To compete and thrive in the 21st century, democracies, and the United States in particular, must develop new national security and economic strategies that address the geopolitics of information. In this century, democracies must better account for information geopolitics across all dimensions of domestic policy and national strategy. This process has to be examined in the context of the current strategic competition between China and the U. Journal Article - International Theory. Domestic sovereignty refers to the ability of the state's political structures to effectively regulate activities within and across its borders.
|Published (Last):||14 July 2009|
|PDF File Size:||14.54 Mb|
|ePub File Size:||19.19 Mb|
|Price:||Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]|
Stephen D. Many of our ebooks are available through library electronic resources including these platforms:. The acceptance of human rights and minority rights, the increasing role of international financial institutions, and globalization have led many observers to question the continued viability of the sovereign state. Here a leading expert challenges this conclusion. Stephen Krasner contends that states have never been as sovereign as some have supposed.
Throughout history, rulers have been motivated by a desire to stay in power, not by some abstract adherence to international principles. Political leaders have usually but not always honored international legal sovereignty, the principle that international recognition should be accorded only to juridically independent sovereign states, while treating Westphalian sovereignty, the principle that states have the right to exclude external authority from their own territory, in a much more provisional way.
The author looks at various issues areas to make his argument: minority rights, human rights, sovereign lending, and state creation in the nineteenth and twentieth centuries. Is it declining or not? Is the state system about to be replaced by something else? Krasner's book will spark much debate and become required reading for all those who wish to think seriously about the nature of sovereignty today.
It is likely to become a standard example of mainstream realist efforts to address the current generation of arguments that globalization is producing fundamental change in international relations. Sovereignty Stephen D.
Illus: 2 tables More. Overview Author s Reviews 2. Krasner is the Graham H.
Stephen D. Krasner
Sovereignty can be said to be the fundamental pillar on which international relations take place. It is sought by territories claiming independence and forcibly defended by those who had it granted. It has also been one of the most debated concepts in International Relations thereafter IR in the last 20 years, particularly since the end of the Cold War when the nature of statehood and boundaries seems to be redrawn by the forces of globalisation and human rights rhetoric. But what is the fuss about this political idea? On the one hand, some have argued that sovereignty is becoming an obsolete idea given that the successful neoliberal economic policies and ethical foreign policy operate in a border-less world. The aim of this essay is thus to understand whether sovereignty is really a straw man, a false utopian idea injected consciously in politics so as to make the world work in a certain way.
Please Consider Donating
Political leaders have usually but not always honored international legal sovereignty, the principle that international recognition should be accorded only to juridically independent sovereign states, while treating Westphalian sovereignty, the principle that states have the right to exclude external authority from their own territory, in a much more provisional way. In some instances violations of the principles of sovereignty have been coercive, as in the imposition of minority rights on newly created st. The major theories of international politics—neorealism, neoliberalism, the English school, constructivism, world culture—are examples of more general perspectives on the nature of social life. One fundamental divide is between actor-oriented theories that take actors as the ontological givens and sociological for lack of a better word theories that take institutional structures as the ontological givens.