International actors have played major roles since the Second World War in a bid to bring sanity to what may at best be termed as irrational leadership. International actors have enabled the establishment of inter-governmental alliances making them (actors) have a formal standing and be respected in times of crisis. A crisis can be as a result of various levels of separatism like regionalism and irredentism if not war itself. Their roles are diverse for both governmental and nongovernmental organizations. Most of their roles have to do with the ability to traverse various nations. This essay seeks to identify significant international actors and identify their specific roles and characteristics. In addition, United States actions in dealing with terrorism shall also be examined.
International actors include state authorities who are charged with the responsibility of duty of mapping their state in the international field. In addition, there are also the individuals who traverse states. These include for example such foreigners as students, tourists, and their correspondents. These form international affiliations by virtue of their movement from one state to another. There is also are also groups that undertake international activities. Such include the multinational companies, religious organizations, and terrorists groups, amongst others. Finally, there are the intergovernmental and non-intergovernmental organizations that have a greater role to play in the international arena compared with the other players. To begin with, the United Nations is a perfect example of an international actor. The organization facilitates cooperation in international law, security, economic development, and human rights. With regard to human rights, the UN and other actors have established national human rights institutions within states (NHRIs). These are owned by governments but run international duties at the home level where they are based. They have greatly revolutionized international governance. For instance, they have set a platform for implementing international human rights law. Other actors include governmental agencies, nongovernmental organizations (NGOs), other international organizations like the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE). Their behavior towards a situation is often characterized by exports, visits, conferences, and threats with the aim of meeting their mission. Their functions include peacekeeping and security, human rights and humanitarian assistance, social and economic development and giving mandates. In peacekeeping, the US for instance gets voluntary forces from its member states and deploys these to an area of conflict for enforcement or to discourage resuming hostilities. Human right is a role that is highly upheld by international actors who enforce international laws for the persecution of human rights violations, exemplified by the earlier stated national human rights institutions which act domestically but apply international standards. In social and economic development, international actors avail funds through grants in developing countries, money that goes to infrastructure, small enterprises, fighting epidemics and agriculture.
The 21st century presents a necessity for change in the international system as it is a reality today that all nations are prone to terrorist attacks, making violence a possibility something that has brought tension in the international sphere. This is seen in terrorist attacks targeting any affiliates of their main target, implying these affiliates’ safety is also at stake. Again, globalization should stream down to poorer countries as satisfaction will be achieved when wealth is better distributed, all of which are achievable only with international systems’ intervention and not a single state’s effort.
The US has employed unilateral counter-terrorism means probably because of the differences in legal systems of the world’s nations. Similarly, involving other nations in its fight might predispose them to these terror attacks, which is well exemplified by the Kenya and Tanzania bombings of 1998. There are varied conceptions on terrorism and counter-terrorism by various nations a discouragement on the US side. The treaty dealing with terrorism in the international arena was initially drafted in 1937 as a convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Terrorism by the League of Nations. The League of Nations failed in one way or the other which saw it being replaced by the United Nations. However, this convention was ratified by India only, something the US must have considered in its present actions. Ultimately, this action may be successful. It will not have jeopardized other states hence recaps of terrorism attacks in US affiliates are not likely. Again, with changing leadership, there is the possibility of terrorists softening their stand and allowing negotiations. This is a very expensive undertaking. US success in this policy financially is questionable. This is a time when there has been a huge economic crunch, not forgetting the US housing bubble which has brought financial pressure unique to its states, something states in other continents have not had (Deflem, par 4).
Real international cooperation is necessary to defeat international terrorism. As said earlier, all states are prone to terrorism. Laws may be passed to combat it in singular states but effecting them is done differently, implying that not all will be equally ‘punished’; justice, therefore, is questionable. This means the nation-state is something to be redefined. That it will not entirely diminish but allow room for decisions to be shifted to multilateral institutions- international actors in this case.
International actors have a vital role in keeping the world a place worth living. In this case, they only need to be empowered to effectively undertake their mandate.
Works Cited
Deflem, M 21st Century Criminology: A reference handbook, 2009. Web.