Antora
Rahman
POLI
480 W
Professor
Shirk
10/30/2013
With a
realist perspective in mind, one can say that the natural world is anarchic;
the motivation for survival is self-preservation. This assumption relates
directly to the nature of sovereign states in an international system whose
chaotic temperament inevitably leads to war. In an effort to offer some
semblance of peace and order as well as promote growth and development so that
even the smallest and weakest of states have a chance of survival for better
reasons other than self preservation, international institutions are birthed.
Such organizations exist in the international system are the boundaries between
order and turmoil. These establishments set conditions to which sovereign
states have to come into terms with and in return, sovereign states receive the
security necessary to keep them from being overcome with pandemonium lurking on
the other side. With that said, to what lengths does a state go to getting such
security until it loses its standing as a sovereign state? Where does one draw
the line?
There are
several international institutions which police the system and try to keep
order among sovereign states, or at least states that are recognized and meet
the conditions. Such institutions include the United Nations—seeks to “maintain
peace and security by peer mediating relationships among states as well as
promoting human rights, social progress, and development”; the International
Monetary Fund (IMF)—“maintains and orderly system of payments and receipts
between nations”; and the World Bank—which primarily focuses on development of
states. So let’s forget everything else and discuss development. There is a
huge gap between a developed country and developing countries. In order to
bridge that gap, the World Bank strives to attack poverty as the key culprit.
Its solution: structural adjustment—the path to economic growth and development.
Structural
adjustment programs are policies which are enforced on developing nations—they call
for government austerity and increased privatization while externally they
reduce trade barriers for such countries for foreign investments. While the
expected results should portray the desired economic outcomes, they seem to do
exactly the opposite, creating a wider gap between developed and developing
both domestically and internationally. In the process, countries which are put
on these programs are basically letting these institutions have the upper hand
in decision-making which in turn seems to strip away the sovereign standing of
such states.
Annotated Bibliography:
Danaher,
Kevin, ed. 50 Years Is Enough:
The Case against the World Bank and the
International Monetary Fund. N.p.:
Global Exchange, 1994.
·
This
book contains criticism which questions the efficiency of the World Bank and
IMF. It discusses issues ranging from policies to inner workings of these
institutions, essentially concluding that they are failing in their mission in
aiding developing countries.
Broad, Robin. Unequal Alliance: The World Bank,
the International Monetary Fund,
and the Philippines.
Berkeley: University of California, 1988.
·
By
using the Phillippines as the primary example, this source provides a specific
analysis of “structural adjustment programs” and their limitations.
Corbo,
Vittorio, Moris Goldstein, and Mohsin S. Khan, eds. Growth Oriented
Adjustment Programs. N.p.:
International Monetary Fund and The World Bank, 1987.
·
This
particular source advocates the reasons why growth programs are key solutions
in tackling Third World debt. It provides a positive outlook on how these
policies can be implemented and build platforms for developing countries’
economic success.
Alexander,
Nancy. "Paying for Education: How the World Bank and the International
Monetary Fund Influence
Education in Developing Countries." Peabody
Journal of Education 76.3
(2001): 285-338. JSTOR.
Web. 30 Sept. 2013.
·
Education
is an important factor of economic growth in developing countries. This source
analyzes current approaches and involvements of the World Bank and the IMF in
education and what changes/improvements need to be implemented in order to
produce better results.
Brune,
Nancy, Geoffrey Garrett, and Bruce Kogut. "The International Monetary Fund
and
the Global Spread of
Privatization." IMF Staff
Papers 51.2 (2004): 195-219. JSTOR. Web. 30 Sept. 2013.
·
Unlike
the majority negative criticism of the pure capitalistic backbone of the IMF
and the World Bank, this source discusses the reasons why and how
“privatization” is actually helping developing economies.
