Globalization and Sovereignty

© Leonid Grinin

http://www.socionauki.ru/authors/grinin_l_e/

II International Congress “Globalistics-2011” Moscow, May 18–22, 2011.

It is reasonable to speak about the transition of most countries and the system of inter- national relations in general to the new state of sovereignty.

Globalization greatly contributes to the change and reduction of the scope of state sovereign powers. These transformations are among the most important ones.

CHANGING OF CHANGING OF NATIONAL SOVEREIGNTYNATIONAL SOVEREIGNTY

FACTORS OBJECTIVELY UNDERMINING FACTORS OBJECTIVELY UNDERMINING THE STATES' SOVEREIGNTY THE STATES' SOVEREIGNTY

• technological and economic changes,

• the aspiration for avoiding wars,

• the presence of global problems uniting countries,

• the processes of the regional rapprochement,

• the rapid extension of the scope of international contacts of all types,

• the necessity of solving the great number of issues and settling controversial questions.

• Internet

THREATS TO THE STATE SOVEREIGNTY THREATS TO THE STATE SOVEREIGNTY

• Global financial flows• Multinational corporations• Global media empires• Global threats (terrorism etc.)

• Technological progress

•Sometimes, international interven- tions, as we see now in Libya

• The factor of voluntariness in the reducing of the scope of powers for the sake of gaining extra prestige and benefits is the most important because it defines the necessity of this issue.

THE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR OF THE MOST IMPORTANT FACTOR OF SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMATIONSOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMATION

• The more countries voluntarily limit their sovereignty, the more difficult is it for other ones to keep their sovereign prerogatives in corpore.

During several decades the countries gradually delegate a part of their sovereignty • to the world international organizations, • to the regional associations.

The integration of the states in the suprastate economic associations is becoming more and more active and deep.

STATE AND SUPRASTATE LEVELSSTATE AND SUPRASTATE LEVELS

the right of war and peace, restriction of human rights,the right to impose duties and taxes,prohibiting and rewarding import and export,issuing currency and borrowing, setting the rules of keeping the imprisoned,application of capital punishment,proclaiming these or those politic liberties or restricting on them, defining fundamental rules of elections and electoral qualification.

SOME SPHERES WHERE SOVEREIGNTY SOME SPHERES WHERE SOVEREIGNTY HAS BEEN REDUCED HAS BEEN REDUCED

The process of reducing sovereignty is going in almost all countries.

However, the basic trends of voluntary reduction of the scope of sovereign prerogatives are very different in Europe, the USA, Russia, the Islamic world, Far Eastern states, North and Tropical Africa, Latin America and other non-Western regions.

Moreover, the future of non-Western cultures depends much on the way this process will proceed.

DIFFERENT WAYS OF DIFFERENT WAYS OF CHANGING OF SOVEREIGNTYCHANGING OF SOVEREIGNTY

• The voluntary reduction of sovereignty is more characteristic of Western countries. • The transformation of sovereignty in the countries with different cultural traditions proceeds with more difficulty.

SOVEREIGNTY IN THE WEST SOVEREIGNTY IN THE WEST AND OTHER REGIONSAND OTHER REGIONS

• This process is closely connected with the level of economic development. It usually goes easier in the countries with post-industrial economics and more difficult with industrial or agrarian-industrial ones.

For states of lower economic development the Westphalian type of state sovereignty is much more preferable than the present (or, to be more precise, forming) type.

That is why the regional powerful states like India, Pakistan, Brazil are less inclined to reduce their sovereignty as compared with the European countries.

At the same time the level of statehood in some countries does not correspond to the level of real sovereignty (failed or fragile states).

ECONOMIC LEVEL AND ECONOMIC LEVEL AND TYPE OF SOVEREIGNTY TYPE OF SOVEREIGNTY

• The only present-day superpower also has serious problems in transforming its sovereignty. The USA practically constantly allows itself to disregard the opinion of many countries, openly positioning its national interests above world.

• However, the main future challenge of changing the world and transforming the principles of international relations is probably rooted in this confrontation between the United States and other countries expressing a certain collective opinion.

USA AND SOVEREIGNTY USA AND SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMINGTRANSFORMING

IDEOLOGY, ECONOMY IDEOLOGY, ECONOMY AND SOVEREIGNTYAND SOVEREIGNTY

Today the maximum sovereignty (i.e. the minimum restrictions in the use of sovereign rights) is possessed by the countries that are closed economically and/or ideologically (such as North Korea, Cuba, China, Iran, Saudi Arabia).

And exactly because of their ‘sovereign rights’ (in particular to create nuclear weapons) sharp conflicts tend to take place.

IDEOLOGY, ECONOMY IDEOLOGY, ECONOMY AND SOVEREIGNTYAND SOVEREIGNTY

• In Muslim countries the growth of nationalism has always been hindered by Islam, which ideologically made all Muslims ‘brothers’. But, nowadays in some Arab countries violent contradictions between the ideas of the state system and Islamist ideology are observed. • This is expressed especially in the open struggle between the forces of the state sovereignty and forces of Islamic internationalism (e.g. Algeria, Turkey, Egypt). The recent disorders in several Arabic countries confirmed the strength of pan Islamic radical movement.

Such typology may be useful for understanding of the differentiations in the processes of sovereignty trans- formation.

1) substitution of the native culture by the foreign one; 2) co-existence – without amalgamation – of the native and global cultures; 3) certain synthesis of the global and partially native cultures; 4) denial of the global culture as a result of the powerful reaction on the part of the native culture.

Four main types of variations of the Four main types of variations of the relationship of these cultures by relationship of these cultures by PETER BERGER: PETER BERGER:

TYPOLOGY OF SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMATIONTYPOLOGY OF SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMATIONWestern and Russian typesWestern and Russian types

• The European type of the supranational community (with a number of subtypes)

• The type of the superpower (the American one)

• CIS–Russia (former superpower)

• New countries type. Typical of the young or somehow aggrieved states, which require an international support/recognition. The complete readiness to turn under the patronage of the more powerful supranational formation (voluntary taking its rules).

• The controllable globalization (by Yunxiang Yan). The necessity to maintain the entrance into economic globalization for the sake of economic benefits, accompanied, however, by aspiration for minimizing in every way the external influence (China).

• Regional leaders type. Striving for playing the role of regional leaders as India, Pakistan, Iran etc. (the tractability in one direction and non-tractability in the other).

TYPOLOGY OF SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMATIONTYPOLOGY OF SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMATIONSome nonSome non--Western typesWestern types

• Civilized/regional type. Striving for geogra- phical, cultural or ideological regionality. Readiness to sacrifice the sovereign rights but only within the frames of the particular regions, unions, but not under the pressure of the USA or Western countries (Latin America, some African countries, etc.).

• Closed type. The aspiration for closure, and therefore, for saving the whole set of sovereignty prerogatives for the sake of maintaining a certain ideology and/or a regime (Cuba, North Korea, some Islamic countries).

TYPOLOGY OF SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMATIONTYPOLOGY OF SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMATIONSome nonSome non--Western typesWestern types

GLOBAL CRISIS: INFLUENCE ON SOVEREIGNTYGLOBAL CRISIS: INFLUENCE ON SOVEREIGNTY

• At the same time, crisis has shown that the states role has been underestimated, while the role of market forces has been overestimated.

• Global crisis brings new treats into sovereignty transformation.

• Necessity to regulate financial and economic processes in the world leads inevitably to the reduction of sovereign powers.

FURTHER SOVEREIGNTY FURTHER SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMATION PROCESSESTRANSFORMATION PROCESSES

The increase of state’s role and the return of some sovereign powers are possible in the nearest future.

Such a return to the increasing role of the state cannot be performed on the former bases.

States will start competing actively for a proper place in the stream of global processes under the slogan of a ‘just world order’.

FURTHER SOVEREIGNTY FURTHER SOVEREIGNTY TRANSFORMATION PROCESSESTRANSFORMATION PROCESSES

Rival forces will perform under mottos of a new, more honest world arrangement, for just and crisisless global development against national (especially American) egoism etc.

So the countries continuing to roughly stand up for their national egoistic interests will eventually lose, sooner or later).

THE EPOCH OF NEW COALITIONSTHE EPOCH OF NEW COALITIONS

That is why regrouping of forces in the world and regional arenas will be needed. Within the struggle for an honorary place in globalization and coalitions, in organization and functioning of a new world order, a phenomenon develops which we named the epoch of new coalitions. As a result, new force disposition may be outlined for quite a lengthy period.

• Though the national state will remain the leading player in the world arena for a long time, in the long term the tendency to transform national sovereignty will grow;

• We are at the beginning of a very complex, contradictory, and long process of forming a new world order;

• the state will not disappear under it, but its features and functions will change significantly.

CONCLUSIONCONCLUSION

Thank you for attention!