IGO Case Study

1450 Words6 Pages
Intergovernmental Organizations do many different things for the international world. They make collective goods, mediate, provide information and even authorize retaliation. One of the fundamental ideas behind IGO’s is that states will value their membership, and want to comply and contribute to ensure their membership and alliance to the IGO as well as the other members. Thus, in a perfect world if all states complied with IGO guidelines, there would be very little to no conflict. Naturally this doesn’t always happen and unfortunately conflict can arise from a lack of compliance. A recent example of this is Russia and their invasion and attempt to annex Crimea.

To understand how this situation is an example of how IGO’s do not always reduce conflict, we need to fully understand the problem at hand. Crimea is the southern peninsula part of Ukraine that is surrounded by the black sea. Recently Kremlin forces took control over the Crimean Peninsula, and later this area’s “Russian speaking majority, voted to join Russia in a referendum the Ukraine and the West deem illegal” ("Crimea profile," 2014). This would not be the first time that Crimea was a part of Russia. Back in 1783, Crimea was annexed by the Russian empire and was a part of Russia for nearly 200 years. In 1954 Russia was constructing two large canals through the border of Ukraine and Crimea. In an attempt to speed up and organize the process Russia gave control of Crimea to Ukraine so that Ukraine could easily oversee the project to completion. Because of the transfer from a Ukrainian state, to a Russian State and back to a Ukrainian state the people of Crimea identify themselves differently. Crimea’s population is roughly two million, “58 percent identify as ethnic...

... middle of paper ...

...ll make the smart decision and pull out of Crimea, saving what little allegiances they may have left. On the other hand if Russia continues to act as it has been, and goes through with its invasion and attempt at annexation, the seriousness could end up as a major contradiction to the statement that “IGO’s reduce conflict”. The seriousness Russia’s actions if they do not choose to stop, are wide spread because who knows if Russia will be satisfied with obtaining Crimea alone. The US fears that Russia’s “military intervention may soon expand to eastern Ukraine” (Arutunyan & Resneck, 2014) and possibly even further.
Russia choosing to continue along this path may lead to a lack of credibility and faith in Intergovernmental Organizations. If a permanent member of the Security Council is willing to act against the advice of the council what are they not willing to do?
Open Document