is globalization undermining state sovereignty?
1559 Words7 Pages
Although it already existed long before through primitive trade and migration, globalization has become a major factor in the world organization since the twentieth century. With the creation of transnational companies, intergovernmental and non-governmental organizations, political and economic associations appeared new powerful actors that cannot be left apart in states’ decisions and whose influence may, according to some, threaten the authority of nation-states. Indeed it can be thought that globalization is causing the end of borders between countries and what is more that it is creating a sort of universal society in which states’ sovereignty is not the main authority anymore. However this essay will try to demonstrate that…show more content…
According to him internationalization characterize the ‘growing interdependence between states’ by suggesting that there is still a ‘discrete national unit’ and concrete borders, while globalization is defining a process of abolition of the distinction between the domestic and the external. Finally regionalization concerns ‘transnational or transregional networks’ and the interconnectedness between states sharing borders or located in the same geographic area (2011, pp. 19-20). Therefore globalization is defined as a phenomenon of global exchanges, such as trading, which leads to bound economies, but also information and news that allow a good communication between states. Migration and tourism are extremely important too. McGrew points out that there are ‘tens of millions’ legal and illegal immigrants and over six hundred million tourists moving across the globe per year (2011, p. 16). So globalization enables people to share common news and cultures by means of a global market that aims to offer similar goods around the world. The Oxford English Dictionary offers the same definition writing that globalization is ‘the process by which business or other organizations start operating on a global scale’ (2011, p. 605). A next term to define properly is sovereignty. McGrew writes that it is the ‘supreme, unqualified and exclusive political and legal authority’ of states and governments within their territory (2011, p. 23). The definition proposed by the Oxford
Globalization And State Sovereignty Essay
There is an undeniable fact that there has been a rise in globalization. It has become a hot topic amongst the field of international politics. With the rise of globalization, the sovereignty of the state is now being undermined. It has become an undisputed fact that the world has evolved to a new level of globalization, the transferring goods, information, ideas and services around the globe has changed at an unimaginable rate. With all that is going on, one would question how globalization has changed the system that is typically a collection of sovereign states. Do states still have the main source of power? What gives a state the right to rule a geographically defined region? It is believed by many that due to the introduction of international systems and increasing rate of globalization, the sovereignty of the state has been slowly eroded over time. My paper has two parts: First, it aims to take a close look at how globalization has changed the way the economy worked, specifically how it opened doors for multinational corporations to rise in power. Second, to answer the question, is it possible for it to exist today? And even so, should it?
Before we delve deeper into this topic, it is imperative to properly provide a definition of sovereignty and lay down some foundation on this topic. There are four different definitions of sovereignty – international legal sovereignty, Westphalia sovereignty, domestic sovereignty and interdependence sovereignty. International legal sovereignty deals with “the practices associated with mutual recognition, usually between territorial entities that have formal juridical independence” (Krasner 4). The main definition of sovereignty that this paper will use is the Westphalian definition of it: which is “political organization based on the exclusion of external actors from authority structures within a given territory” (Krasner 5). Domestic sovereignty is based on the effectiveness of the legitimate authority within restrictions of their policies and the extent to which that authority can be effectively exercised. Lastly, Interdependence sovereignty deals with the capability of public authorities to regulate the flow of information, goods, people, pollutants, or capital across borders from their state (Krasner 5). While these are four different definitions of sovereignty, De Benoist says that traditional sovereignty has either one of two definitions: The first of the two definitions is “the capacity of the public power to impose its authority”. The second of the definitions is “the holder of the legitimate power, who is recognized to have authority” (99). While each definition seems to differ from the other, they all have power and authority at the centre of their definitions (De Benoist 100).
This main goal of this paper is to take a critical look on the relationship between globalization and state sovereignty. With the discussion of globalization, it is important that we see...
Loading: Checking Spelling0%