Topic 1 questions Flashcards
Examine the claim that economically powerful states are able to manipulate global governance institutions to their advantage.
States have 3 ways of manipulating global governance:
1 pro: Setting agendas e.g. US agenda with Israel
1 counter: Russia super economically powerful, many did not agree with the move to annex Crimea and imposed sanctions
2 pro: escaping punishment e.g. US not punished for invading Iraq, China not punished for Xinjian camps
2 anti: Britain punished by EU after leaving
3 pro: ignoring rulings, e.g. Russia ignoring the ruling that their 2013 propaganda law was unjust, china ignoring 2016 SCS ruling, continued conflict
3 anti: UN 2021 ruling that Australia should bring it’s citizens home, results followed.
To what extent is sovereignty an outdated concept in the 21st century?
liberalism 1: Globalisation: has led to more inter-state interaction and shared governance. e.g. the use of the euro
realism 1: IGO’s can be said to enhance sovereignty and not diminish it, e.g. recognition of statehood by the UN (Israel not recognized by 28 members, widely considered a contested area rather than a state)
liberalism 2: intervention: in a globalized world, Many less powerful states are commonly impacted by statements or actions of global governance institutions or NGO’s, and are not allowed to enact their own laws in their own boarders (e.g. Eritrea HRW letter/UHNRC notice)
realism 2: IGO’s can enhance sovereignty through intervention e.g. Cote d’ivoire
liberalism 3: IGO governance: most states are involved in at least one IGO alliance (NATO, EU, UN, ASEAN, AU etc). orgs like the EU regulate laws and actions of members
Realism 3: views in Britain pre-Brexit and views that led to the leave vote.
Examine the claim that global politics is defined more by cooperation than conflict.
it’s not.
differing ideologies: UDHR v CDHRI, outright non-cooperation with human rights leg
counter: US-Russia cooperation despite differing ideals, arctic management (climate change and stuff)
Consistency of war: realism dictates that all states will be vetting for themselves. there are always so many wars going on. key example, US, never not in conflict, despite being powerful enough that it need not engage.
counter: a big part of the US’s power comes from the military. Also, The US is engaged in lots of cooperations, Paris climate, UN etc.
Impossibility of cooperation: again, realism, states with their best interests cannot yield power in cooperation. States are always feuding, as previously mentioned, US and Russia, also US and China
Counter: cooperation is certainly not impossible. even states that are focused on self-preservation and disagree strongly with other states can enter into agreements for the greater good e.g. paris climate
Discuss the impact of NGO’s, MNC’s and IGO’s on state sovereignty.
NGO positive impact: Provide an amplifier for the voices of citizens so that they may alert the government to issues they should fix e.g. Human Rights Watch and Eritrea
NGO negative impact: Provide systems which should be responsibility of government e.g. healthcare (Ebola crisis)
MNC positive impact: Bring economic power to the state which they herald from. e.g. US has most MNC’s, and is widely considered the most powerful nation in the world (Largest GDP)
MNC negative impact: Can impose a financial threat on states. e.g. tobacco MNC’s and their impact in Togo
IGO positive impact: UN peace forces can help to re-establish sovereignty through negotiation and coordinated effort. e.g. Cote d’ivoire
IGO negative impact: Removes an aspect of self governance. e.g., all declarations of war must be approved by the UN security council.
