ON INTEGRATING TEACHING OF THE UN
IN THE UNDERGRADUATE CURRICULUM

It is my opinion that the major problem encountered in teaching about the UN to undergraduates lies in their general lack of understanding of the nature of the international system and how its character differs from the national system with which they have become increasingly familiar since grade school. Clearly, they know that there is something "out there" that the United States is part of - a larger complex world consisting of many States. But the related notion of a world system comprised of a community of States is rather abstract for them. Thus, the introduction of the UN into the discussion of global politics is, not surprisingly, often confusing at best.

Their confusion is spawned by the patterning of students to conceptualize human society as comprised of two parts: government (those who govern) and the people (those who are governed). Cast in the context of national society, the role of government is viewed as being that of law maker and law enforcer. The governed are expected to abide by the laws if they wish to avoid the penalties associated with enforcement. The presence of the UN compounds this "neat" conceptualization of societal order. It too looks a government and appears to behave like a government. Yet in the final analysis, it is not a government because it lacks the effective capacity to enforce the decisions it makes.

In light of this seeming paradox, the teacher's initial challenge is to free the students from such conceptual rigidity. The first step in meeting that challenge is to construct the image of the international system as an anarchical community, i.e. a society without government. It is comprised of largely self-interested members (the States) who, despite their respective self-interests, do share a common value: a preference for order over chaos.

A helpful analogy is that of a traffic light at a busy intersection and the general conformity of motorists to go only when the light is green and to stop when the light is red. The question that arises from observing their routine behavior is this: why do motorists obey the lights? The goal of the traffic light analogy is to propose to students that conforming behavior does not result from fear of punishment - there is no police office at every intersection. Rather, observance of the law is the product of the shared desire of self-interested motorists to get through the intersection safely (i.e., to avoid chaos) and to proceed safely to their destinations. If no one obeyed the directions implied by the colors of those street lights, there would be numerous collisions. The motorists' prospects for arriving safely at their destinations would be greatly endangered if not entirely defeated.

Similarly, the international system - although not a government in the domestic sense - is able to maintain a surprising level of order due to the common interest that States share in the maintenance of order. States have thus created an organizational framework - the UN. It functions to provide a forum in which States can identify and define various shared interests. The process of identification and definition of these additional shared interests serves to articulate the nature of their shared value preference for global order, giving it ever greater specificity. Moreover, the voluntary national decision to become a member of the UN should be interpreted as indicating acceptance of that body's decisions as legitimate collective expressions of the fundamental common value preference for order. Like most self-interested motorists at the traffic light at the busy intersection, self-interested States recognize that it is in their best interest to comply with UN decisions. In both situations, self-interest is equated with the interest of all (i.e., with the interest of the global community). If all motorists proceed when the light is green and stop when it is red, and if all States comply with UN decisions, everyone is served and order prevails.

I will readily admit to the fact that the model presented here is far from being flawless. However, the model does address an essential fact in the student's everyday existence - which frees the student from a very limited understanding of the legitimacy of governance as being dependent upon a coercive enforcement; and then replacing it with an understanding of the legitimacy of governance as resting upon the base of shared common values. Without this insight, the effort to integrate the teaching of the UN into the curriculum will be viewed by the students as, "we have to learn about the UN because the teacher said so" - rather than appreciating the importance of the UN's role in the international system.