Mr.

The book: “Globalization and International Relations Theory” (1999) by Ian Clark actually helped and facilitated this note on “Real Sovereign State.”

The Real Sovereign State

By: Ahmad Reza Taheri

The book: “Globalization and International Relations Theory” (1999) by Ian Clark actually helped and facilitated this note on “Real Sovereign State.”
The term sovereignty is derived from the Latin word “superanus” which means “paramount” or “supreme.” It came into actual usage not before the 15th century. French jurists, particularly Beaumanoir and Loyseau first used the terms: sovereign and sovereignty in that century. English, Italian, and German writers began to use it later. The concept clearly arouse and was fully developed in modern times by Jean Bodin, Althusius, Hugo, Grotius, Hobbes, Locke, Rousseau, Hegel, Bentham, Austin and other writers. Jean Bodin (1530 – 96) defines sovereignty, as: “sovereignty is the supreme power over citizens and subjects unrestrained by law” (B.K.Gokhale – 1964).

According to the Oxford Concise Dictionary of Politics: “sovereignty is the claim to be the ultimate political authority, subject to no higher power as regards the making and enforcing of political decisions. In the international system, sovereignty is the claim by the state to full self-government, and the mutual recognition of claims to sovereignty is the basis of international society…” Thus, states are separate, they are autonomous, they have legitimate and absolute power within their territories, and answer to no higher authority. “Sovereignty also means that states are not supposed to interfere in the internal affairs of other states. Although states do try to influence each other on matters of trade, alliance, war and so on, they are not supposed to meddle in the internal politics and decision processes of other states” (J.S.Goldstein.IR.2003). Now, here, the first question that comes to our minds is: Does a state today have real absolute power within its own territory?

Well, before go to “Yes” or “No,” two points should be noted:
First, earlier on, we had state and sovereignty. But, now we have state, sovereignty, and globalization. And so, that previous definition and concept of sovereignty has changed now. Because of globalization. In other words: sovereignty is a modification of the older behavior and readjustment to the on going process.
The second point is that, we have “North” versus “South.” Global north, are those countries which are wealthy, democratic, and technologically innovative. They hold almost 80% of the globe’s wealth and are home to almost 20% of the globe’s population. Whereas, in the global south we witness a different story – corruption, poverty, uneven development, inequality within the state, human right’s violations, etc.
Now, which block is more powerful? Countries of the north or those of the south? Obviously, countries of the north are more powerful and thus are more sovereign than those of the south. Why? Because, countries of the south are more vulnerable to threat. Their sovereignty is threatened by both internal and external factors. Till the Cold war we had the concept of non-intervention in internal affairs of other states. But, this concept has changed now. Today, states cannot kill or commit whatever they wish on their citizens and subjects in the name of sovereignty. Global community intervenes in internal affairs of other states. We have intervention in humanitarian issues, in genocide, in political, economic, social, cultural, and natural disasters that take place in other countries. In Afghanistan and Iraq (recent years) we witnessed political and military intervention. In Iran (recent Bam earthquake) and Pakistan (recent earthquake) we had intervention in natural disasters. Today, we have cultural intervention – a gradual process that taking place within the Eastern countries from the West… This is all because of globalization. This phenomenon has changed the nature of the states. It gives to them more responsibilities, and on the other hand, weakening their control over their own economies. Globalization has reduced the legitimate and absolute power of the state over its subjects. It requires that government structures be more transparent. Globalization breaks national identity, and makes every state to re-define itself.
The phenomenon of economic globalization and the widening of the scope of authorities and extent of influence of such international bodies as: World Trade Organization, International Monetary Fund, World Bank and so on, has led to a new world system in which economy is subjected to new rules and regulations devised by certain group of countries without the participation of many others…

Thus, from what we said, it can be deduced that all countries are not equal, and all do not have equal sovereignty. It is obvious that the first world is more sovereign than the second and the third world. As a matter of fact, third world and poor economic states never enjoyed absolute sovereignty. It is because they are always dependent on the more economic powerful states. They do not exercise real power at the international level. What they have is a nominal sovereignty. Such states are increasingly trapped in a downward cycle of poverty and violence, and their sovereignty is threatened by both domestic and international forces. Internally, they face problems within their own territories. These problems may fall into following three major categories: Political: • Where a system either denies more participation or has no respect for it and people do not participate or they participate less in it.• Where certain dissatisfied sections of the population demand for independence, etc.• Where there is no equality and liberty, and there is human right’s violation.Economic:• Where central government exploits the resources of a state.• Where there is unemployment, low production, and no economic growth, etc. Social: • Where there is religious differences. Religion is an emotive issue which can trigger conflicts. It is often employed by political actors and opportunists. • Where there is social discrimination, etc. So, when a state is internally ineffective, it also becomes internationally weak… Boundaries penetrated due to media, communication, and technology. And, so global forces play much stronger role in threatening the sovereignty of the state. Thus, the chances of instability becomes brighter, and the more a state is unstable, the more it loses its sovereignty. What really constitutes sovereignty? Security is one of the important factors. Well, traditional sources of security believed that a state which has military power is considered to be much stronger and more secure… But, non-traditional sources of security believe that military is not enough.
The real sovereignty lies in human security, economic security, environmental security, etc. Most of the South Asian states have gone for military development and not for economic development. That is why these states have failed in human and economic developments.
The other important factor is democracy – presence of stable democracy. And, the third important factor that constitutes sovereignty is competition – economic competition at the global level. Today a real sovereign state is a state which has military security, human security, economic security, and environmental security. A real sovereign state is a state which has a democratic culture. A real sovereign state is a state which has a stable democracy.A real sovereign state is a state which has effective economic control over its own economy, as well as being able to control global economy to some extent. A real sovereign state is a state which produces enough wealth and is economically strong. A real sovereign state is a state which has social welfare and fiscal discipline…Indeed, a real sovereign state is a globalize state --- the United States of America is more sovereign than other states. Why? Because, it is an economic, political, and military power – the most economic powerful state in the world is the most sovereign state…!

Sources
* Ian Clark, Globalization & IR Theory: Sovereign state, Security state, 1999, Oxford university press.
* B.K.Gokhale, Political Science: Sovereignty, 1964-2004, Meena Pandey, p. 140,141,144.
* Iain Mclean & Alistair Mc Millan, Concise Dictionary of Politics: sovereignty, Oxford university press, Indian Edition, 2004.
* Joshua S. Goldstein, IR, Pearson Education 2003, American university, Washington, DC, p.90.