State and non-state actors

Question 1

State sovereignty and the CIS

Answer 1

• central actors in CIS: states, 193 members of UN
  
  • 2011: newest member South Sudan
• Peace of Westphalia 1648: emergence of CIS through processes in Europe
  
  • CIS became global in 20^th century due to decolonisation and end of Cold War
• sovereignty: implies that a state ruler (whether absolute or popular) has control and authority within a defined territory (internal sovereignty), and is recognised as the legitimate authority in that territory by other states (external sovereignty)
  
  • sovereign state system: similar to Greek city state system (e.g. in UN equal votes), includes
    
    • territorialism
    • political independence
    • sovereign equality: each country is regarded as equal
    • pluralism: different political systems in existence
    • non-intervention: each state has a responsibility to not intervene in another state
  • principle gives equality, somehow suggests states exist in their own territory with rigid boundaries, each state is equal and legitimate in their own right
  • challenges: in theory and practice incl. globalisation, some argue it never existed in its ideal form

Question 2

Describe globalisation

Answer 2

• movement towards a hegemon culture where people become more connected at an increasing pace nowadays
• Baylis, Smith and Owens (2014): “process of increasing interconnectedness between societies such that events in one part of the world increasingly have effects on societies far away. A globalised world is one in which political economic, cultural, and social events become more and more interconnected, and also one in which they have more impact.”
• McGrew (2014): “a historical process involving a fundamental shift or transformation in the spatial scale of human social organization that links distant communities and expands the reach of power relations across regions and continents.”
  
  • think of world as made up of human social structures – state sovereignty contains these structures
  • society spatially has now expanded with a sense of identity (sense of affinity for other individuals in other states)
• Griffiths and O’Callaghan (2002): “refers to the acceleration and intensification of mechanisms, processes and activities that are allegedly promoting global interdependence and perhaps, ultimately, global political and economic integration. It is, therefore, a revolutionary concept, involving the deterritorialisation of social, political, economic and cultural life.”
  
  • deterritorialisation: historically states and cultures were attached to territories, notion of identity and affinity is not restricted by the territory you are in now

Question 3

Forms of globalisation

Answer 3

• social and cultural: integration of cultures
• economic: means of production and labour increasingly move across borders
• political: integration of political ideas across the world e.g. Brexit and election of Trump – integration of territorialism, nationalism, anti-immigration

Question 4

Facilitators of globalisation

Answer 4

• internet and email
• global mass media e.g. broadcast of 9/11 and invasion of Iraq only on CNN, now mass amounts of channels to access news
• global social media: movement of ideas false or not
• transport technologies (goods and people): ease with which goods/people move is greater
• population movement
• global capitalism and other economic processes
• religion and global social movements

Question 5

Roles of NGOs and other non-state actors in the contemporary international system

Answer 5

• many analysts still consider states to be the primary actors in the contemporary international system, a range of ‘non-state’ actors also operate, some in significant ways and all facilitated by the processes of globalisation:
  
  • transnational social, political, religious and environmental movements
    
    • examples: labour movements, human rights activists, Arab Spring, anti-globalisation movements like ‘occupy’
  • International Non-governmental Organisations (INGOs)
    
    • over 8,000 e.g. Amnesty International, Greenpeace, Human Rights Watch
  • Multinational/Transnational Companies (MNCs/TNCs)
    
    • over 100,000 e.g. Nike, Coca-Cola, Samsung, BHP Billiton, GE
  • transnational criminal and terrorist networks
    
    • e.g. smuggling rings, drug cartels, piracy networks, al-Shabaab network
  • governance, policy and regulation networks (state + non-state)
    
    • e.g. collaborations between state departments of different countries, with NGOs
• non-state actors can be inter-governmental organisations such as UN or non-governmental organisations e.g. social organisations such as Amnesty International, environmental groups, MNCs, criminal networks
• policy networks: not in conflict with state often cooperate to solve global problems

Question 6

al-Qaeda as a contemporary non-state actor

Answer 6

• a politico-religious network that operates transnationally has a loose ‘cell’ network structure
• aims to overthrow the corrupt “apostate” regimes in the middle east and replace them with “true” Islamic governments
• stance:
  
  • opposes US-led economic, political & military hegemony + globalisation of US culture and values
  • wants US influence removed from Muslim world; removal of corrupt Arab regimes; end of Israel’s occupation of Palestine
  • advocates use of violence to achieve these politico-religious aims (including acts of terrorism against civilian targets), distinguishes between ‘the far enemy’ and ‘the near enemy’
• motivated in part by, but also uses tools of, globalisation:
  
  • use of global media – usually giving video recording to media
  • use of advanced telecommunications
  • diverse funding sources
  • global network and cell structure
  • al Qaeda as a ‘transnational idea’

Question 7

NGOS and raising human rights awareness

Answer 7

• Australia and detention centres: AI named Australia as one of the countries in the Asia-Pacific violating international law by ‘forcibly returning people to countries where they would face a real risk of serious violations’
• Rohingya Refugees: AI declared ethnic cleansing in Myanmar, Rakhine State against Rohingya people

Question 8

Outcomes of non-state actors

Answer 8

• accountability promoted: raise awareness of human rights violations and the need to counter moves by states
  
  • Saudi Arabia and Amnesty International:
    
    • not enough freedom of expression e.g. suppression of views expressing dissent with the government often via imprisonment
    • Yemen War: leadership has been impulsive and not accountable to actions
    • women not able to drive in Saudi Arabia – restriction of movement
  • children’s plight in South Sudan by Save the Children
    
    • source of tribal conflict initially along religious lines
    • mass effect on children
  • non-state actors in constructivist views – believe have right to hold state to account
• homogeneity promoted: promote cultural homogeneity often marked by Western values and ignore local cultures and values
  
  • not neutral actors: issues brought to forefront by organisations have an underlying Western agenda
• as arms of external interests: not neutral and value free, hence can be used by other actors
  
  • espionage 2005: Nikolai Patrushev (Russia’s Federal Security Service director) to the State Duma
    
    • US, British and other foreign NGOS provide cover for professional spies in Russia, and Western organizations bankrolling plans to stage peaceful revolutions in Belarus and other former Soviet republics bordering Russia.
    • the U.S. Peace Corps,
    • the British-based Merlin medical relief charity,
    • Kuwait’s Society of Social Reforms and
    • the Saudi Red Crescent Society
    • Save the Children Fund and World Vision in Gaza and Israel
    • Halabi of World Vision accused of diverting millions to Hamas to buy weapons and build tunnels for Gazans and engaging a Palestinian worker with Save the Children Fund to provide information about US sponsored individuals in aid organisations
• criminal syndicates e.g. rhino horn poaching, cigarette black market import networks in Australia

Question 9

NGOs, undermining the state and limiting its sovereignty

Answer 9

• businesses: threat of moving businesses out of the state - economic dependence exploited, have capacity to have demands met
  
  • avoid regulations imposed by states e.g. Apple avoiding tax payments in Australia
    
    • Apple paid $85 million in Australian income tax last year (2015), despite making almost $8 billion in local revenue, accounts filed with the corporate regulator show
    • tax bill is slightly up from the year before when it paid $80.3 million, but a fraction of its overall $7.9 billion sales revenue (up from $6 billion in 2014).
    • Apple concluded a deal with Ireland that has been declared illegal by the European Union
    • a discretionary tax break for a specific multinational is state aid, Apple avoided paying €13 billion of corporate income taxes via the deal
• non-state actors undermining state sovereignty: view their way as greater than state interests
  
  • Afghanistan warlords
  • ISIS
• limits of exploitation/undermining of sovereignty
  
  • 1973: Aramco, in response to oil embargo imposed by US, switched policy to side with Saudi Arabia
  • 2006: Danish cartoon saga, Gulf states stopped doing business with Danish companies causing some to lose revenue each day