[Assam] Is Nation-state system obsolete ?

[Dilip/Dil Deka]

The topic of the discussion below is interesting, though the author did not do full justice to it.
  Is globalization going to kill nation-states and international borders as we know them today? Is sovereignty of a country in jeopardy in the powerful hands of MNCs and Super banks?
  ========================================================
   
Guwahati, Tuesday, August 22, 2006 
EDITORIAL 
  
---------------------------------
  Is State system obsolete ?
— Dilip Gogoi  The post cold war period has been witnessing certain significant changes in the State- centric international system, results of which are far reaching. In this emerging environment, the traditional notion of State sovereignty is eroding due to number of factors like the changing power structures, information and communication technology revolution, fragmentation of nation States, increasing role of transnational actors, role of market economy and emergence of new sub- national and transnational challenges. This transformation appears to encompass a three stage process incorporating the decline of national sovereignty, escalation of global interdependence and the proliferation of anarchic conflict.

All these developments have posed a challenge to the State-centric international system which is believed to have come from both above and below. From below, I mean the states often face challenges from their own people, living within the State which questions state legitimacy to govern and the capability and capacity to rule. This is demonstrated in the form of secessionist, ethno-nationalist, and autonomy movements and sometimes in the form of religious fundamentalism.

A number of challenges come from above as transnational actors’ ie.MNCs, NGOs and supra -national organisations make territorial national boundaries permeable by linking people together across the globe. Due to globalization and information and communication revolution, we are witnessing a number of transnational entities which functions cutting across national boundaries and thereby threatening State sovereignty and limiting the State activities.

These present developments help us to draw three assumptions- firstly nature of the competition between states has fundamentally changed. Traditionally State competed for control over territory and the natural resources. Now they are increasingly competing for market share in the global economy. Secondly, the form of competition between States has changed by seeking economic alliances, not military one. And finally, the State authority over society and economy is undergoing another period of diffusion. State is coming to share authority in economy arena with transnational entities i.e.WTO, IMF, World Bank and various civil society organisations.

One of the most remarkable developments of globalisation is the increasing role of MNCs. MNCs now dominate most of the world’s market. Some of such examples are General Motors and Ford in the automotive industry, Esso, Shell, BP in oil industry, McDonalds fast food chain, AT&T and CNN in communication sector. Lots of such examples can be drawn from banking and finance, insurance and service sectors. The most significant development is that MNCs are now recognised as symbols of concentration of economic power. It seems MNCs are often in a position to alter State policies in its favour. Some MNCs have become so powerful that their annual turnover is higher than the GDP of most of the host nations. Thus, developing countries have become vulnerable with each passing day.

Further evidence of globalisation is found in the growing importance of international and supra-national bodies such as UN, EU, NAFTA, ASEAN, APEC etc. The policies and conditional ties of IMF, World Bank and WTO on developing world are much more discriminatory. IMF offers soft loans for structural adjustment with conditionalities. These conditionalities include reduction of expenditure in social sectors, cut down in employment, reduction of government subsidies etc. which are sometimes not acceptable because these are essentially domestic in nature. Thus, states lose their freedom to decide their future.

The revolution in information and communication sectors and advent of high tech weapons, nuclear and ICBMs revolutionise the security discource. This development makes territorial boundaries irrelevant in State security system. New technologies of disseminating information have revolutionised communication across national boundaries. With hundreds of satellites rotating round the earth orbit, the secrecy of the State is no longer intact. As for instance, USSR could not conceal from the world “the Chernobyl disaster” because it was photographed and transmitted by a France commercial satellite. Neither China was able to prevent Tiananmen Square incident to be figured in global media. Media can draw attention worldwide with a short span of time and form public opinion if there is a major violation of human rights as happened in Iraq and on going crisis in Lebanon.

Non-governmental international organisations are functioning in the grass roots of the world in a manner similar to NGOs within individual states to build civil society. NGOs operating at the international level perform wide range of activities relating to human rights, women, children, environment, poverty eradication, refugee protection etc. Some of them have very wide networks and are powerful enough to influence the decision making process of individual States. The Green Peace, Amnesty Internationals, Medicines sans Frontiers, WWF are such examples of NGOs activism across national boundaries.

Despite all the challenges to the State system, the importance of the nation-States and its territorial independence and desire to maintain State sovereignty doesn’t seem to have diminished. Even movement for national self determination within multi- national States represents a negative psyche of deprivation on one hand and on the other hand in positive side, a quest for recognition as nation-state.

Another aspect of nation-States is its resilience, its capacity to survive odds. History shows alliances, power politics, conflict and cooperation among States have often been short lived. Even UN recognises state as primary and most important actor in international system.

All challenges are actually not real threat. Because most of the international organisations or regional arrangements are rooted in efforts of States and have their existence rooted in the consent of member States. Their decisions and recommendations are meaningless unless implemented by the member States themselves. Such global regimes are conceived as tools for State pursuits of national interests.

Transnational entities and MNCs are not always threat to the State system. The challenges posed by these actors are not permanent. They simply cannot ignore State as it is the State which provides security and working environment. It would be a mistake to assume that globalisation necessarily means the eclipse of the nation-State as an economic actor. Globalisation has tended to alter the importance of economic policy rather than making it redundant. If capital can be transferred across the globe in the flick of a computer screen and financial markets react to crises on the other side of the world, it is necessary in the part of national government to work harder to make their societies more globally competitive.

There is a widespread view that nation-States are weakened by the globalisation process. But it can be also argued that the State is being or has been weakened by changes related to globalisation and it has been strengthened by precisely these global changes. The increased permeability of national economies and societies may pose new challenges to the nation- States so as to generate their restructuring rather their irrevocable weakening.

Therefore, so long as the nation-State is defined as autonomous economic community, it becomes difficult to avoid the conclusion that all nation- States are necessarily weakened by globalisation. Though the sovereign State has come under increasing attack from various fronts, it remains the most important actor on the global stage. One could have imagined changing role of the State, development of new kinds of State and growth of new relationship among them rather than a world without States.
(The author teaches Political Science in Cotton College, Guwahati)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.assamnet.org/pipermail/assam-assamnet.org/attachments/20060822/e463560d/attachment.htm>