tries such as Iran, North Korea, Afghanistan, Iraq, Pakistan, China etc whereas Britain has many disputes with Argentina like Latin American countries. China has problems with India, Taiwan, Tibet etc. In short, interstate problems exist everywhere in this world and global governance is the only solution for these interstate problems according to Karns and Mingst.
Karns and Mingst have defined global governance as follows: “Global governance is not global government. it is not a single world order. it is not a top-down, hierarchical structure of authority. It is the collection of governance-related activities, rules, and mechanisms, formal and informal, existing at a variety of levels in the world today”(Karns and Mingst, 2004, p.4). The concept of global governance put forward by Karns and Mingst seems to be good on papers and in practice it is not so. Since different types of governances are prevailing in this world, how we can expect that the collection of governance-related activities under the label of global governance may solve international problems or interstate problems. Moreover, different people may have contrasting beliefs, ideologies and customs and how we can use these things together for ensuring global peace and harmony.
It should be noted that United Nations was founded immediately after WW2 to avoid or solve future interstate problems. However, we know that interstate problems are still going on at different parts of the world and UN seems to be ineffective in solving many of the interstate problems. Many people believe that in a unipolar world dominated by America, even UN like global agencies may fail to act neutrally. The on-going war on terror, Israel-Palestine crisis, the tensions between America and Iran are examples to prove the failure of UN. Under such circumstances how we can assume that the concept of global governance may ensure peace and harmony in this world.