The Role of Informal International Organizations in Resolving the Iranian Nuclear Crisis (2003–15)
Bibliographic Data
| ID | 6282152 |
|---|---|
| Authors | Tilman Sauer (0000-0003-1632-8281, University of Antwerp, corresponding author), Tom Sauer (Universiteit Antwerpen Antwerpen) |
| Year | 2019 |
| Volume | 57 |
| Issue | 5 |
| Pages | 939-955 |
| Publication date | 2019-09-01 |
| Peer Reviewed | Yes |
| Open Access | Yes |
| Type | ARTICLE |
| Venue | JCMS Journal of Common Market Studies (JOURNAL) |
| Journal identifiers | ISSN: 0021-9886 • E-ISSN: 1468-5965 |
| Publisher | Wiley (PUBLISHER • GB) |
| DOI | 10.1111/jcms.12861 |
| OpenAlex | W2922196612 |
| Language | EN |
| Citations received | 17 |
| References cited | 27 |
This article attempts to discover why states have chosen to co‐ordinate within ad hoc informal international organizations instead or on top of formal ones, in order to resolve the Iranian nuclear crisis in the period 2003–15. Three informal groups of states – the E3 (France, Germany and the UK), the EU‐3 (the E3 + the EU High Representative), and the EU‐3 + 3 (the EU‐3 + the US, Russia, and China) – are widely seen as having contributed to the diplomatic solution. Empirically, one can wonder why formal international organizations like the UN, the IAEA and the EU were not able to do the wheeling and dealing by themselves in the case of the Iranian nuclear conflict. From a theoretical perspective, this article highlights the role of informal international organizations, a subject that is under‐researched both in EU and International Relations studies. It will argue that these temporary informal international organizations have three advantages: no (or less) bureaucracy, speed, and the ability to buy time for more important diplomatic actors like major states or formal international organizations
Bureaucracy · Business · China · International relations · Order (exchange · Political economy · Political science · Politics · Sociology · Subject (documents · Economic Sanctions and International Relations · International Relations and Foreign Policy · Law · Security, Politics, and Digital Transformation
The Origins of Informality
Informal governance in world politics
The High Representative and directoires in European foreign policy
Normalising adhocism in EU foreign policy
Informal governance and transnational access in world politics
Varieties of informal intergovernmental organisations
The importance of rational institutionalism in the analysis of informal international institutions
Assessing the network power capacity of Informal International Governmental Organizations (Iigo)
Informal groupings as types of differentiated cooperation in EU foreign policy
Minilateralism and effective multilateralism in the global nuclear order
The European Union in informal intergovernmental organizations
Ad hoc coalitions and institutional exploitation in international security
An informal mode for multilateral cooperation
Legitimation strategies of informal groups of states
Hybrid minilateralism
The New Terrain of Global Governance
Gray Governance at Border Checkpoints
Forceful persuasion
CHAPTER TWO. The Governance Triangle
Organization without delegation
Informal Institutions and Democracy
International Handbook on Informal Governance
Policy-Making and Diversity in Europe
Informal Governance in the European Union
Global Standards in Action
The convergence of transatlantic sanction policy against Iran
Coercive diplomacy by the EU
Iran
How much is global governance changing? The G20 as international practice
Informal Governance in the European Union
Governing informally
Informal division of labour in EU foreign policy-making
Why are some international agreements informal
Informal Groups of States and the UN Security Council
| Unique citing works | 17 |
|---|---|
| Citations per year | 2,83 |
| Citation span | 2020 - 2026 (7) |
| Citation velocity | current |
| Highly cited | No |
| Citation types | Neutral: 17 |