State Sovereignty: An Outdated Concept? Flashcards
arguments to suggest that state sovereignty is an outdated concept due to the impact of globalisation
globalisation has led to the development of global and regional governance bodies, which undermine state sovereignty
globalisation has led to the rise of international law anc courts, which undermine state sovereignty
economic globalisation has undermined state sovereignty
arguments to suggest that state sovereignty is NOT an outdated concept due to the impact of globalisation
global and regional governance bodies do not undermine state sovereignty as states choose to join and can leave at any time
international law and courts do not undermine state sovereignty as states can ignore rulings
economic globalisation has not undermined state sovereignty as states often use economic bodies for their own aims
globalisation has led to the development of global and regional governance bodies, which undermine state sovereignty
GLOBAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNANCE BODIES
there is a growing realisation among states that they need to work together to achieve common goals and that common problems need common solutions
there has subsequently been an effort among states to pursue common approaches to global and regional problems through global and regional governance institutions like the UN, the IPCC, the EU and ASEAN
the existence of these institutions can be seen as an acknowledgement that states are no longer as sovereign as they once were
the EU has undermined state sovereignty
since 1983, through its Common Fisheries Policy, the EU has regulated the amount of deep sea fish that could be caught with a system of quotas and has allowed fishing boats from different member states to have equal access to each other’s fishing grounds
this was at the centre of the landmark ruling in the 1990 Factortame case, in which a Spanish fishing company called Factortame sued the UK government for restricting its access to UK waters
the law lords ruled that the 1988 Merchant Shipping Act, which the government was using to justify his actions, could not be allowed to stand because it violated EU law
this case established the primacy of EU law over an Act of Parliament, demonstrating that state sovereignty is often heavily undermined within the EU
global and regional governance bodies do not undermine state sovereignty as states choose to join and can leave at any time
GLOBAL AND REGIONAL GOVERNANCE BODIES
however, states choose whether to cooperate within such institutions and cannot be forced to do so, being able to leave at any time
states are sovereign and the most important actors in the international system, meaning that they are free to dismiss and undermine international bodies
the Iraq War of 2003 is an example of states ignoring and undermining global governance bodies
the USA had acted unilaterally, invading without UN approval, leading many to argue this intervention lacked legitimacy and undermined international law
even in the EU, the most advanced example regionalism in the world, member states retain the right to veto on key issues that define a sovereign state, including foreign policy, defence, taxation and non-EU immigration
states may enter into relationships with other nationstates in regional organisations and IGOs, which limits their absolute freedom of action, but they are free to withdraw their involvement at any time
states can withdraw from regional organisations at any time — Article 50 of the Treaty of Lisbon provides a mechanism by which states may reclaim their sovereignty, as the UK is doing with Brexit
President Trump unilaterally withdrew from the TPP and threatened to withdraw from NAFTA multiple times, only not doing so because he managed to secure a renegotiation of the deal
globalisation has led to the rise of international law and courts, which undermine state sovereignty
INTERNATIONAL LAW AND COURTS
globalisation has led to the rise of international bodies designed to tackle common problems – e.g. courts
the growing role of international law around human rights and a growing global rights culture has seen the rise of bodies such as the ICC and of humanitarian intervention, which erodes state sovereignty
the ICC is the organisation that prosecutes individuals for crimes against humanity, genocide and war crimes
by convicting human rights abuses before an international court, the ICC establishes precedents for the development of international human rights-based law
for example, the ICC successfully prosecuted the Congolese warlord Thomas Lubanga for recruiting and using child soldiers and he was eventually sentenced to 14 years imprisonment
moreover, its persecution of Laurent Gbagbo, former president of the Ivory Coast, has reinforced the principle that heads of state are morally responsible for their actions
the fact that a large number of states have accepted that these crimes can be tried at an international court suggests that there is a little less anarchy in the international system and that states are not as sovereign as they once were
states, more often than not, observe the decisions of the ICJ as these decisions have moral power, with a high cost to the reputation and legitimacy of states who defy the court
for instance, in 2002, the ICJ ruled on a border dispute between Cameroon and Nigeria which had sparked violent confrontation in the 1980s and 1990s
the ICJ awarded the Bakassi Peninsula to Cameroon and the dispute was resolved, with the Peninsula being handed over by Nigeria in 2008
international law and courts do not undermine state sovereignty as states can ignore rulings
INTERNATIONAL LAW AND COURTS
there is an abundance of examples where states have ignored ICC rulings (e.g. Sudan over Omar al-Bashir)
while many states have signed up to the Rome Statute, some countries, including the USA, China, India and Israel, are not bound by the full requirements of the court
similarly, in October 2016, South Africa, Burundi and Gambia announced that they were going to withdraw from the Rome Statute, and other African countries may follow
Russia also seems likely to withdraw from the Rome Statute, perhaps because it may face punishment over the annexation of Crimea and its actions in the Syrian Civil War
with so many powerful countries absent or threatening to withdraw, the ICC only provides partial justice and cannot claim to uphold international law
this demonstrates that sovereign states, who are free to withdraw from such organisations, are capable of severely undermining international law
the ICJ has no enforcement powers and states have to sign up to be bound by ICJ decisions, also having the option to withdraw their commitment at any time and therefore undermine its influence
state sovereignty also means that no states actually have to adhere to the rulings, even if they have signed up to the court
this can be seen in 1984, when Nicaragua brought a case arguing that the USA had violated international law by supporting the CONTRAs in the rebellion against the government
the ICJ ruled in Nicaragua’s favour but the USA said that the court had no jurisdiction and ignored the ruling
this is a clear example of international law being undermined by state sovereignty
economic globalisation has undermined state sovereignty
ECONOMIC GLOBALISATION
since the world is so closely economically connected, states cannot insulate themselves from global financial crises, such as the 2008 collapse of US bank Lehman Brothers
the huge financial influence of TNCs, such as Apple, Google and Microsoft, also means that states need to shape policy in such a way as to attract investment from TNCs
nation’s policymakers are therefore primarily concerned with creating conditions that are favourable for foreign investment, which significantly reduces a state’s freedom of manoeuvre
global acceptance of economic liberalism, encouraged by the Bretton Woods institutions, further restricts the economic choices that governments can take, since in order to attract trade and investment, governments are forced to adopt policies of low taxation and free-market reforms, sometimes at the expense of workers’ rights
states clearly have less freedom of action, and according to Susan Strange “markets are now the masters of governments”
economic globalisation has not undermined state sovereignty as states often use economic bodies for their own aims
ECONOMIC GLOBALISATION
economic globalisation has not undermined state sovereignty as states often use economic bodies for their own gain
powerful states actually use these organisations to further their own sovereign interests, so economic bodies may strengthen a state’s ability to make decisions rather than challenge it
anti-globalists have often accused the IMF, World Bank and WTO of being agents of American free market imperialism
it also claimed that China, as the major shareholder in the AIIB, uses the loans it provides as a way of advancing its economic influence across Asia
critics claim that the establishment of the Eurasian Customs Union in 2010 represents a way for Russia to regain strategic influence in the newly independent republics that emerged after the dissolution of the Soviet Union
