Full Picture

Extension usage examples:

Here's how our browser extension sees the article:
May be slightly imbalanced

Article summary:

1. Donald Trump's "America First" approach posed a significant challenge to the liberal international order and international organizations (IOs).

2. The ability of IOs and their institutional actors to respond to existential challenges varied depending on factors such as leadership, organizational structure, formal competences, and external networks.

3. NATO officials leveraged the challenge to increase burden-sharing among allies while quietly shielding the alliance from Trump's position on Russia, while officials from the United Nations Framework Convention on Climate Change focused on preventing further withdrawals through coalitions with non-state actors. WTO officials lacked leadership and organizational structure to formulate a response and did little to save the Appellate Body from becoming defunct.

Article analysis:

The article "Donald Trump and the survival strategies of international organisations: when can institutional actors counter existential challenges?" provides an insightful analysis of how international organizations (IOs) responded to the challenges posed by the Trump administration's "America First" approach. The article argues that IOs' institutional actors, including leaders and bureaucracies, play a crucial role in their survival and ability to respond to existential challenges.

The article presents three case studies on NATO, UNFCCC, and WTO, highlighting how different IOs varied in their ability to pursue survival strategies during the Trump administration. The authors argue that not all IOs have similar abilities to respond to contestation, as much depends on the strength of their leadership, organizational structure, formal competences, and external networks.

While the article provides valuable insights into IO responses to existential challenges, it has some potential biases and limitations. For instance, the article focuses solely on the Trump administration's impact on IOs without considering other factors that may have contributed to their crisis. Additionally, the authors do not explore counterarguments or alternative perspectives that may challenge their claims.

Moreover, while the article acknowledges that institutional actors within IOs may not recognize the challenge or have the prowess to implement a response, it does not provide sufficient evidence for this claim. The authors also do not consider possible risks associated with IOs' survival strategies or whether they present both sides equally.

Overall, despite its limitations and potential biases, this article provides valuable insights into how institutional actors within IOs can respond strategically to existential challenges. It highlights the importance of strong leadership and organizational structures in ensuring IO resilience in times of crisis.