Has the Nation-State been Undermined by Globalisation? - PO-222 – Isabelle La Barbera
The question of whether the nation-state has been undermined by
globalisation is not a simple one to answer; the phenomenon has affected states
in a multitude of ways, some of which initially appear to conflict with each other,
so no clear answer is immediate. The sovereignty of a nation- state is key to its
purpose; the ability to exercise authority over its peoples and territory without
any higher institution having jurisdiction (Gritsch, 2006). Globalisation, defined
as “the intensification of worldwide social relations,” (Giddens, 1990, p. 64) has
altered the relationships between states and their peers, citizens, institutions
and outside actors. Formal changes in the international political structure, such
as the existence of international institutions, along with informal features of
globalisation, such as increased migration, have all been seen as both beneficial
and degenerative to the sovereignty of individual nation states. However, states
are not absent bystanders in the process of globalisation, with their actions both
causing and reacting to the process, and their responses have, as this essay will
affirm, ensured that globalisation has not diminished or undermined the role of
the nation-state within the global stage, and within countries themselves.
The post WW2 era has seen a widespread proliferation of supra- and inter-
national organisations, treaties, conventions and various forms of agreements
between states – including the United Nations (UN), European Union (EU), NATO,
and the World Bank. An idea that exists amongst both optimists for the concept
of globalisation and those who are pessimistic towards it, is that, as the existence
of these organisations requires countries to cede some sovereignty toward
them, the importance and authority of individual nation-states weakens. Many
of these systems inform the economic, political, and even moral frameworks
56
Made with FlippingBook HTML5