Globalization And Sovereignty

Question: Can national sovereignty survive globalisation? Do all nations experience globalisation in the same way? Discuss with examples. Answer: Sovereignty is defined as the most essential attribute that a state must have to gain complete supremacy and self sufficiency in the domestic policies and independence in terms of its domestic policies. By the beginning of the modern age the advent of certain factors such as French Revolution and other civil disturbances lead to the idea of national Sovereignty. However, in the view point of Hay and Marsh (2016), Sovereignty became one of the most difficult and ambiguous issue with the advent of globalization. Sovereignty could no longer be considered as a straight forward characteristic of a country but it is a dynamic factor that changes according to the advent of other factors. The world has now more than 190 countries. These countries are in fact co-related and to each other. With the increasing number of powerful nations and non-sovereign states, the global political scenario is getting affected largely. As argued by Moghadam (2012), that there are certain reason that has given seats to Microsoft, Amnesty International and Goldman Sachs in the United Nations General assembly. These things clearly imply the fact that power has been transferred to the major corporate power representatives and they are bound to affect the Sovereignty of a state. In the recent situation there are many situations that clearly states about the increasing influence of the globalization. The sovereignty of the states are major concern for the government of the country. In order to maintain sovereignty, it falls under the responsibility of the government to protect their sovereignty of their country. World is consists of divided as well as sovereign states that do not recognize the superiority of the authority of a nation. The process of law making and the settlement of disputes are largely depended on the enforcements of law by an individual or the nation. Each country also has a number of international laws as well that are established for the existence of minimal number of rules. Any kind of wrongful act across the border or the other concerning nation is completely a private matter for those who are concerned with those who are affected. All states are regarded equal before law and any state do not have the authority of take any kind of asymmetries of power over any nation. In case of any kind of forceful act by any country or nation will be disregarded. There must not be the presence of any kind of collective power that minimizes the impediment power of the other Free states. It has been observed that the decentralized political arrangements that characterized Europe was rep laced by the Westphalian state systems that had affected the internal sovereignty of the country. This might have facilitated the expansion of trade and might have helped in the growth of the industry but there is no doubt that the internal sovereignty of the country was hampered. In such situation, the Royal court became the authority of the complete situation in the public sphere and the paternal authority role exercised within the family. Further, the feudal state in Europe was replaced by the absolutist state where the king or the queen is believed to enjoy the supreme power in the state. It was later found that this particular method became one of the important tools for the nation to subjugate or rule from abroad. Globalisation process has contributed correctly to the change and reduction in the sovereignty of a nation or a state. As pointed out by Resnik (2013), some of the threats include financial flow, increasing influence of major multinational corporations, global media expansion that hinders the sovereignty of a nation. Globalization process has undoubtedly contributed to the change and reduction in sovereignty of a nation. The influence of globalization has largely affected the political scenario of major nations. In the view point of Moghadam (2012), it is reasonable to speak about transition of most countries and the system of international relations in respect to the sovereignty of a new state. As stated by, Legrain, Globalization has been one of the most controversial issues in the recent world scenario (Legrain 2004). It has been pointed out by the author that on one side major protestors are coming down to the streets at international summits, the fact that the private companies are taking over the world. In fact, governments ability to taxation, spending and other regulations remain at a stake. The situation seemed to degrade and result in harming the poor and keeping democracy at risk. The author has strongly argued with some of the myths. As it is assumed that globalization would increase opportunity of jobs and it is one of the effective ways by which the government can get richer (Legrain 2004). As argued by the author that focusing on the impact of world trade and other topical issues related to specific countries, it can be easily assumed that the poor are never going to get richer. It has to be mentioned that globalization era started when the states aim at preventing the interference of other states in the private or other internal decisions of a state. From this point, it can be clearly stated that the current state of globalization is important in the evolution of nation state. There is no doubt that economic globalization challenges and the political authority retained by the political authority of the country consolidate the process of expansion of business and commerce and the laws related to jurisdiction expansion of commerce and economy (Legrain 2004). In the economic realm, there are a number of forces that increases the social impact of economy and the workforce mobility power. The scope of increased decisive role of technology and communication claim that sovereignty of a state in terms of economic policy is not correct. In the view point of Moghadam (2012), Globalization has become a driving force that increased the economic inequality by making the rich richer and poor poorer. According to Resnik (2013), liberalization and globalization are both important programme of the economic reforms undertaken by numerous countries and nation states. These programmes have been undertaken by these countries to make a powerful grip on the policy making process of the development plans of these countries. Supporting the fact, it has been pointed that new liberals and the economic reforms cannot be minimized. It is important to keep a close watch on the activities of the nation states. In lieu of maintaining competition, the countries are killing their private initiative. Globalization has also a vital role to play in the scientific and technological progress of a country (Pieterse 2015). It falls under the responsibility of the state to understand the requirement and the needs of the citizens of the country and evolve a co operative spirit to negotiate between the two countries and reach to a particular decision that shall help both the nations. Globalization can be considered as one way to combat poverty because it might result in incoming of money that would give opportunity of building schools, hospitals or other welfare. The main issue of concern associated with globalization is to understand that the democratic government are in control of these privately owned companies (Galli 2015). The other con that the author put forwarded that globalization brings is the declination of the indigenous culture of a country. For example, with the increasing impact of globalization, Americanises indigenous culture is spreading in major continents where its globalization impact is increasing (Alvarez 2013). The arguments put forwarded by the author lead to the threats that even the elected government is not competent enough to fight against the odds that arises as a result of globalization. In fact the government remain in control under these companies. In the book Global Capitalism and the Death of Democracy, Noreena Hertz pointed that in the recent time method of governing is changing and so is our economy (Hertz 2004). Further, it has been stated that with the advent of globalization, the Government is losing its power and the private companies are influencing the market of a country. In addition to this, the author also focused on the fact that in spite of the increasing domination of the private companies in the country, the newspapers remain drowned with the government activities. These situations are creating havoc in the socio-economic condition of a country. The author suggested that in order to live in this newly created world, where the power of the private sector due to globalization is increasing, one needs to learn to challenge the long-held assumptions about the nature of society where one lives (Hertz 2004). In her book, the authors core argument was focused on the impact of the democratic government and its impotency to influence the major decisions that affect the lives of ordinary people (Hertz 2004). In addition to this, the author stated that in surrendering to the global capitalists, the government are getting lucid towards democracy that is making it quiet useless for a democratic nation and the purpose to vote. The author has given the example of Seattle, Davos, the city of London and other so-called democratic nations (Hay and Marsh 2016). This mode of globalisation directly usurps democracy because increasing globalization and advent of foreign companies in a country is giving rise to the situation the corporations are silently taking over the government and ultimately there shall remain no recourse or representation of a governmental body in the country (Hertz 2004). In this perspective, the author provided example of Seattle city about the declining democracy. The Seattle str eet coalition was motivated by the instinct of declination of democracy. In the book Globalization in question, the authors pointed out that globalization have been gaining momentum in the recent scenario. In every country, globalization has been used by both left and right parties as the cornerstone of their analysis for any kind of international economy or polity (Hirst, Thompson and Bromley 2015). The authors discussed about the process of globalization. It has been stated that globalization are mainly related to economic process of a country. It has been strongly argued that globalization is more of a qualitative factor in the stage of development of international capitalism. However, the question that rose was related to the notion that investigates the different foreign accounts of the international economy and the stressing possibilities that continued and extended governance. The author further added that globalisation is actually weakening the boundaries and power of the nation-state is relatively getting weakened (Hirst, Thompson and Bromley 2015). It has been found that nation-states no longer matter and it is just a whim of the dynamic global economic environment. The transitional companies in actual sense are very rare and some of these companies have national allegiance and developmental strategies of their own. Therefore, any economic market has to be necessarily embedded in an established political and social situation (Beck 2015). A large concentration of foreign direct investment in the developing companies as a result of the increasing industrial economy is one of the important aspects of the process of globalization (Hirst, Thompson and Bromley 2015). The authors continued to the central understanding that prevent social breakdown and reduce the exposure to the economic shock. The authors considered globalization as the prime reason behind the se social and economic breakdowns. Several examples where the sovereignty of a nation has been hindered as a result of globalization can be cited. Democratic countries like India, Russia are greatly affected due to the increasing impact of globalization (Hay and Marsh 2016). Globalization has opened up the gate for foreign companies to enter into a foreign land and conduct business there. For example, International Monetary Fund and its structural adjustment plans had insisted on certain conditions that allow government to take loans for expenditure, subsidiary welfare program and other currency devaluations for the monitoring purpose. Global market gives the opportunity of greater access to a larger market that makes the idea of splendid isolation. However, as pointed out by Ku and Yoo (2013), that globalization is also creating a serious threat for the theory and the practice of the sovereignty exercised in the modern nation states. If the scenario of post world war is considered, it was witnessed that the denouncement of England and France that act as the supreme power and the USA and USSR rose up to greater power blocks (Sassen 2015). The dominance of USA and USSR as the worlds powerful and major operation regions clearly constrained the decision making process of the nation. The supreme power that was headed by these powerful nations constrained the decision making process of major nations. The sovereignty of these states was necessarily decisive and was more committed to the NATO conflict (Cohen 2012). In the recent situation, if the situation of the multinational organizations is taken into consideration, it can be said that the inter-governmental organizations and other pressure groups have moderated the idea of sovereignty (Hay and Marsh 2016). The countries which have the membership in the European Union provide more opportunities and restrains. In fact, it has been pointed out by Sassen (2015), that the decision making process on monetary or even the defence policies are rather initiated by the members of the Union. These are all the result of the impact of globalization. In the era of globalization and open economy, it has become possible for major companies to go beyond their domestic boundary and take the opportunity of the global business (Payne 2016). It has been found that many companies based on USA, UK have shifted or opened their business in major Asian countries like India or China to target the customers there and increase their business (de Brca 2013). In lieu of this, it has been found that these companies also created a dominating impact in these countries. If the situation of India is considered, it can be easily said that there is a huge domination of the major multi-national companies. Being a democratic country, the government always portray that the major decision undertaken by them is a tool for the development of the nation. However, in the view point of Zaki and Hosseini (2015), the country is equally dominated by these foreign companies. Therefore, it creates a threat on the sovereignty of the country and indirectly affects the people of the nation. Much has been spoken about the way globalization strengthens the sovereignties but there has been considerable changes that limits the sovereign rights of a nation. It is important to recognize the downfall of power of different nations that resulted in a change of whole range of decision direction, tendencies of the government and created an evident consolidates that limit the sovereignty of the nation. As suggested by Holden (2013), every country must be prepared to fight for their sovereignty and give up elements that hinder the government to work with their own decision. If taken into consideration, globalization increases volume, velocity and the importance of business flow within and across the borders of nation. The advent of various factors like climate change, decreasing economy of major nations and other vulnerable reasons have significantly decreased the impact of sovereignty and opened up various areas where any major company or nation state interfere other nations (Hay a nd Marsh 2016). Apart from all these, globalization might result in a number of negative impacts as well. Cross border activities might lead to major problems related to terrorism and other environmental problems. This shall harm the security and integrity of a nation as well. It is based on the different attitudes and contextual dissimilarities that the process of globalization can be defined as an uneven process that do not feel the same degree everywhere. Globalization is definitely decreasing the sovereignty of a nation and is in fact making the nations weaker in reality. In fact, in the view point of Andre et al. (2014), sovereignty might get eliminated if necessity arises. Therefore, it is favourable for a country to be eventually contractual with other countries rather than being absolute. The diplomatic challenge in this area has widespread and it is necessary to determine the remedies that support the principles of a state and do not violate the basic principles of the nation. It could be said that technological, cultural, economic as well as political processes of globalization makes a variety of changes in the current situation of the market. If the economic dimension is taken into consideration, the nations have adapted to the territorial border of different culture. A considerable disagreement and other conflicting dimensions have been taken into consideration that stresses the hegemony of the ideological factors of a countr y. Reference List: Alvarez, E., 2013. Globalization and Sovereignty: Rethinking Legality, Legitimacy, and Constitutionalism.AJIL,107, pp.697-980. Andre, P., Ayres, J., Bosia, M.J. and Mssicotte, M.J. eds., 2014.Globalization and food sovereignty: Global and local change in the new politics of food(Vol. 42). University of Toronto Press. Beck, U., 2015.What is globalization?. John Wiley Sons. Cohen, J.L., 2012.Globalization and sovereignty: Rethinking legality, legitimacy, and constitutionalism. Cambridge University Press. de Brca, G., 2013. Jean L. Cohen. Globalization and Sovereignty. Rethinking Legality, Legitimacy and Constitutionalism.European Journal of International Law,24(4), pp.1245-1247. Galli, A.M., 2015. Security or Sovereignty? Institutional and Critical Approaches to the Global Food Crisis.Global Environmental Politics. Gross, A. 2011. Eyes wide open. New York: William Morrow. Hay, C. and Marsh, D. eds., 2016.Demystifying globalization. Springer. Hertz, N. 2001. The silent takeover. New York: Free Press. Hertz, N. 2004. I.O.U.. London: Fourth Estate. Hirst, P., Thompson, G. and Bromley, S., 2015.Globalization in question. John Wiley Sons. Holden, B. ed., 2013.Global democracy: Key debates. Routledge. Ku, J. and Yoo, J., 2013. Globalization and Sovereignty.Berkeley J. Int'l L.,31, p.210. Legrain, P. 2002. Open world. London: Abacus. Moghadam, V.M., 2012.Globalization and social movements: Islamism, feminism, and the global justice movement. Rowman Littlefield. Payne, R.J., 2016.Global issues: Politics, economics, and culture. Pearson. Pieterse, J.N., 2015.Globalization and culture: Global mlange. Rowman Littlefield. Resnik, J., 2013. Globalization (s), privatization (s), constitutionalization, and statization: Icons and experiences of sovereignty in the 21st century.International journal of constitutional law,11(1), pp.162-199. Sassen, S., 2015.Losing control?: sovereignty in the age of globalization. Columbia University Press. Zaki, Y. and Hosseini, N.N., 2015. The Effect Of Different Dimensions Of Globalization On National Sovereignty.