Mohammad Javad Ranjkesh; Abdullah Ahmadi nik
Abstract
Extended Abstract Introduction Reitberger attributes the formation of international organizations to three "problem-centered", "cognitive", and "hegemonic" positions. Atheory is a general theory of all organizations, regardless of the type of membership, geographical area, governmental/nongovernmental, ...
Read More
Extended Abstract Introduction Reitberger attributes the formation of international organizations to three "problem-centered", "cognitive", and "hegemonic" positions. Atheory is a general theory of all organizations, regardless of the type of membership, geographical area, governmental/nongovernmental, organizational function, and claims to explain the development of different types of organization, but it can be concluded by studying other types of international organizations. The difference that each of Rittberger's different levels of influence play has a major role in the nature, continuity, and the democratization of the relevant international organizations. The question in this article is to determine. What are the essential characteristics of the organization in the process of forming the Shanghai Cooperation Organization? In the answer to the new hypothesis It is true that all three Rittberger positions are influential in the formation of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, but because of the superiority of the role of "hegemonic position" and later "problematic position" over "cognitive positioning" of a transient, undemocratic nature over others. Organizations are predominantly cognitive based. Review of Literature In this respect, the existing works can be divided into two categories. First, textbooks on international organizations that deal more with the institutional-legal narrative, or, as Barkin puts it, institutionalized; In this context, works such as Musa Zadeh (1384), Ghafuri (1391), and Shirkhani (2014) are mentioned in the history and form of Shanghai under the introduction of major international organizations, mainly government. There are also studies that have specifically examined the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, including the book Shanghai Cooperation Organization: A Perspective Towards a Multipolar World by Hamid Reza Anvari and Morteza Rahmani Movahed, or articles by Shafiee and Mahmoudi (2015), preacher (2010), Haj Yusefi and Alvand (Journal of Political Science 2008), Badiei, Sharifi Razavi and Mirahmadi (Practical Geography 1393), Kozegar College (Strategy 2009), Kolaee and Moradi (Politics Quarterly, 2009), Goodarzi (Central Eurasia), 2015 ), Bozorgi and Hosseini (Political and Economic Information, 2011), Rezaei and Salehi (Political Studies, 2010), Amini and Mousavi (Rahbord, 2013), Khalili and Zarei (Seasonal) International Organizations, 2013), Shahriari (Political Quarterly, 2009), Jurisprudence and Humanities (Political and Economic Information, 2011), Tabatabai (Strategy, 2011), Ezzati and Yazdanpanah (Geopolitical Quarterly 1386),); however, this paper is distinguished from the above in terms of the theoretical framework, question, and notion. Reitberger cites three approaches or situations in explaining why international organizations have evolved. The hegemonic approach, according to which international organizations are nothing but the interests of the dominant power, and the hegemonic government has created international organizations to promote its interests and values at the level of the international system or region. Problem-based, which sees the establishment of international organizations as a result of cooperation between member states to solve common problems and benefits from game theory and, ultimately, a cognitive approach that focuses on ideas and ideas rather than merely on material conditions and forces. Shared ideas emphasize the creation of international institutions that depend on a consensus of values and norms. Method The research method is descriptive-analytical and the method of data collection is library and documentary. The analytical-descriptive approach used in this article is to interpret the data by gathering data related to the founding of the Shanghai organization and compare the three effective positions in establishing the aforementioned organization in order to confirm the research hypothesis. Results and Discussion As the findings of the study suggest, the formation of the Shanghai organization is more in line with the two hegemonic and problem-oriented situations than with the cognitive one. In interpreting this finding, it must be said that the organization relies heavily on the presence and essential role of its major founding states, China and Russia. Therefore, the optimal functioning of the Shanghai Organization cannot be imagined without the serious and effective role of China and Russia. In other respects, the emergence of the Shanghai Organization is due to the existence of a number of needs, concerns, and issues common to member states that they alone cannot satisfy. Confrontation or soft balances with the United States, territorial and border disputes, business issues Finance, energy and countering the threat of terrorism are all caused by the post-Cold War atmosphere that dominates international relations. Obviously, addressing the needs and concerns of governments on any of these issues will lead to a change in the nature and effectiveness of the organization. Conclusion Ritterberger's three positions are true in the formation of the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, but this influence has been accompanied by an uneven weight and role. In fact, these three situations have not been equally effective. In general, it can be concluded that most international organizations arise out of the need or concern of the member states. Therefore, the problematic situation in the development of organizations is inevitable. However, the role of the state or governments of the global or regional hegemony and the political structure and structure of these states / states will have a profound effect on the nature of organizations.
