Key points are not available for this paper at this time.
At the risk of simple-mindedness, there are two schools of thought regarding the relationship between inter national organ iza tions (IOs) and the diffusion of power.1 One school suggests that IOs are conservative organ iza tions that are designed to freeze existing configurations of power. If they are doing their job, then they are not diffusing power. The other is that IOs are expected to pluralize power. The world is constituted by radical inequalities of power, with some states having an abundance and others a scarcity, and the United Nations and other IOs essential to global govern ance help to level the playing field by giving an opportunity for the weak to have a voice and neglected issues to be seen. Both camps are right: IOs can be defenders of the powerful and agents of reform. In fact, individual IOs such as the United Nations can function in both capacities. The UN Security Council, for instance, is a bastion of privilege reflecting the distribution of power in the inter national system seven decades ago, while many of the UN’s specialized agencies seat NGOs from the global South and powerful states at the same table.
Barnett et al. (Tue,) studied this question.