Sovereign State Essay Example for Free

Sovereign State Essay Evolution of role and meaning of government as social-political institution in common and government sovereignty in particular is one of the most actual topics for discussions nowadays. Fundamental processes in spheres of politics and economics change radically usual positions for role of state and meaning of its formal attribute government sovereignty. It is connected with the fact that in the modern world governments to a greater extent are forced to renounce by part of their prerogatives, being limited in taking political decisions. Studying of processes of â€Å"degradation† and â€Å"devaluation† of status of sovereign government and weakening of centralized institutions of governmental power is actually singled out into independent direction of political science. In this work we’ll examine the principles of sovereign state and will try to understand, can the sovereign state be effective way of organizing its political life. Definition of sovereign state and its main features. Let’s examine what is sovereign state and what are its main features. Sovereign state is politically independent government, which is independent in its internal and external affairs (the word â€Å"sovereign† is from French word â€Å"souverain† – the highest, supreme) – it is politically sovereign state, sovereign object of international rights and international relations. Governmental sovereignty means leadership of the state within the limits of its own borders. It doesn’t allow foreign intervention in its affairs. What are main features of sovereign state? They are as follows: Independence; Free execution of the whole completeness of power at the territory of the country; Integrity and inalienability of territory; Unanimity of territories of the country. Nowadays we can determine the following meanings of sovereignty: Sovereignty of interdependency – ability of government to control movement via their borders; Internal sovereignty – internal delegations of governmental structures and ability to influence effectively on behavior of population; This possibility of government to a great extend depends on loyalty of its citizens. So, in 1999 in the USA 73% of population examined themselves as â€Å"citizens of the world† simultaneously with recognition of US citizenship (http://www.vox-populi.org/digest/america_role2.html#4) West-Fal sovereignty or Wattle’s sovereignty – exception of external sources of power de jure and de facto International legal sovereignty is connected with mutual acknowledgement of governments. (Stephen D.Krasner, P.231-233.) Principle of sovereignty. Speaking about the reasons of re-examination of sovereign principles, we have to focus our attention to complex of processes, which is traditionally noted as â€Å"globalization† (James Rosenau, P.7-8.). In the basis of globalization phenomena lay processes in spheres of finance and economics, which serve as a basis for global political and cultural â€Å"superstructure†. It gives us grounds to consider that practically any sphere of human activity will avoid definite transformation. During those processes â€Å"attack† of government sovereignty principle is made by several directions, and existing concept of governmental sovereignty casts doubt in relation of practically all its main components (Youngs, G, P.71-72.). Modern world economics demonstrates more and more qualities of united system and functions in accordance with unified rules. No other country can exist in conditions of economical self-sufficiency. Leading type of economical practice becomes financial-legal regulation, which consequently subjugates other kinds of economic activities. New concept of geo-economics is determined to reflect the new level of economical development and economical integration. Demands of economical developments contradict with principle of firmness of state sovereignty to that extent in which governmental borders impede economical effectiveness and in common, to social progress. Governmental borders now experience pressure more from inside, than from outside. Separatism became serious problem in different parts of the world. (Joseph A.Camilleri and Jim FalTk, P.24-25.). Being subordinated to dictate of economical expediency, governments open their borders and are exposed to inroad of foreign currency, international terrorists, drugs, flows of information from other countries, sects, societies, etc. All this inevitably decreases effectiveness of functioning of governmental body and forces to find new ways and forms of decision everyday problems. Living picture of global market are transnational corporations, which have their aim to receive profit. Such actions cause misbalances in the modern society (Manuel Castells P.162.). In accordance with researches, they control approximately half of world industrial manufacture and even more in spheres of foreign trade. Constricting sphere of activity of national governments, global market undermines basis of state sovereignty. Global forces (economical, technological and cultural) force governments to re-examine meaning of sovereignty. (Muthiah Alagappa and Takashi Inoguchi (Eds.). P.21) Problems of environment are also assisting in that undermining. (Luc Sindjoun P.222.) The government also looses the meaning of guaranty of preservation of democratic foundations in society. Rules of free market take place, not the rules of national parliaments. Vitally important decisions for the whole country and all its citizens are taken by people, who are actually unknown and who weren’t chosen by way of public procedures of democratic elections and who are often guided by their own interests, but not by interests of other people. The main consequences of globalization processes But from the point of view of problems in state sovereignty, the main consequence of globalization processes is contradiction between increasing economical and political interdependency of countries and nations from one side and reservation of right to decide independently and by its own choice (from the side of government) its own problems – from the other side. Thanks to progressive â€Å"washing out† of borders between national economies, problems which before were considered as definitely belonging to foreign policy, more and more receive internationally-political character. U.N.O. also â€Å"washed out† concepts of state sovereignty and changed opinions for relations between government and their citizens. (D.M.Malone, P.21.) Actions of government of one state can entail serious consequences at the other part of the Earth. In those conditions we can see evident necessity to correspond important decisions, and, therefore, to create corresponding political mechanisms. And, to tell the truth, process of creation of such mechanisms is going quite intensively. If in 1909 there were 37 inter-governmental international organizations, at the end of the century there were already 260 such organizations. Such organizations as EU and other, taking some definite functions, which are delegated to them by separate states, factually limit their state sovereignty. For example, governments – members of European Union – give part of their sovereign right to above-national organs of management. If before it was related only to economical questions, now it relates also to financial-currency questions (for example, it is lead-in of Euro in countries of Euro-zone), in perspective it will touch questions of foreign policy and defense. Although they say that above-national organs of management act strictly in accordance with mandate (its limits are determined by sovereign states, which realize common interests), it is evident that increasing of such practice means â€Å"washing out† of limit between internal policy and foreign policy, where it becomes more and more difficult to tell, what relates to the first and what – to the second. Speaking at annual international forum in Dawos about foreign policy in XXI century, German president proposed to finish with â€Å"anarchy† of politics of national interests and to pass to â€Å"globalized foreign policy as internal world policy†. By other words, he proposed to governments to refuse from their national interests in favor of global foreign policy. Limited character of sovereignty. Taking into consideration all aforesaid, sovereignty is â€Å"weak evolutionally stable strategy, which is chosen by plenty of actors† and which can co-exist with forms, which Krasner called â€Å"neutral mutants† (alternative strategies, which attract definite actors in definite moments) (Stephen D.Krasner, P.231.) Being one of the forms of jurisdiction organization, sovereign national governments always collided with competition from the side of other kinds of jurisdictions. There are jurisdictions, which don’t recognize territorial limitations of their power – such jurisdictions we can conditionally call â€Å"empires†. The most famous example of such institution is USA, which during the last years in an explicit form refused from support of principle of state sovereignty (Anna Leander COPRI, 2.). The main principle of foreign policy, which negates state sovereignty, is doctrine of â€Å"preventive stroke†. G. Bush said that if we’ll wait for the moment when threats will materialize, we have to wait too long. We have to start struggle with our enemy, to destroy his plans – our safety needs that all Americans should be decisive and farsighted, when it will be necessary to defend our lives. (http://www.ndu.edu/inss/strforum/SF200/sf200.htm) Another factor, which determined re-evaluation of state sovereignty principle, became creation of numerous non-governmental associations and organizations, their activity, directed at realization of their own corporate interests, increased spectrum of actual political problems and intensified their dynamics. Appearance of those new forms, probably took place, because civil society don’t see in government the main and irreplaceable instrument of realization of their demands. As a result, procedure of taking decisions by government regarding different problems of foreign and internal policies is more often is guided by coordination of their positions with non-government public organizations and transnational corporations. If we were able to examine the nation or the state in world political space as the one subject, which was outlined only from outside, and what was going inside, wasn’t’ important significally, now more and more often people speak that modern society is society of pluralism interests, which one cannot reduce to a common denominator (Manuel Castells, P.303.). If before we were able to examine government as one-piece formation – a kind of big figure at chess-desk; now we need to make a lot of stipulations. Decrease of role and meaning of government comes as result because civil loyalty is being weakened. For example, in Germany considerable number of young people consider themselves Europeans first of all, and only than – Germans, but not vice versa. Another important factor, which undermines corner stone of state sovereignty – is a principle of non-intervention into internal affairs of sovereign state – and is connected with dissemination and consolidation of universal ideology of human rights. Ways of influence for such countries and regimes, which have world society, first of all, are very limited, and second-of-all, are non-effective – such principle of â€Å"non-intervention into internal affairs† bothers a lot. But what scholars write about state sovereignty? One of them writes: Nowadays the problem of sovereignty is, for social scientists, a dead duck. (Fowler and Bunck 2). There are also debates of sovereign immunity – and its criticism is not new. Even   President Abraham Lincoln declared: It is as much the duty of Government to render prompt justice against itself in favor of citizens as it is to administer the same between private individuals.† (Chemerinsky 1201) All these factors are very important tendencies in the modern society. Taking into consideration all examined factors, we can make conclusion that state sovereignty cannot be really effective instrument to provide effective political life for sovereign country. My opinion is that principle of state sovereignty in modern conditions is ineffective. Works Cited: Stephen D.Krasner. â€Å"Abiding Sovereignty† in International Political Science Review. Vol. 22, No.3, 2001, P.231-233. M.Malone. The Security Council in the 1990s. in Ramesh Thakur and Edward Newman (Eds.) New Millennium, New Perspectives: The UN, Security, and Governance. UN University Press, 2000, P.21. Luc Sindjoun. â€Å"Transformation of International Relations Between Change and Continuity: Introduction† in International Political Science Review. Vol. 22, No.3, 2001, P.222. Stephen D.Krasner. â€Å"Abiding Sovereignty† in International Political Science Review. Vol. 22, No.3, 2001, P.231. http://www.vox-populi.org/digest/america_role2.html#4 http://www.ndu.edu/inss/strforum/SF200/sf200.htm Law, Power, and the Sovereign State: The Evolution and Application of the Concept of Sovereignty Book by Julie Marie Bunck, Michael Ross Fowler; The Pennsylvania State University Press, 1995 Against Sovereign Immunity (Journal article by Erwin Chemerinsky); Stanford Law Review, Vol. 53, 2001 Joseph A.Camilleri and Jim FalTk. The End of Sovereignty? Great Britain: Edvard Elgar, 1992, P.24-25. Muthiah Alagappa and Takashi Inoguchi (Eds.). International Security Management and the UN. United Nations University Press, 1999, P.21 Manuel Castells. End of Millennium. Blackwell Publishers, 1998, P.162. Anna Leander. Globalisation and the Eroding State Monopoly of Legitimate Violence. COPRI, 2. Manuel Castells. The Power of Identity. Blackwell Publishers, 1998, P.303. Youngs, G. International Relations in a Global Age. Cambridge: Polity Press, 1999, P.71-72. James Rosenau. â€Å"Governance in the Twenty-First Century† in The New Political Economy of Globalization., Vol. 2., P.7-8.