thearchitectureofinternationalcooperation.docVIP

The Architecture of International Cooperation Kal Raustiala UCLA Law School Raustiala@ January 2002  I Introduction The future architecture of international cooperation is the subject of growing debate. Many scholars endorse liberal internationalism, the prevailing form of cooperation in the 20th century, in which formally-negotiated multilateral treaties, often coupled to international organizations, structure inter-state relations. Others question liberal internationalism’s reach, arguing that international organizations threaten national sovereignty and their growth ought to be stopped. Meanwhile in the streets—of Seattle, Washington, Genoa—these organizations are increasingly attacked. Yet another set of scholars suggests that the era of liberal internationalism is already ending. They claim that the structure of the international system is changing deeply--deeper even than formulations like the end of history suggest. Notions of neo-medievalism, and the end of the nation-state, call into question the traditional statist foundations of liberal internationalism. As these competing views reflect, this is truly a time of perplexity in international law. One notable response to this debate asserts the resilience of the state in a globalizing world. Proponents of this view argue that the state— for purposes of transborder cooperation--is in practice disaggregating into its functionally distinct parts. Modern states are composed of legislatures, executives, agencies, and courts. These constituent parts--in particular, regulatory agencies tasked with elaborating and enforcing the laws that manage complex societies--are increasingly networking with their counterparts abroad. In the process they are sharing information, ideas, resources, and policies. As the problems policymakers address have gone global, this argument claims, so have the policymakers. But their chosen vehicle is not the formal liberal internationalist organization; it