Preventive Action in World Politics
| Published date | 01 September 2016 |
| Date | 01 September 2016 |
| Author | Monica Herz,Denise Garcia |
| DOI | http://doi.org/10.1111/1758-5899.12323 |
Preventive Action in World Politics
Denise Garcia
Northeastern University
Monica Herz
Pontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro
Abstract
In only a few instances in international relations, states anticipate major problems and address them before they become dis-
astrous: negotiating and creating new international norms to avert human and financial loss. One example is the Protocol ban-
ning laser weapons that can permanently blind. It was created in the mid-1990s before the weapons were fully operational
and set a powerful norm that banned their future development. With new evolving technologies that have unparalleled
capacity to harm and maim, such as fully autonomous weapons systems (killer robots), it is imperative that states take preven-
tive action and create new multilateral agreements to cope with problems yet to materialize. This article aims to initiate the
discussion of when states act preventively to avert major future problems. It advances three initial explanatory propositions
on preventive multilateralism in areas of ‘commonly perceived global dimension of future potential harm’to improve states’
security dilemmas; based upon reputation and humanitarian, material concerns, and national security, and presents the initial
discussion toward a world politics of prevention.
Policy Implications
•States may choose to take preventive action because doing so will be less costly in situations in which there is high risk
from financial loss from potential damages.
•States may also act preventively if there is risk of precluding large scale death, in which case there may be intense public
demand for action.
•Improvement of the security dilemma: states behave preventatively when they wish to contain major security repercus-
sions of irreversible character.
•Preventive action is necessary in the face of the urgent assessment of new technologies the harmful impacts of which
have not yet been fully estimated and may represent a threat to humanity.
•The successes of preventive multilateralism seen here represent a model for future policy action areas. The international
community may be observing the rise of an emerging norm of preventative multilateralism. Nonetheless, in most
instances states act reactively and therefore miss the opportunity to safeguard their reputation and prestige, and save
funds that are spent unwisely in an effort to contain an unfolding problem. States currently apply the discourse of preven-
tion to practice in their international relations with modesty, keeping it mostly confined to tackling problems associated
with preserving the global environmental commons.
Precaution in world politics
States rarely take precaution and act preventively in world
politics. We thus aim to start discussing the conditions for
what we call ‘preventative multilateralism’to emerge, exam-
ining when states could act preventively to avert major
global problems or disasters. This area has not attracted
attention in the literature of international relations. This
glaring lacuna manifestly demonstrates that there are very
few cases in which states work to avert future problems. We
advance three initial explanatory propositions, presenting
the initial contours, and paving the way towards an under-
standing of preventative multilateralism. Our argument is
part of a trend towards treating major problems in a pre-
ventive way. Therefore we consider prevention as a rising
norm in itself and as part of new forms of global gover-
nance (Ruggie, 2014, pp. 5–17).
The analysis we introduce is premised upon the assump-
tion that preventive multilateralism occurs through the cre-
ation of new international norms. In line with the
constructivist agenda, we believe that learning, deliberation,
and persuasion can help the understanding of the possibility
of preventive multilateralism through norm building. Social-
ization of states plays a key role in changing identities and
interests according to this perspective. Thus we contend
that states have been socialized in the logic of prevention
and humanitarian law and human rights particularly after
the end of the Cold War, opening a window of opportunity
for the development of preventive norms in the field of
arms control and disarmament, in particular, as these are
©2016 University of Durham and John Wiley & Sons, Ltd. Global Policy (2016) 7:3 doi: 10.1111/1758-5899.12323
Global Policy Volume 7 . Issue 3 . September 2016
370
Research Article
To continue reading
Request your trial