ARTICLE

Relation between bodies at International and National Level along with transparency of
information.
Relation between bodies and its transparency of information are interrelated term. Level of
transparency between the bodies defines its relationship. The essence of saying this thing here is
to show how the relation of national and international bodies depends on transparency of sharing
of information. In fact transparency of information is one of the key factors that promotes
mutual cooperation between the national and international bodies. Moreover the relation between
these two determine the level of competency.
As to provide an overview of transparency of information, it can be said that access to
information gives the bodies their right by through which they can access to the facts and data
concerning the exercise of its authority, as well as on the use of any organizational funds.
Moreover its level of transparency of information determines how successful the bodies are in
propagating its agendas. 1
To describe the relation between these bodies, we have to go through the debate about the
relationship between structures and institutions in international systems. On one hand it focuses
on the principles of neorealism, a school of that reflect set of related theories of international
relations that emphasizes the role of the state, national interest, and military power in world
politics. This limits the foreign-policy options available to states and influences international
institutions in important ways. It reflects the idea of bipolar world where the two bodies are in
dominant position while the rest of them marked there presence in the form of its alliance. The
most famous example of this is United Nations Security Council which is dominated according
to the will of its five permanent members.
Whereas on the other hand Neoliberalism, ideology and policy model that emphasizes the value
of free market competition, talks about institutional matters beyond simply reflecting or
codifying the power structure of the international system. Although neoliberal schools accept the
realist conception of states as the principal actors in a fundamentally anarchic environment, they
argue that state behaviour can be modified by interaction with international institutions such as
the European Union (EU), NATO, the World Trade Organization (WTO), and the UN. Such
interaction, they contend, reduces the long-term potential for international conflict and such
interaction can only be possible through mutual cooperation and transparency of information.
Although both of these schools agreed upon the fact that mutual cooperation can be possible in
forming relations between bodies but neoliberals institution is found to be more cooperative and
long lasting. It can be pursued by most of the bodies. Moreover it also offers transparency of
information to their bodies that strengthen their relation. But neorealism school seemed to be
more sceptical about weather it last long or not and also raise a question on its cooperation. For
better understanding we can take an example of NATO and USSR both had experienced the
bipolar world but with the collapse of USSR, this bipolar world also disappeared. And later
NATO had to change its policy and focused on neoliberal school of thought. Consequently, each

1
Journal; Right to information; Transparency International; Berlin, Germany 1993.

1
theory appears to offer useful insights, and both together can form the basis of a unified approach
to the relationship between structures and institutions.2
Since from the cold war relation between the bodies is also determined by behaviour of these
bodies, this is called constructivism. In this all institutions, including the state, are socially
constructed, in the sense that they reflect an “intersubjective consensus” of shared beliefs about
political practice, acceptable social behaviour, and values. 
With the arrival of postmodernism and critical thinking, the relation between the bodies changed
over time. According to postmodernism these bodies are more in realist form and believes that
reflect the other international relations theory are social constructions that reflect a worldview
that serves the interests of the elite. Whereas critical thinking i.e. forms of domination other than
class domination, including those based on gender, race, religion, ethnicity, and nationalism. 
As relations of states with each other and with international bodies are managed by certain
subnational entities (e.g., bureaucracies, political parties, and interest groups). It is related to a
number of other academic disciplines, including political science, geography, history,
economics, law, sociology, philosophy and physiology.
Apart from this there are various tools that are brought together to fulfill the interest of these
bodies but here we are going discuss two major tools that influence relation between bodies at
national and international level. 3
Politics as a tool – It is a broad chamber that encompasses foreign policy, diplomatic ties of
states that have specialization in managing security, sovereignty of every state in international
arena. Moreover with the help of international law or Charter of organizations it promotes human
rights, peace world wide. One of the major reason for its existence is its mediation and conflict
resolution policy that makes it more attractive to opt for. In fact there are more aspects that are
covered under this tool which states can use time to time to strengthen its ties and to accelerate
its development.
Economics as a tool – Although there are some similarities in political and economic tool of
international relation but economics tools distinguish itself by its policies for international
relations for example international relations for trade, sharing of technological advancements,
multilateral treaties, memorandum of understanding through which a state maintains its relation
with other states.
Scope of relation between bodies at national and international level - The scope of
international relations encompasses issues such as globalization, diplomatic relations, state
sovereignty, international security, ecological sustainability, nuclear
proliferation, nationalism, economic development, global finance, terrorism, and human rights.
This all attracts states to have international ties so that they can maintain themselves in the
international affairs.4

2
Britannica; International Relations, Internet Encyclopaedia of Philosophy,
https://www.britannica.com/topic/international-relations/Scholarship-and-policy
3
Jstor journal, Economic Ideas and International Relations: Beyond Rational Neglect, vol. 39, The international
studies association, https://www.jstor.org/stable/2600845.

2
Thus by going through this article we can say that relation between the bodies whether at
national or international level can only be maintained by way of states increasing their
transparency of information i.e. sharing political, economic and other advancement and allow
other states to make ties with them.

4
Journal, Transparency of Intergovernmental Organizations, vol. 51, The Roles of Member States, International
Bureaucracies and Nongovernmental Organizations, International Studies Quarterly,