The second ideal type of international region in this taxonomy is the intergovernmental model. In this archetype, decisions are taken and agendas set by elites located in governmental institutions, i e , the Heads of State and their supportive network, the civil service. This construct can be labelled as relational as it focuses on the orientation of a state's foreign policy behaviour. It covers the complete range of foreign policy options including alliances of a cultural, economic, political and military nature. Like its transnational counterpart, the intergovernmental model reflects the degree and intensity of co-operative and conflictual state relations.
Kal Holsti defines orientation as a state's "general attitudes and commitments toward the external environment, its fundamental strategy for accomplishing its domestic and external objectives, and aspirations and for coping with persistent threats (Holsti, 1977: 109). This level of analysis therefore deals with both the internal and external dynamics of regionalism. It seeks to address questions such as: what are the country's general objectives and strategy at the global and regional levels?; how do orientations change over time and what are the sources of change? The intergovernmental international regional model helps answer Waltz's question: "what are the relative strengths and foreign policy capabilities of a region's states?" It also assists in understanding Buzan's theory that states' enduring patterns of alignment and conflict are crucial to understanding their relationships (Waltz, 1979: chs. 5 & 6, and Buzan, 1991 : ch. 5).
The spectrum of relations among a group of countries in a region can extend from very close co-operation of a bloc to the opposite extreme of direct military confrontation. The
degree of amity varies in accordance with the type of interrelationship that exists among a group of states A bloc is the most intense structure where states act internationally as if they were a single political entity. In an alliance states co-operate with one another in specific ways, while at the tentative co-operation level they co-ordinate polices on a much more limited scale.
At the other extreme of the spectrum, complete enmity results in direct military conflict between regional states. Sustained crises exist when certain states are continuously attempting to shift the balance of power in their favour without reverting to military combat A stalemate is arrived at when contention continues but the actors involved are aware that they cannot change the situation. They therefore settle for the status quo rather than face the consequences of their actions. At the centre of the spectrum is the equilibrium which signifies a mutually acceptable division of power among the states. The main difference between stalemate and equilibrium is that in the former the states in question would change the situation given the opportunity. In an equilibrium situation neither of the parties wants to alter the balance of power. (See diagram below)
bloc>alliance>limited co-operation>equHibrium>stalcmate>sustaincd crisis>direct m ilitary conflict
A number of factors influence the course of relations between regional states which makes it difficult to arrive at clear cut conclusions about the nature of any bilateral or multilateral relationships For example, a state may be in conflict with another state in one sector but have perfectly normal relations in others United Nation's embargoes help to illustrate this point. While Mediterranean countries are enforcing the trade embargo against Libya in accordance with UN resolutions, they continue to maintain normal diplomatic relations and import Libyan petroleum It is therefore necessary to distinguish the intensity of conflict and co-operation between particular states in an international region or across
international regions to understand better the intergovernmental regional dynamics which are in operation
The variability of intergovernmental regional relations is complicated by the involvement of external powers. An assessment of international regional interaction concentrates on which states co-ordinate their policies and which adhere to an independent and sometimes aggressive agenda (the spectrum of relations); the basis for their amity and enmity (the cause of relations); and the resources which they employ to effect their relations (the means of relations) (Canton and Spiegal, 1970: 17).
Further insight into the spectrum of relations within a region is achieved by referring to the resources used in such relations. Is warfare a common means of conducting relations or is the emphasis on implementing co-operative diplomatic relations? A distinction can also be made between those states that are consistent in their foreign policy behaviour and those that favour a maverick external policy. This parameter explores how domestic politics affects the foreign policy behaviour of the major regional states. It also considers how the activities of the major outside powers, operating within the Mediterranean area, affects the patterns of regional interaction. For the sake of clarity, an assessment of the role of external actors is conducted in a separate chapter dedicated to this aspect (see chapter six).
Intergovernmental social interaction includes all those measures adopted by the state that in some manner influence social patterns o f contact within a given area For example, immigration policies have a direct impact on the level o f social exchanges that occur. A government's approach to this question can hinder or facilitate migratory trends, depending on how restrictive or open governmental policies are in this field Intergovernmental economic
interaction requires that at the very least states accept and/or develop the basic conditions for international trade: some common units of currency, and legislation that allows goods to cross borders in both directions. At a more co-operative level of economic interaction the parties involved will extend agreed tariff concessions to others participating in the reciprocal system, thus establishing a most-favoured nation network. The spectrum rises through a sequence of stages, each building on the one before it: free trade areas, where quota restrictions and tariff barriers between neighbouring countries are removed, but maintaining their separate restrictive arrangements with the rest of the world; customs unions, where members abolish restrictions on the movement of goods, capital, services and labour; economic union, where participating states harmonise their economic, fiscal, and social policies (Buzan, 1994: 7).
Diplomatic interaction, is another type of interaction which falls within this category. The extent of memberships in international organisations assists in identifying the degree to which an international region is institutionalised in a single political framework. For example, a very large set of institutions manage interdependence in Western Europe. This complex web of international institutions serves as a vehicle to strengthen the European international society (Miall, 1994: 5-14) A comparison of international organisation memberships across regional divides helps disclose the level of asymmetry in this area of international region interaction It is thus significant to note to what extent, or not, a regional organisation is coterminous with a region's boundaries For example, compare European Union (EU) or Arab League membership to that of the Organisation of American States (OAS) Thus, if all of the members of a region also belong to a regional international organisation, this can strengthen the degree of political interaction This will certainly be the case if the organisation’s boundaries coincide with that of the specific regional grouping, like that of the Arab Maghreb Union. Membership in a larger organisation can therefore serve the dual purpose of harmonising foreign policy
agenda and enhancing the voice of regional actors on the international scene. Although it is by no means a forgone conclusion, overlapping international organisation frameworks can help foster regional and international patterns of co-operation. The North Atlantic Co-operation Council (NACC) and the Partnership For Peace (PFP) programme demonstrate such intergovernmental types of interaction. Voting behaviour in the United Nations could also shed some light on the degree of organisational cohesion among certain groupings of states such as the Non-Aligned Movement
Intergovernmental regional military interaction comprises all types of military exchanges that take place between states in a given area These include the importing and exporting of armaments, the assistance in training combat units and the construction of military production facilities. Intergovernmental regional relations can be both bilateral or multilateral in nature For example, Middle Eastern states maintain bilateral military relations with neighbouring Arab countries, like that between Syria and Lebanon, in addition to multilateral contacts through organisations such as the Arab League. In Western Europe, states maintain strong bilateral military contacts, as exemplified in cross-border manoeuvres between countries like France and Belgium Multilateral ties in this field include memberships in military alliances such as NATO and the WEU.
Assessment of political interaction in international regions is thus concerned with the pattern and degree of complementarity of regimes in the area, and what bearing this will have on the cohesion process In this context, one can compare the different influences parliamentary-type regimes and autocracies will have on such a process (Cantori and Spiegal, 1970: 12). Across the southern shores of the Mediterranean, the absence or weakness of democracy makes domestic consensus behind governments and regimes remain fragile In order to obviate this
handicap, authorities and regimes adopt pan-Arab or Islamic foreign policies - policies asserting Arab or Islamic interests - in an effort to maintain their positions of authority. In other words, foreign policy is used to alleviate internal tensions and create consensus for the leadership (Dawisha, 1988: 260-275). This form of "regional nationalism" intensifies intra- regional rivalry and is conducive to conflictual international relations For example, this was the approach adopted by Gamal Abdel Nasser when he assumed power with the support of the Muslim Brotherhood. It was also the Islamic platform o f Khomeini when he reigned over Iran, and is nowadays the pan-Arab platform adopted by Saddam Hussein in Iraq
In the Mediterranean area, the intensity o f intergovernmental relations within distinct international regions and across the contiguous international regions, is illustrated by the high degree of cross-national interference and the level of competition between regimes for regional leadership. These two intergovernmental patterns of interaction contribute to the conflictual nature of the relations which characterise the area. The end of the Iran-Iraq war seemed to usher in a period when regional association and collaboration among Arab countries was possible as reflected in the formation of intergovernmental bodies such as the Arab Co operation Council (ACC) and the Arab Maghreb Union (AMU). However, the 1990-91 Gulf War revealed the fragility of co-operative intergovernmental relations in the Middle East
As long as the policy of "regional nationalism" is pursued, it will continue to upset efforts to establish an equilibrium based system of relation across the Mediterranean Regional activism, which aims at undermining the internal political dynamics of the other regimes, and the pursuit of national territorial interests, upsets the balance of power equation While conducive to the formation of conflict-based regions, it is counter-productive to regional harmonisation schemes
Throughout this taxonomical exercise, it is essential to remember that we are dealing with ideal types of international regions that do not exist in perfect form. Governments can become highly interventionist, decide to form alliances, or organise intergovernmental international conferences, (such as the forthcoming 1996 European Union Intergovernmental Conference), but all of these measures will not always be influenced by intersocietal relations Alliances such as NATO or the OSCE correspond to this ideal type only if we focus on relations between the participating units along functional lines, that is, in military ventures.
A working definition that comes close to describing this type of international region is that offered by Hurrell:
. a set of policies by one or more states designed to promote the emergence of a cohesive regional unit, which dominates the pattern of relations between the states of that region and the rest of the world, and which forms the organising basis for policy within the region across a range of issues (Mace, Belanger and Therien, 1992: 120).
An intergovernmental international region is therefore concerned with what degree o f governmental interaction takes place in a given area The type of interaction can be of a social, economic, political or military nature, but it is always government led. Assessing foreign policy strategies is therefore the clearest way of identifying intergovernmental regional trends. Applying the intergovernmental model will thus assist in deciphering the intensity and patterns of such relations in the Mediterranean area. An attempt is made to see how strong intergovernmental social, economic, political and military ties are and whether any indicators point towards an intensification of such relations across the Mediterranean