I’m in class listening to Assistant Professor of Political Science Patrick Cottrell talk about NGOs, IGOs and everything in between. I hadn’t taken a political science class at Linfield before; Global Governance is my first.
The professor asks the class, “Why would it be difficult for the government and international institutions to use force?”
The first thought that popped in my mind was the fact that we have been spending the entire class so far learning about government institutions and whether they are legitimate. We have been studying whether they are actually doing anything for the U.S. or if they should be shut down. So why would we obey force if some of us do not believe institutions are doing anything to begin with?
Another thought: The media cover so much of everything else going on in the world, but nothing about the war in Iraq or what the U.S. is doing in other countries. Sure, there is coverage on bombings in Afghanistan or the capturing of American soldiers, but no details on whether we are winning or losing a fight that has been dragged out. And Obama is sharing his thoughts about his NCAA bracket in Iowa while our soldiers are fighting for an unseen cause.
International institutions have not done enough to make a U.S. citizen say, “Wow, I am glad we have international law to keep us bonded.” So how are we supposed to be forced to cooperate?
To answer professor Cottrell’s question of what difficulty would be encountered if force were to be used: fairness. Not everyone can be treated the same to begin with. International institutions already have a hard time treating each country the same. But how can you do that if each country is so diverse? Darfur cannot be treated the same as the U.S. because we have a greater economy than it does, and Darfur is worrying about genocide.
Another issue with using force: accountability. Who is accountable for issues when it comes to international law? It isn’t apparent enough to have someone be accountable when applying force.
Why is force needed? And what kinds of international laws have been created? These are all questions I have asked myself since the start of class. It is difficult to use force when no one knows enough about international institutions in the first place.
My point: If international law really does exist, then why has it taken so long to adapt and become potent? And if it does exist, then how would it be strong enough to make an impact on citizens from different countries?
Our economy has sprouted quickly, and we have created other organizations such as NATO to use force among countries. So why is it so hard to get international law off of the ground?
Thinking about all of these questions makes my brain hurt because political science is mostly about opinion. How do we resolve our questions if this is true?

Lauren Ostrom can be reached at
Features editor Lauren Ostrom [email protected]