Extent Globalisation Has Undermined the Power of the Nation State - Essay Example

ARGUMENTATIVE ESSAY ON THE EXTENT GLOBALISATION HAS UNDERMINED THE POWER OF THE NATION By Argumentative Essay on the Extent Globalisation Has Undermined the Power of the Nation State Introduction The twenty-first century is characterised by a globalised world whereby relatively every aspect of the state’s affairs is viewed from a global perspective. Ideally, the primary function of the state is to formulate laws and oversee their implementation to ensure a country’s sovereignty is protected at all times (Hamed, 2010). However, with globalisation much has changed concerning the power that states have the control of their affairs. Initially, states had the authority to do whatever that is in their discretion to safeguard their interests and those of other countries whereby they hold mutual interests but this has far changed since the affairs of the world have been interrelated in a manner whereby multiple states have common interests on particular issues. To maintain order in the operations of individual states, a new level of rules has been formulated differently from the ones that have jurisdiction within the boundaries of different countries (Hamilton, 2015). For instance, each country has its economic policies and the manner that it governs its domestic and international trade relations. However, with the increased need for expansion into the global market firms are now competing with on the global platform and thus much of the regulatory frameworks that are set out by their native countries will fail to control the operations at the international arena due to the disjoint that might arise from the different policies that are applied by various nations. It is from this premise that a new set of international regulations are set to control how firms from different countries relate or rather conduct business with each other universally (Okpara, 2008). In that light, globalisation tends to undermine the power that nation states initially held in that for example in the economic perspective a firm has to subscribe to international policies on top of the policies of its native country for it to conduct operations effectively in the international arena. In some instances, the foreign policies override or rather collide with policies of individual countries but the former supersedes the latter since the interests of the world are more than those of individual nations. In such situations the autonomy and power of nation states is substantially undermined since the objective of statehood of coming up with policies that protects its interests seems to be overridden by global concern (Homann, Koslowski, & Luetge, 2007). Notably, the extent to which this system works depends on the superiority of the nations in question. For instance, countries such as the United States of America, China, United Kingdom, Russia, and France among other influential nations have the capability of influencing the manner in which global policies are formulated so as to ensure they are in accordance with their interests. It is at this juncture that world politics or rather superiority politics comes into play. Regardless of the common interest of the world, in general, the influential nations can manipulate global rules and regulations to favour their interests so as to ensure they continue to dominate the lesser nations and in the long run they will be advancing their interests uninterrupted (Hamilton, 2015). On the contrary, the less influential countries will have to forego their individual interest to be able to comply with the international provisions. The vice is commonplace in essentially all international aspects (Wolf, 2001). For instance, USA is a vocal supporter of the International Criminal Court, and yet it does not subscribe to the Rome Statute itself. Countries that are signatories of the statute are frequently threatened with economic isolation by being declared pariah states if they do not cooperate with the court in implementing its mandate. Ideally, the court is meant to punish crimes against humanity that are beyond the jurisdiction of the judicial systems in individual countries. Based on history, the Unites States of America Army has violated a number of international peace treaties by invading countries such as Iraq and Iran situations that result in mass fatalities but none of these incidences has been brought against the individuals responsible. Similarly, Israel has done the same by continually attacking Palestine in unending conflicts that have claimed thousands of lives so far but yet no action has been taken against these nations since they can influence the global system. Conversely, some African leaders have been arraigned in the same court for even lesser crimes because the states in their countries have been undermined by the globalisation of judicial policies (Jessop, 2014). Conversely, during the 2008 financial crunch in which some UK and American banks like Lehman Brothers ran into bankruptcy the situation had far-reaching consequences in other nations. Despite the credit crunch being an exclusive problem of a few nations, it transferred its effects to other countries alike that had nothing to do with the issue in the first case. The primary reason for this analogy is the globalisation of business in that firms have to be dependent on one another and thus a crisis in one sector of the global economy will readily transfer its effects to other areas alike (Glanville and Glanville, 2011). In spite of the fact that nation-states have mechanisms in which they can protect their economies from exterior forces; it was evident that the states remained powerless over this issue since the adverse effects of the credit crunch were felt across the world through the exchanges in international trade. It is worth noting that the US and UK were able to transfer the effects of the crisis to the wider economic catchment to prevent the calamity befalling only their firms. Additionally, in the past there have been media revelations of how the National Security Agency of the United States of America is compelling giant communication companies such as Amazon, Google and Yahoo to surrender confidential information to it in order to monitor communication across the world (Weiss, 2000). In some of the allegations, the agency requested information regarding the European Trade Commission since it is involved in setting trade policies of how American forms engage with the European counterparts. Incidentally, classified information of the main competitors to US firms was also sought in a bid to reveal private details to the American companies to obtain a competitive advantage in the market. From this notion it is evident that despite the privacy rules and policies those individual countries uphold to facilitate confidentiality in operations within their boundaries globalisation has rendered its efforts powerless and inconsequential since some parties can still access what is meant to be confidential to pursue their interests. Despite the magnitude of such allegations, the U.S. government did not receive any form of disciplinary action since it is part of the primary influencers of determining penalties to rogue states (“Globalisation”, 2007). In a nutshell, globalisation culminated to the pooling of international interest to the extent that the power of national states has remained inconsequential especially for the less influential countries. However, the power of influential nation such as France, USA , UK etc. remain relevant since global policies are formulated to suit and protect their interest thus safeguarding the power and sovereignty of these countries. References Glanville, A., & Glanville, J., 2011. Economics from a global perspective: a textbook for use with the IB diploma economics program. Dolton, Glanville Books. Globalisation and the Power of the State. (2007). Available at: http://economistsview.typepad.com/economistsview/2007/06/globalisation_a.html [Accessed on 22 Jun. 15]. Hamed, H.S. (2010). Globalisation and Nation-State. Available at: https://globalalternatives.wordpress.com/2010/04/01/globalisation-and-nation-state/ [Accessed on 22 Jun. 15]. Hamilton, L., 2015. International business environment. Oxford Univ Press. Homann, K., Koslowski, P., & Luetge, C., 2007. Globalisation and business ethics. Aldershot, England, Ashgate. http://site.ebrary.com/id/10211478. [Accessed on 22 Jun. 15] Jessop, B. (2014). Globalisation and the National State. Available at: http://bobjessop.org/2014/01/05/globalisation-and-the-national-state/ [Accessed on 22 Jun. 15]. Okpara, J. O., 2008. Globalisation of business: theories and strategies for tomorrows managers. London, Adonis & Abbey. Weiss, L. (2000). Globalisation and State Power. Available at: http://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=2&ved=0CCcQFjAB&url=http%3A%2F%2Fisdpr.org%2Fisdpr%2Fpublication%2Fjournal%2F29-1%2F1Linda%2520Weiss.pdf&ei=E5CHVdalAcf4UNamgvAB&usg=AFQjCNEJlPuOUSrKaY1AM4QBp8JHt5r8UA&sig2=u9JBvz_o-nPcU4mnRB9j6Q&bvm=bv.96339352,d.d24 [Accessed on 22 Jun. 15]. Wolf, M., 2001. Will the Nation-State Survive Globalisation? Available at: https://www.foreignaffairs.com/articles/2001-01-01/will-nation-state-survive-globalisation [Accessed on 22 Jun. 15]. Read More