Another importance with regard to this issue is the ambiguity of the whole international economic system which was viewed as being ruled by a group of elites and was inaccessible by the society at large. This difficulty is experienced not only by the underdeveloped nations but also with various sectors like the environmentalists, NGO’s, multinational corporations and the public in general; all want to have an access to the works of the organizations. The problem becomes apparent during the Battle in Seattle in 1998 where many had violently protested against the World Trade Organization.
Another worrisome deficiency on the part of the international society is the strong control that the states’ organization exercises on the international society and the conflict between local and international interests. All these reflect the association of the system to Kenneth Waltz’s third image of structural realism. The states continue to be the role player in international political and economic functions despite the presence of the United Nations and NATO for international political institutions and IMF and WTO along with NGO’s and multinational corporations for international economic corporations.
States will persist to be the best medium for looking after the interests of their people until cooperation through supranational organizations is further flourished and developed. The conflict between international adjustment demands and domestic political necessities is a main problem of international monetary relations. 2 For instance, According to Spero and Hart, it is often required but politically complicated to enforce policies that cut down on the governmental budget deficits and inflation just to stabilize a nation’s exchange rate or to cut down the deficit in its balance of payments.
2 Those policies generally lead to lower growth rates and higher number of unemployment in the short term but higher rates of growth and employment in the long term. Hence, during the low times of domestic economy, there is a high unemployment and inflation. It is the political leaders whom interest groups turn to first for action and not the international economic corporations. They think that political leaders can act fast and handle the problem from there.
Farmers want agricultural subsides, conservatives hope to continue economic and political sovereignty, labor leaders attempt to get protection from offshoring. In turn, Politicians make themselves more favored by many by means of acting out legislation that can be detrimental to the interests of the international economic system or of same organization overseas and may involve talks of favorable trade terms with other countries or instant protectionism in the means of trade and non-trade barriers.
Because of this, domestic politics is always damaging to the interest of the international system and of the other countries as well. This can be illustrated in the US agribusiness subsidies, where American food products’ prices are lowered to a level that can’t be vied by other nations or of the farmers of the other nations. Another example of international ripple effects was presented by Spero and Hart. The authors state, “The Europeans and the Japanese demanded…a deflationary U. S. policy (when the dollar became seriously overvalued in the 1960s), on the premise that the dollar outflow and the expansion of the U. S. economy were causing inflation abroad”.
2 Therefore, a conflict between order and justice at the national and international levels happens. It doesn’t follow that what’s considered to be a norm for a particular country’s economic interests may also be the same for the international system or for the other countries. This will hopefully change by the time the organization continues to grow.