State Sovereignty has or has not eroded

State sovereignty has eroded because:

• 1). Permeable borders.
• 2). Rise of non-state actors.
• 3). Collective dillemmas.
• 4). International human rights.

State sovereignty has eroded because of permeable borders:

• State borders have tradiitionally ensured territorial sovereignty.
• However, over time these borders have become more permeable because they have increasingly been penetrated by external factors, such as;Global financial markets have also eroded economic sovereignty, alongside transnational capital flows.
  • International tourism.
  • The movement of knowledge and information, by the internet.
• States are, therefore, no longer meaningful territorial borders because of the increasingly difficult way of sustaining conventional domestic/international divide.

The rise of non-state actors has also contributed to the decline of state sovereignty because:

• States are no longer the only dominant actors in the world stage, due to the rise of transnational corporations.
• This is because TNCs own greater financial power than many states.
  • E.g. Nike, Adidas, Apple.
• This means that TNCs can effectively dictate state policy through their ability to relocate production and investment, through a globalised economy.In addition, NGOs, such as Greenpeace and Amnesty International, exert global influence, because of their size and influence.
  • E.g. Apple has been able to avoid paying tax in Ireland, and nothing has been done about this because Ireland's economy will suffer if they move some place else, meaning Apple has more power than Ireland.
• Another example of an NGO is al-Qaeda which is likely to threaten state sovereignty, because it seeks a one Islamic State.

State sovereignty has eroded because of collective dilemmas:

• Collective dillemmas are issues that must be resolved collectively (more than one state).
• Collective dillemmas have confronted states increasingly, in modern times, because of issues that taxing, which confound the most powerful of states when acting alone.
• Global issues require global solutions, such as a collective or global character, as they are too complex and big because no individual state can deal with these issues alone.
• These issues include:
  • Climate change
  • Terrorism
  • Transnational crime
  • Pandemic diseases
  • International migration.
• Therefore, only international organisations (not sovereign states) can tackle these issues.

International human rights have reduced state sovereignty because:

• State sovereignty has eroded by the growing belief that there are standards of conduct, to which all states must obide by.
• This will happen as far as the treatement of their domestic populations is concerned.
• This virw is based on human rights and the idea that individual rights are morally superior to state sovereignty and the state's right to independence and autonomy.
  • E.g. This is evident in shifts in international law and in the wider acceptance of humanitarian intervention.
• If a state abuses these human rights, other states have the right to intervene, which interferes with state sovereignty.

However, on the other hand, state sovereignty has not eroded because:

• 1). Myth of the 'borderless world.'
• 2). States remain dominant
• 3). Pooled sovereignty
• 4). Enduring attraction of the nation state

State sovereignty has not eroded because of the myth of the 'borderless world':

• The image that world politics in dominated by transnational processes, that elude state control, is exaggerated.
• This is because national economies have not been absorbed into a 'borderless' global economy as economic activity takes place within state borders more than it takes place across state borders.
• States choose to engage in the global economy for national self interest, meaning that globalising trends do not disempower states.
  • E.g. The Britain decided to join the EC in 1973 in the interests of their economy. However, in 2016, a referendum cocluded that the UK wanted to leave the EU to bring their soveregnty back.

States remaining dominant is one of the reasons why state sovereignty has not eroded because:

• States remain the most important on the world stage because they exercise power in a wat that no other actor can.
• This power includes using the administration procvesses of government, relying on unchallengable coercive power and ruling their people.
• States have control over what happens within their terriroties, which is rarely challenged.
  • It is only challenged, espeically in the case of the supranational body, EU, where it can challenge and intervene in a member state's control if they do not abide by EU law.
• Therefore, only a tiny proportion of states (weak states) have effectivbyly lost control over what happens within their borders.

Pooled sovereignty is another factor of why state sovereignty has not eroded. This is because:

• Instead of the advance of political globalisation and global governance eroding state sovereignty, they expand the opportunities available to states, espeically for achieving the benefits of cooperation.
• International organisations are bodies formed by states, which are used by states as tools to achieve their own means.
• This means that working together (pooled sovereignty), the states gain greater capacity and influence, economically, politically and culturally, than they would alone.
• E.g. The EU is a supranational body that features pooled sovereignty as all its member states must abide by EU law.

State sovereignty has not eroded because of the enduring attraction of the nation state:

• If states continue to enjoy the allegiance of the mass of their citizens, they wll not lose dominance.
• As most states are nation-states, survival of nationalism is ensured due to the most potent ideological force.
• E.g. Rival doctrines, such as cosmopolitionism and alliegances based on religion, are of minor significance compared with nationalism.