Response 1: The European Union seems to be one of the few modern arguments that can be made in favor of liberal IR theory. Following WWII realist principles would have dictated that states compete to fill the power vacuum left by the fall of Germany with each state pursuing the sole goal of European hegemony. Amazingly, this is the opposite of what happened. Perhaps it was the need to band together against the powerful Russian threat during the Cold War, which would conform to realist theory, but for whatever reason the European states chose to cooperate and form international institutions instead. According to our lesson this week the EU began as an economic IO to regulate trade in certain materials, and later customs. This should not be surprising, given what we learned two weeks about the link between economic prosperity and the expansion of democracy, but it is still a unique phenomenon in global politics. Between NATO and the EU, Europe probably hosts more successful supranational organizations than any other region in the world. There are other successful supranational organizations, such as ASEAN and the African Union, but they have had significant troubles and do not enjoy the same level of support from their member nations that the EU does. Some of the common difficulties we have seen facing supranational political organizations are accountability and enforcement. Tallberg described the two solutions to this as enforcement and management. “Enforcement theorists characteristically stress a coercive strategy of monitoring and sanctions, management theorists embrace a problem-solving approach based on capacity building, rule interpretation, and transparency.” (2002, 1) The EU has figured out how to combine these two competing approaches into a political strategy that keeps states in line while not subjugating them or overly imposing on their sovereignty. This is why I find this enforcement and management theory most persuasive in analyzing EU policymaking. The EU’s multi-level governance would not work without the accountability that they obtain through balancing enforcement and management. As I said at the beginning of this post, realism is the theoretical approach least persuasive when explaining EU development and effectiveness. As someone who usually ascribes to the bleak, realist outlook, I find the example set by the EU to be refreshing and hopeful. If ASEAN and the African Union could replicate their success, it would greatly increase stability and peace in their respective regions. The recent secession of Great Britain from the EU (dubbed “Brexit”) may indicate a trending decrease in support for the EU from member nations. Going forward the EU will have to carefully balance their enforcement and management mechanisms as states now see leaving the organization as a viable option if they are not happy with the EU’s policies. Great Britain’s decision to leave the EU comes down to unwillingness to c.