Amin, S. (1997). Capitalism in the Age of Globalization. London: Zed Press.; Gill, S. (1995); Globalization, Market Civilization and Disciplinary Neoliberalism. Millennium. 24(3); Greider, W. (1997). One World, Ready or Not: The Manic Logic of Global Capitalism. New York: Simon and Schuster; Hoogvelt, A. (2001). Globalization and the Postcolonial World: The New Political Economy of Development. London: Macmillan; Luttwak, E. (2000). Turbo-Capitalism. New York: Basic Books. >; Scholte, J.A. (1997). Global Capitalism and the State. International Affairs. 73(3): 427-452; Strange, S. (1996). The Retreat of the State. Cambridge: Cambridge University Press; Yergin, D.A. and Stanislaw, J. (2002). The Commanding Heights. New York: Simon and Schuster. >.
The factors of globalization have a wide impact on the state sovereignty. There are increasing political, economic, and social forces that degrade the importance and authority of states creating an avenue for a more incorporation. This has put the question of whether or not the factors of globalization did decrease the sovereignty of states. The primary issue being debated is largely concerning the prospect of the state sovereignty. Will the state maintain its key role in the international system or be overshadowed. The state system has evolved over time and the present modern state is arguably of a Western concept. There are other forms of governance over the past centuries but are seen as failed as state system came to dominate the international system. However, due to global forces pressure is building up threaten to undermine the modern states. The future role of states is now in doubt, even continued existence of states as sovereign entities. From this view there are two contending arguments that are for and against the question of the survival of state sovereignty. Stephen Krasner on one hand believes that the forces of globalisation do not and should not endanger the existence of the state, as states have the ability to continue to exist as a sovereign entity. On the other hand, Kimberly Weir argued that since the world progressively more interdependent the position of states has become outdated. This has put the hypothesis of whether the present model of governance nevertheless the best model for the future.
Globalization and State Sovereignty Essay examples
What features of Westphalia make it the origin of the sovereign statessystem? In fact, not all scholars agree that it deserves this status(see Krasner 1999). Nowhere in the settlement's treaties is asovereign states system or even the state as the reigning legitimateunit, prescribed. Certainly, Westphalia did not create a sovereignstates system ex nihilo, for components of the system hadbeen accumulating for centuries up to the settlement; afterwards, somemedieval anomalies persisted. In two broad respects, though, in bothlegal prerogatives and practical powers, the system of sovereignstates triumphed. First, states emerged as virtually the sole form ofsubstantive constitutional authority in Europe, their authority nolonger seriously challenged by the Holy Roman Empire. The Netherlandsand Switzerland gained uncontested sovereignty, the German states ofthe Holy Roman Empire accrued the right to ally outside the empire,while both the diplomatic communications and foreign policy designs ofcontemporary great powers revealed a common understanding of a systemof sovereign states. The temporal powers of the Church were alsocurtailed to the point that they no longer challenged any state'ssovereignty. In reaction, Pope Innocent X condemned the treaties ofthe peace as “null, void, invalid, iniquitous, unjust, damnable,reprobate, inane, empty of meaning and effect for alltime” (quoted in Maland 1966, 16).
The term ‘complex interdependence’ was first coined to describe a condition in which autonomous states are related by a growing number of channels–political, social, economic, cultural, and others. So interdependence, or mutual dependence “implies sensitivity or vulnerability to an external force. The units to be studied when examining and measuring interdependence are territorially bound, sovereign nation-states. International interdependence thus denotes a condition of mutual sensitivity and vulnerability among states in the international system. From the perspective of each state, the source of this sensitivity and vulnerability is external” (Reinicke1998, p.55)Purveying sovereignty from quite a different perspective was MartinLuther. His theology of the Reformation advocated stripping theCatholic Church of its many powers, not only its ecclesiasticalpowers, but powers that are, by any modern definition,temporal. Luther held that the Church should no longer be thought ofas a visible, hierarchical institution, but was rather the invisiblyunited aggregate of local churches that adhered to rightdoctrine. Thus, the Catholic Church no longer legitimately held vasttracts of land that it taxed and defended, and whose justice itadministered; it was no longer legitimate for its bishops to holdtemporal offices under princes and kings; nor would the Pope be ableto depose secular rulers through his power of excommunication; mostimportantly, the Holy Roman Emperor would no longer legitimatelyenforce Catholic uniformity. No longer would the Church and those whoacted in its name exercise political or economic authority. Who, then,would take up such relinquished powers? Territorialprinces. “By the destruction of the independence of the Churchand its hold on an extra-territorial public opinion, the last obstacleto unity within the State was removed,” writes politicalphilosopher J.N. Figgis (72). It was this vision that triumphed atWestphalia.