of what the institutions bring. For example, the WHO with IBM, the Centers for Disease Control and other major worldwide public health institutions have formed the Global Pandemic Initiative (Company News, 2006) to help stem the potential spread of infectious diseases. As we have seen with bird flu, Ebola, and other potential pandemic diseases, the work has been effective in helping inform and educate populations, while limiting the potential global spread of many diseases. People trust the legitimate power bestowed on these types of organizations. The same trust would be difficult to engender for organizations that handle conflict resolution or deterrence. Ideology and political considerations, including cultural make support difficult. Are these institutions failures or without influence? If anything, the work that does influence people like that accomplished within the humanitarian institutions, should better guide the other organizations toward solutions to improve their own value. Focusing on outlines and strategies for keeping peace, partnerships with businesses and communities for more influential legitimate power at the non-state level, and using internal pressure where possible is going to improve influences. Changing the structural framework to allow more voices from more diverse states, equalizing power, and removing complete veto power or control is another potential solution. People on the ground, working with the people, not telling them what to do and how to do it, is another way to build influence, something institutions like the IMF and United Nations need. References Battams, S. (2014) What Can the World Health Organization Learn from EU Lessons in Civil Society Engagement and Participation for Health? International Journal of Health 44(4), 805 816 Betsill, M. M., E. Corell, F. Dodds (2007) NGO Diplomacy: The influence of nongovernmental organizations in international environmental negotiations. Cambridge, MA: MIT Press. Chan, S. (2004). Influence of international organizations on great-power war involvement: A preliminary analysis. International Politics, 41(1), 127-127+. Company News. (2006) Journal of applied Science Feichtner, I. (2009). The Waiver Power of the WTO: Opening the WTO for Political Debate on the Reconciliation of Competing Interests. European Journal Of International Law. 20(3), 615-645 Feig, C., S. Shah. (2011). Setting the record straight on WHO funding. Foreign Affairs. 18, Nov. Kant, Immanuel. (1795) Perpetual Peace. Krumwiede, R. (2005) The efforts of the United Nations. The Peace Journal. 25-29. Preamble, Charter of the United Nations. (1945) United Nations. Retrieved from https://www.un.org/en/sections/un-charter/preamble/index.html Ring, D. (2010). Who is Making International Tax Policy?: International Organizations as Power Players in a High Stakes World. Fordham International Law Journal. 33(3), 649-722 Salvage, J. (2011). Global institutions: The world health organization (WHO). Nursing Management, 18(5), 12. Shannon, M., Morey, D., Boehmke, F. J. (2010). The Influence of International Organizations on Militarized Dispute Initiation and Duration. International Studies Quarterly. 54(4), 1123-1141. doi:10.1111/j.1468-2478.2010.00629. Smith, F. (2013). POWER, RULES, AND THE WTO. Boston College Law School. Boston College Law Review. 54(3), 1063-1086. Wang, Y. (2013) The result of world powers in WTO: A cheap-talk game under different communication protocols China Economic Review. 27, 192-207.