Intergovernmental organizations do many different things for the international world. They produce collective goods, serve as intermediaries, provide information and even authorize retaliation. One of the fundamental ideas behind IGOs ​​is that states value their membership and want to comply and help ensure their membership and alliance with the IGO as well as other members. So, in a perfect world, if all states complied with the OIG guidelines, there would be very little, if any, conflict. Of course, this doesn't always happen and, unfortunately, conflicts can arise due to a lack of compliance. A recent example of this is Russia and its invasion and attempted annexation of Crimea. To understand how this situation is an example of how IGOs ​​do not always reduce conflict, we need to fully understand the problem at hand. Crimea is the southern peninsula of Ukraine surrounded by the Black Sea. Recently, Kremlin forces took control of the Crimean Peninsula, and later that region's "Russian-speaking majority voted to join Russia in a referendum that Ukraine and the West deem illegal" ( “Crimean Profile”, 2014). This would not be the first time that Crimea became part of Russia. In 1783, Crimea was annexed by the Russian Empire and was part of Russia for almost 200 years. In 1954, Russia built two major canals across the border between Ukraine and Crimea. In an attempt to speed up and organize the process, Russia gave control of Crimea to Ukraine so that it could easily oversee the project until its completion. Due to the transfer from a Ukrainian state to a Russian state and then back to a Ukrainian state, the population of Crimea identifies differently. Crimea's population is around two million, "58 percent identify as ethnic... middle of paper ... I will make the smart decision and withdraw from Crimea, saving the few allegiance they have left. On the other hand, if Russia continues to act as it has and carries out its invasion and attempted annexation, the severity of this situation could end up being a major contradiction to the claim that “IGOs reduce conflict”. The seriousness of Russia's actions, if it does not choose to stop, is widely reported, because who knows if Russia will be content to obtain Crimea on its own. The United States fears that “Russia's military intervention will soon extend to eastern Ukraine” (Arutunyan and Resneck, 2014) and perhaps even beyond. Russia's choice to continue on this path could lead to a lack of credibility and trust in intergovernmental organizations. If a permanent member of the Security Council is prepared to act against the advice of the Council, what is he not prepared to do? ??