Sovereignty

Introducing the Topic

Introduction to the Nature of Sovereignty

Sovereignty is a key principle at the heart of the modern state system. State sovereignty refers to a
state's authority and power to govern itself, make and enforce laws, and shape its foreign policy free
from external interference.

Traditionally, sovereignty has been viewed as absolute and indivisible, with states having supreme
authority within their borders. However, in recent years, the notion of state sovereignty has evolved. It is
now understood to be more complex to the extent that the notion of sovereignty itself is being
challenged.

NOTE: as one of the four key concepts in the course, the expectation is that in addition to
understanding the basic tenets of sovereignty, it should also be used as a lens for examining issues in
all three of the thematic units.

Prescribed Topic Prescribed Content

Sovereignty in global politics Nature of state sovereignty

Traditional and modern notions of state sovereignty
Sources of sovereignty
Internal and external dimensions of sovereignty
Challenges to state sovereignty

Teacher only box

This is a slide presentation for this topic:

Activiating - Who Has Control?

Teacher only box

This is a fun introduction to the idea of sovereignty. You might consider having students explore why these micronations are
not legitimate states.
Who Has Control?

Consider the following institutions and organizations and, in groups, identify:

1. Who has control over the institution/organization?

2. What do they have control over?

The government of the country you are living in

The United Nations
Your home(s)
Your local newspaper
Your school

Teacher only box

The purpose of the activating activity above is to get students to consider the complexities of sovereignty. First, they may
realize that there are many elements of sovereignty in their lives; however, they may also realize through this brief
introductory exercise that who is sovereign and what exactly they have sovereignty over is diverse and complex. Adapt as
needed. This can be completed in 10 minutes or less.

Sources of Sovereignty

There are many ways to examine sovereignty (authority in a particular area or context), and the list of 30 here spans a wide
interpretation of the word. To familiarize yourself with the concept, in groups, read through these 30 definitions and place
them into one of these categories:

Foundational aspects of sovereignty

Territorial and geographical sovereignty
Economic and resource-based sovereignty
Cultural, social, and community sovereignty
Governance and administrative sovereignty
International and external relations sovereignty
Emerging and specialized forms of sovereignty

Teacher only box

These are some possible categories into which students may place the sources of sovereignty. Several of them may cross
over, and that is ok. The concept can be vague, and this is again an opportunity to highlight the debatability of the idea.

Foundational aspects of sovereignty: popular sovereignty, national sovereignty, legal sovereignty, and political
sovereignty.
Territorial and geographical sovereignty: territorial sovereignty, maritime sovereignty, aerospace sovereignty, and
environmental sovereignty.
Economic and resource-based sovereignty: economic sovereignty, energy sovereignty, food sovereignty, fiscal
sovereignty, and monetary sovereignty.
Cultural, social, and community sovereignty: cultural sovereignty, social sovereignty, cultural-linguistic sovereignty,
educational sovereignty, and intellectual sovereignty.
Governance and administrative sovereignty: judicial sovereignty, civic sovereignty, health sovereignty, informational
sovereignty, and digital sovereignty.
International and external relations sovereignty: international sovereignty, humanitarian sovereignty, and historical
sovereignty.
 Emerging and specialized forms of sovereignty: technological sovereignty, ethical sovereignty, divine sovereignty, and
constitutional sovereignty.

Lesson Content

Instructions: Read the lesson content and answer the guiding questions that follow the readings. To access the lesson
content topics or sections below, click the “+” sign to expand the box and the “-” sign to close them.

Introduction to Sovereignty
As humans, we all have an inherent need and desire to be the masters of our domain, to control what goes on around us. We like
to have agency and a sense of independence to go about our lives without too many hindrances. Of course, there are situations
where we are told what to do, or we have to do something that we don’t want to do, and that might actually be better for
everyone. But for the most part, we like to be recognized, acknowledged, and respected for our role and position in society. And
that goes for individuals, as well as organizations. States are no different. They, too, want to be left alone to rule themselves
without too much interference from other states or organizations. Think of your school as a state. It would be strange if another
school told your school what curriculum to study, what students can or cannot do at lunchtime, or when you can leave school.
This brings about the concept of sovereignty.

While sovereignty is, as we will see, used in various ways, at its core, it means “supreme authority within a territory.” In the
context of Global Politics, we will focus specifically on the supreme authority of the state.

States and Nations

Before exploring possible conceptions of sovereignty, it is important to clarify the terminology related to the sovereign areas
that we will be referring to. In particular, a state often differs from a nation. Recall that a nation is more of a cultural and ethnic
concept. It refers to a group of people who share common cultural elements such as language, religion, history, traditions, and
often a common ethnic origin. A nation does not necessarily have political or geographic boundaries and often evokes a
sense of belonging and community among its members. A good example of a nation that is not a recognized state is the
Kurds, who span several countries in the Middle East. Note that not all states are composed of a single nation (like Canada, a
multicultural state with multiple national identities).

On the other hand, a state (often called a country) refers to a political entity characterized by a defined territory, a permanent
population, a government, and the ability to enter into relations with other states. It's a legal and political organization with
sovereignty over its internal and external affairs. States are recognized as such in the international system, and their
boundaries and governance structures are defined by international law.

Let's pause here to consider notions of nationalism: both the positive and the negative.

Go to this webpage and respond to the following guiding questions:

Guiding Questions:

1. What are the differences between a country and a nation?

2. What are two different ways of looking at (defining) nationalism?
3. In what ways can nationalism be a force for good?
4. Describe how both extreme nationalism and exclusive nationalism can be negative. Provide one current for each.
5. Why do you think negative nationalism and populism are so often linked?
 6. What is the irony of the recent rise in nationalism in the world today?

Teacher only box

Suggested Answers:

1. What are the differences between a country and a nation? A country refers to a geographical area with a
government that is internationally recognized and has the power to oversee what happens within its borders. A
nation, however, is a group of people united by ethnic, linguistic, geographic, or other common characteristics.
2. What are two different ways of looking at (defining) nationalism? Nationalism can be seen as groups working to
advance the interests of their nation, country, or would-be country, often for independence, cultural promotion, or
political power. It can also be a basis for unity, inclusion, and social cohesion.
3. In what ways can nationalism be a force for good? Nationalism can unify diverse societies by promoting a shared
national identity, as seen in Indonesia’s Pancasila, which is based on shared ideas and values, fostering social
cohesion and patriotism.
4. Describe how both extreme nationalism and exclusive nationalism can be negative. Provide one current for each.

Extreme nationalism: This can lead to aggressive advancement of a nation's interests at the expense of others, as
seen in Nazi Germany's ethnocentric nationalism leading to World War II.

Exclusive nationalism: It entails defining citizenship based on narrow criteria, leading to discrimination or violence
against those who don't fit. For example, in Saudi Arabia, non-Muslims cannot become citizens, and minority
Muslim sects face prejudice.

5. Why do you think negative nationalism and populism are so often linked?

Nationalism and populism intersect in their focus on creating a clear division between "us" (the true people or
nation) and "them" (outsiders or elites). Both ideologies use exclusionary and protectionist language to appeal to
people's fears and frustrations. They promote policies that prioritize the interests of the native population and
push back against globalization and multiculturalism. Charismatic leaders often exploit this intersection to gain
support by offering simplistic and divisive solutions to complex problems.

6. What is the irony of the recent rise in nationalism in the world today? The irony lies in the fact that despite the
increasing interconnectedness of the world due to globalization, where cooperation is more necessary than ever,
there is a resurgence in nationalism. This nationalism often opposes the international cooperation needed to
tackle global challenges.​

Defining Sovereignty

What is Sovereignty?

As we consider this question, let's start with the following introductory video:

Answer these guiding questions as you watch the video:

Guiding Questions

1. How does internal sovereignty differ from external sovereignty?

2. At what point can one country or international global organization violate the sovereignty of another state?
3. What determines whether a nation can claim sovereignty and become its own state?
4. How has globalization made sovereignty more complicated?
 Teacher only box

Suggested Answers:

1. How does internal sovereignty differ from external sovereignty? Internal sovereignty refers to a government's
ultimate authority over what happens within its borders, applicable to everyone in the country. External
sovereignty means respecting other countries' borders and not using military force to change them, indicating a
certain equality between countries internationally.
2. At what point can one country or international global organization violate the sovereignty of another state? A
country or international organization can violate another state's sovereignty in cases of gross violations of human
rights, genocide, or ethnic cleansing. When a state fails to protect the safety of its people, it risks forfeiting its
rights to non-interference.
3. What determines whether a nation can claim sovereignty and become its own state?

Claiming sovereignty and becoming a state lacks clear rules or procedures. It often involves a combination of
factors like self-identification, control over a territory, and recognition by other states or international bodies. The
process can be violent and prolonged, and not just any group or territory can successfully claim sovereignty.

4. How has globalization made sovereignty more complicated? Globalization has complicated sovereignty because
the interconnectedness of governments, economies, and people has increased. Modern issues like refugees,
cyber threats, and environmental concerns transcend national borders, challenging the traditional concept of
sovereignty, which is based on respect for national borders and non-interference in internal matters. The
challenge is adapting the concept of sovereignty to these modern, global issues.

Check out this video that provides some historical background on the origins of sovereignty.

Defining Sovereignty

Sovereignty seems to have at least three central aspects:

the absoluteness of sovereignty

territoriality
the internal and external dimensions of sovereignty.

The holder of sovereignty is superior to all other authorities under it. This authority applies to all individuals and entities, such
as corporations, who are within those borders, irrespective of the system of governance in place. Furthermore, a holder of
sovereignty possesses the right to command and to be obeyed, with the term “right” implying that those doing the
“commanding” have legitimacy. As we will explore in our next topic, several sources of legitimacy can exist. However, what is
foundational is that the citizens and residents of a state concede that the heads of government have (or have been given) the
authority to have supreme authority over an area. This means that the government can implement and enforce its laws,
penalize lawbreakers, and is acknowledged by its citizenry to have this authority. Moreover, the government should be able to
manage its borders and oversee the movement of goods and people in and out of its territory.

Another element of sovereignty is territoriality. Territoriality is a principle by which members of a community are to be defined.
Membership comes from living within a geographic territory where sovereigns (typically, some form of national government or
authoritarian) are supremely authoritative. By living within certain geographic borders, those people belong to the state and
fall under the authority of its ruler. It is important to realize that the ‘state’ differs from ‘the government.’ Governments are
temporary holders of state office, directing state power. They are how state authority is created. In many ways, the state is
simply a theoretical concept.

Finally, we need to consider two aspects of sovereignty: internal and external. A state gains sovereignty when, internally, the
citizens and residents of a country consent to their sovereign authority and externally when supreme authority over a
geographic area is acknowledged by other sovereign states, generally through the establishment of embassies, exchange of
diplomats, and participation in treaty agreements. The United Nations General Assembly consists only of states that meet
these internal and external notions of sovereignty. Currently, the United Nations recognizes the sovereignty of 193 states.
Internal sovereignty can be defined as states being independent and responsible for what happens inside their borders. For
example, they create the laws they choose, collect taxes, spend money to pave roads, build hospitals and schools, and do all
the other things governments set out to do. External sovereignty is how states interact with other states and international
organizations. They respect each other’s borders and right to rule within them, so they shouldn’t interfere with what’s
happening outside their borders.

Internal sovereignty is when the state has an entity (a body like a parliament or an individual like a Queen) within it that can
effectively command the rest of the society. External sovereignty means that any force outside of the state can not command
this political entity. These two aspects, making decisions or creating laws that will be obeyed by a population within a state
(internal sovereignty) and noninterference by those outside the state (external sovereignty), are the two key components of
sovereignty.

In short, internal sovereignty is a matter of supremacy; external sovereignty is a matter of independence. External sovereignty
is independence, or freedom from interference, not only in relation to any international authority but also in relation to other
states.

Declarative Theory of Sovereignty

The current expectation for a state to be deemed sovereign by other states and external institutions is often called the
Westphalian System because they were born out of the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648. However, the 1933 Montevideo
Convention lays out specific criteria to be met to be considered a sovereign state:

1. A permanent population: No minimum number of people must exist together to constitute a state. Tuvalu has just over
11,000 people, whereas India has over 1.4 billion.
2. A defined territory and borders: As with population, there is no minimum size for statehood. For example, Liechtenstein
is only 160 square kilometres, and Canada is just under 1 million square kilometres.
3. The ability to enter into relations with other states: How many and with whom (big and powerful often trump many) is a
matter of debate, but this is an important criterion. It is also tricky because some non-recognized states have
agreements with states. For example, Hong Kong hosts consulates for various states. However, Hong Kong is not
sovereign. It is a special administrative region (SAR) of China.
4. Functioning government: This is related to both external and internal sovereignty (and is related to legitimacy as well).
First, a state will not be recognized by other states if it doesn’t have a functioning government at the time of
recognition, though this may not be the case after the fact. A state can give itself whatever constitutional and political
system it likes and has the right to construct and impose laws free of any external involvement, but the important
element is that no other state or international organization has the right under normal circumstances to determine the
internal political arrangements of a state. This is often referred to as legal sovereignty. On the other hand, practical
sovereignty refers to the practical ability to ensure that the state's laws are obeyed throughout its territory. If the state is
not providing for its population, its practical sovereignty may be questioned.

Constitutive Theory of Statehood

The above criteria are also referred to as the Declaratory Theory of Statehood. It can get a little confusing, however, because
there are countries/territories that meet all of the above criteria but are not considered sovereign states. Think of Scotland,
The Vatican, and Palestine. That’s where the issue of recognition comes into play. The Constitutive Theory of Statehood
asserts that sovereignty is defined by how many other states recognize a state as sovereign. The principle of recognition is
important, as it can determine things such as membership status in international organizations such as the EU or the UN. It
must be recognized as a fellow sovereign state by ‘enough’ of the other members of the international system, especially the
most powerful states. In theory, wealthy or poor, strong or weak, every sovereign state is legally equal in international law. But
the reality is that some states are more powerful than others and will have greater sway in determining the recognition of a
state.

Statehood at the UN

According to the United Nations, “the recognition of a new State or Government is an act that only other States and
Governments may grant or withhold. It generally implies readiness to assume diplomatic relations. The United Nations is
neither a State nor a Government and, therefore, does not possess any authority to recognize either a State or a
Government. As an organization of independent States, it may admit a new State to its membership or accept the credentials
of the representatives of a new Government.

The procedure is briefly as follows:

 The State submits an application to the Secretary-General and a letter formally stating that it accepts the obligations
under the Charter.
The Security Council considers the application. Any recommendation for admission must receive the affirmative votes
of 9 of the 15 members of the Council, provided that none of its five permanent members — China, France, the
Russian Federation, the United Kingdom of Great Britain and Northern Ireland and the United States of America —
have voted against the application.
If the Council recommends admission, the recommendation is presented to the General Assembly for consideration. A
two-thirds majority vote is necessary in the Assembly for admission of a new State.
Membership becomes effective the date the resolution for admission is adopted.

At each session, the General Assembly considers the credentials of all representatives of Member States participating in that
session. During such consideration…the issue can be raised whether a particular representative has been accredited by the
Government actually in power. This issue is ultimately decided by a majority vote in the Assembly. It should be noted that the
normal change of Governments, as through a democratic election, does not raise any issues concerning the credentials of the
representative of the State concerned."

Self Determination

Another aspect related to sovereignty is self-determination—the belief that people should have the right to decide if they want
their own independent country. Many countries have diverse groups based on religion, language, or tribal affiliations. This
raises questions about who should be an independent country and who gets to set those rules. There's no global agreement
on this.

Take Taiwan, for example. It meets all the criteria for being an independent state: its own government, military, and central
bank. However, because China claims it as part of its territory, only a few countries officially recognize Taiwan as a separate
country. Similarly, while the United States and over a hundred other nations see Kosovo as an independent state, several
countries, including China, Russia, and Kosovo's neighbour Serbia, do not.

Sovereignty extends beyond domestic boundaries to have global implications. In the international arena, sovereignty
embodies the principle of equality among nations. Regardless of a country's size, population, influence, or financial resources,
all states are considered equal in their rights—most importantly, the right to have their territorial boundaries respected by
other nations. The principle of “non-interference” in another state's internal matters is a key element of sovereignty and is
foundational to the existing international order.

Challenges to Sovereignty

As we consider some of the challenges to sovereignty, let's start with the following introductory video:

Answer these guiding questions as you watch the video:

Guiding Questions

1. How does sovereignty define the role and authority of states within their borders?
2. How did the emergence of the concept of sovereignty about four centuries ago change the nature of international
conflict and relations?
3. In what ways has sovereignty been challenged recently?
4. How does the 'responsibility to protect' doctrine challenge the traditional concept of sovereignty and
5. What are the implications of this challenge for international relations?

Teacher only box

Possible Answers:

1. How does sovereignty define the role and authority of states within their borders? Sovereignty is the principle that
a state has complete authority over what happens within its borders, including decisions about its political system,
 control over resources, and a monopoly on the legitimate use of force. It also implies that states are the sole
legitimate representatives of their territory and people, and they mutually recognize each other's sovereignty.
2. How did the emergence of the concept of sovereignty about four centuries ago change the nature of international
conflict and relations? The emergence of sovereignty marked a shift from a world dominated by empires and
constant warring to a system where mutual non-interference was respected. This change dramatically reduced
the amount of conflict by establishing clear borders and reducing external meddling in internal affairs. The
concept of sovereignty introduced a new structure for international relations based on mutual recognition of each
state's territorial integrity and authority.
3. In what ways has sovereignty been challenged recently?

From above: Supranational entities like the European Union challenge state sovereignty as member states
voluntarily cede certain powers to a central authority.

From below: Non-state actors such as ISIS, drug cartels, and pirate organizations challenge state authority by not
recognizing the unique and legitimate role of states.

From the side: Globalization challenges traditional notions of sovereignty, as it enables the seamless cross-border
flow of information, goods, pollution, etc., often beyond the control of individual states.

4. How does the 'responsibility to protect' doctrine challenge the traditional concept of sovereignty? The
'responsibility to protect' doctrine posits that sovereignty is not absolute and is conditional on a government's
ability and willingness to protect its citizens. This principle arises from the recognition that governments should not
commit or allow mass atrocities, such as genocide, against their own people. If a government fails in this
responsibility, the international community may have the right to intervene.
5. What are the implications of this challenge for international relations? This idea challenges the traditional concept
of sovereignty by suggesting that state rights are contingent upon fulfilling certain responsibilities towards citizens.
While it aims to prevent humanitarian crises, it also raises questions about how to implement this principle without
undermining the beneficial aspects of sovereignty, like preventing constant warfare and maintaining international
order.

Is Sovereignty Absolute?

Sovereignty is generally viewed as being almost, but not completely, absolute. A continuing discussion revolves around the
issue of whether there should be justifiable reasons for intervening in another country's domestic affairs, possibly even using
military force. One such reason might be to halt genocide. Central to the debate is whether the concept of international order
should go beyond simply governing relationships between states and consider the internal activities within states.

Recently, there's been a move towards rethinking the balance between the state's authority and individual citizens' rights.
According to this perspective, sovereignty is an agreement between the government, its populace, and other states. If a
government fails to meet its obligations, it may lose certain privileges traditionally associated with sovereignty. One such
privilege is the general expectation of non-interference in its internal affairs.

Responsibility to Protect

An explicit call to revise the concept of sovereignty to allow for internationally sanctioned intervention arose with The
Responsibility to Protect (R2P), a document written and produced in 2001 by the International Commission on Intervention
and State Sovereignty, a commission that the Government of Canada convened at the request of U.N. Secretary-General Kofi
Annan.

R2P proposes revising the concept of non-interference. As described above, sovereignty involves a “responsibility to protect”
on the part of a state towards its own citizens, a responsibility that outsiders may assume when a state perpetrates massive
injustice or cannot protect its own citizens. This framework lays the groundwork for external interventions—whether through
diplomatic dialogue, economic sanctions, or even military action—when a state commits or fails to prevent large-scale human
rights abuses within its borders. Responsibility to Protect has garnered wide international attention and highlights how
sovereignty is not absolute and can be conditional upon outside obligations.

In real-world scenarios, the Responsibility to Protect doctrine hasn't succeeded as hoped. For example, the U.S. and NATO
used R2P as the reason for intervening in Libya in 2011. However, countries like China and Russia grew skeptical when the
mission, which started as a humanitarian effort, seemed to evolve into an attempt to remove the existing government.
Implementing R2P can also be extremely challenging and expensive, which may be why global action was limited when
around 500,000 Syrians died during the civil war. Most of the population was displaced due to a conflict largely fueled by its
own government. Additionally, countries shy away from making exceptions to the principle of complete sovereignty. They
worry that this could set a precedent limiting their freedom to act within their borders.

The following summarizes the core principles of responsibility to protect:

Responsibility to protect: States have the primary responsibility to protect their citizens from mass atrocities, such as
genocide, war crimes, ethnic cleansing, and crimes against humanity. If a state is unable or unwilling to protect its
people, the international community has a responsibility to intervene.
Responsibility to respect: States should respect the human rights and dignity of their citizens, including the rights to life,
liberty, and security. This also means that states should not engage in or support activities that violate these rights.
Responsibility to prevent: States should actively work to prevent conflicts and crises that could lead to mass atrocities
or human rights abuses within their borders and in the wider international community.
Responsibility to act: States should take appropriate actions, individually or collectively, to address situations that
threaten peace, security, or the well-being of their citizens or the global community.

Responsible Sovereignty

Responsible Sovereignty emphasizes the importance of states being not only sovereign but also responsible for the welfare of
their citizens and the impact of their actions on the global community. This idea challenges the traditional notion of
sovereignty, which primarily focuses on the authority and independence of states. Responsible sovereignty goes beyond this
by stressing the need for states to be domestically and internationally accountable for their actions and policies.

The former Secretary-General of the United Nations, Kofi Annan, introduced responsible sovereignty in his 1999 speech to
the General Assembly. The idea behind responsible sovereignty is that sovereignty is not an absolute right but rather a
responsibility that states have to their citizens and the international community.

Annan argued that in today's world, where issues such as terrorism, environmental degradation, and human rights violations
can have global consequences, states cannot simply act in their own self-interest without regard for the impact of their actions
on others. Instead, states have a responsibility to exercise their sovereignty in a way that considers the needs and interests of
others and contributes to the collective good.

According to Annan, responsible sovereignty involves three main principles: first, states have a responsibility to protect their
citizens from harm; second, states have a responsibility to respect the sovereignty of other states; and third, states have a
responsibility to cooperate with each other to address global challenges. However, some argue that the notion of responsible
sovereignty places too much emphasis on state responsibility and not enough on individual rights and freedoms.

Pooled Sovereignty

A way in which sovereignty has been seen to be challenged is through European integration. European integration began in
1950 when six states formed the European Coal and Steel Community in the Treaty of Paris. The community established joint
international authority over these six countries' coal and steel industries. This same model was expanded to a general
economic zone in the Treaty of Rome in 1957. A judicial body further enhanced it, the European Court of Justice, and a
legislature, the European Parliament, a directly elected Europe-wide legislature. European integration has widened, as the
institution now consists of twenty-seven members. It deepened with the 1991 Maastricht Treaty, which expanded the
institution’s powers and reconfigured it as the European Union.

Far from replacing states, the European Union “pools” important aspects of their sovereignty into a “supranational” institution
in which their freedom of action is constrained. European Union states are no longer absolutely sovereign. In recent years,
European integration has continued to advance in important respects. On December 1, 2009, the Treaty of Lisbon came into
full force, pooling sovereignty further by strengthening the Council of Ministers and the European Parliament, creating a High
Representative of the Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy to represent a unified European Union position, and
making the European Union’s Charter of Fundamental Human Rights legally binding.

However, strains on European integration have also emerged in recent years. A treaty establishing a Constitution for Europe
was signed by the European Union’s member states in 2004, but referendums in France and the Netherlands in 2005 rejected
it and prevented its ratification. Then, in 2016, a referendum in the United Kingdom resulted in a victory for the U.K.’s
withdrawal from the European Union, popularly known as “Brexit.”
A similar situation exists within the World Trade Organization. In these cases, countries believe they're better off participating
in collective decision-making, even if they don't agree with every decision. Importantly, as was demonstrated by Brexit, this
sharing of sovereignty is partial and voluntary and can be reversed if necessary.

To learn more about the European Union, click on this link and answer the following guiding questions:

Guiding Questions

1. In what way is some limited sovereignty given up when countries agree join the UN or WTO?
2. What are the four freedoms of the EU single market?
3. Describe the three benefits for countries that are part of the EU.
4. What are three drawbacks of being involved in the EU?

The European Union is a complex and multifaceted organization. Click here for an excellent overview of its various
elements.

Teacher only box

Here are some possible responses:

Guiding Questions

1. In what way is some limited sovereignty given up when countries agree to join the UN or WTO?
2. What are the four freedoms of the EU single market?
3. Describe the three benefits for countries that are part of the EU.
4. What are three drawbacks of being involved in the EU?

Challenges by Nonstate Actors

Sovereignty might also be called into question if a government lets a terrorist organization operate within its borders. It can't
expect other countries to respect its sovereignty if they allow these aggressive, sovereignty-violating activities to occur within
their borders. This was the situation with Afghanistan, led by the Taliban, which allowed al-Qaeda to plan the 9/11 attacks on
U.S. soil. When one country violates another's sovereignty—whether through military invasion or cyberattacks—it opens the
door for some form of retaliation by the victim country.

It's important to note that sovereign states aren't the only players in global politics. There are corporations and NGOs like
Amnesty International, Doctors Without Borders, Greenpeace, foundations, journalists, religious leaders, local politicians, and
global and regional organizations. There are also actors like terrorists, drug cartels, and pirates. While countries generally
have more power and influence, they're not alone in impacting global events. They can't always stop other actors from making
their presence felt. This makes the world less of a place where state sovereignty is an absolute reality and more of a place
where it's a guiding principle.

The current realities of global politics have challenged the notion of national sovereignty. With increased economic integration
and interconnectivity, a policy of isolationism is a non-starter today. Furthermore, the increasingly detrimental human impact
on the environment, which does not recognize borders, will continue challenging notions of sovereignty.

Most states have attempted to address challenges to their sovereignty by entering into mutual agreements. Furthermore, they
have used agreements to further their economies and to benefit the world more broadly. However, these agreements also
seem to represent a loss of sovereignty. They usually involve states tying themselves to agreements that may partially result
in losing control of their decision-making capabilities. This is not to say that these agreements may not be in a state's best
interests, but they may be for a state to do something they may not want to do and, therefore, chip away at a small piece of a
state’s sovereignty.
Economic Influence on Sovereignty

In today's world, economic factors often interfere with a country's operations. This is particularly true for poorer countries
when wealthier countries influence them. When a country is much weaker economically than others, it raises a question: Can
it still be considered legally sovereign and equal to other countries? Extreme economic differences and the pressure they
create can limit a country's legal sovereignty. If a country is economically weak, it might be forced to make decisions not
because it wants to but because of the pressure from more powerful countries. Think of it like personal freedom. Normally,
your choices are your own, even if others influence them. But if someone forces you to choose (like a robber saying "your
money or your life"), you're not really free in your decision. Similarly, if a country is under too much economic pressure, its
ability to make free legal decisions is compromised, just like your freedom in the face of coercion. So, while all countries have
legal sovereignty, the reality is that economic power can heavily influence the decisions of economically weaker countries,
challenging their ability to make truly independent choices.

International Law and Sovereignty

International law has grown alongside increased global economic integration, affecting states' independence. It's used by
states to manage the impact of outside interference. By agreeing to international laws, states voluntarily accept certain
restrictions to avoid greater negative impacts from actions they can't control. This seems to challenge the idea of a state's
complete legal freedom (legal sovereignty).

However, some argue that international law doesn’t conflict with a state's legal sovereignty. International law differs from local
law because it's only binding when states agree to it. So, when a state agrees to international law, it’s actually exercising its
sovereignty.

International law enforcement comes through pressure from other states or groups, not through a single powerful authority. If
a state breaks an international agreement, it might face consequences like reprisals from other states, but these are not as
forceful as legal penalties within a country. This pressure is a way for other countries to influence the state.

Even with international agreements, a state still has legal independence because it chooses to comply with the law. While
there can be significant consequences for not following international agreements, these are not usually forceful enough to
make a state lose its legal independence. However, if international law becomes extensive and the consequences of not
following it become severe, then a state's legal sovereignty might be threatened. But we're not at that point yet.

In summary, while international law does place some limits on states, it's generally seen as a way for states to exercise their
sovereignty rather than lose it. Compliance is mostly voluntary, and the consequences for not following international laws are
usually less severe than domestic legal penalties, keeping a state's legal independence intact.

The Future of Sovereignty

Today, the world is deeply interconnected, with vast amounts of money, goods, and people moving across international
borders yearly. Local issues have become global, exemplified by climate change, where the greenhouse gas emissions of one
nation can pose a global threat. In this era, there's a growing debate among experts about whether the traditional concept of
sovereignty is still relevant. They're considering if there's a need for a new definition of sovereignty, where governments are
responsible not just for their own citizens but also for the impact of their actions on people in other countries.

Sovereignty is further questioned by the rise of entities other than states, like non-governmental organizations, multinational
corporations, terrorist organizations, and inter-governmental organizations. However, most of these groups don't have the
same level of power as states. Furthermore, only a few see themselves as directly challenging state sovereignty. While some
terrorist groups aim to challenge state power to establish a new state or radically change an existing one to suit their goals,
most of these groups recognize the importance of working within state frameworks and influencing state policies to achieve
their objectives.

Sources:

The State and Sovereignty by Kevin Harrison and Tony Boyd

Introduction to Global Politics by Steven Lamy et al.
A Puzzle of Sovereignty by Steven Lee
The World by Richard Haass
The Stanford Encyclopedia
Challenges to Sovereignty: Concluding Reading and Video

As we conclude our consideration of the challenges traditional sovereignty faces, watch the following video and complete the
reading along with the guiding questions.

Guiding Questions:

1. How do modern global challenges, like the Amazon fires, affect traditional concepts of sovereignty?
2. What international responses were observed in reaction to the Amazon fires, and how did Brazil initially respond?
3. How might future global challenges require a rethinking of traditional sovereignty concepts?

Teacher only box

Suggested Responses:

1. How do modern global challenges, like the Amazon fires, affect traditional concepts of sovereignty? They
show that decisions within one country can have global impacts, challenging the traditional concept of
sovereignty, which emphasizes non-interference.
2. What international responses were observed in reaction to the Amazon fires, and how did Brazil initially
respond? The G7 countries tried to persuade Brazil to take action against the fires and offered $22 million in
aid. Brazil initially refused, citing sovereignty, but later accepted some aid and deployed the army to control
the fires.
3. How might future global challenges require a rethinking of traditional sovereignty concepts? Future
challenges that transcend borders, like climate change, might necessitate interventions that traditionally
violate sovereignty, indicating a need to adapt this concept for modern global issues.

Tanks, Sanctions, and Separatists: The Various Challenges to Sovereignty

Click on this webpage and answer the following questions related to the challenges traditional notions of sovereignty are
facing:

1. How do each of the challenges noted in the article actually challenge sovereignty?
2. What are five ways in which states can counter challenges to sovereignty?

Teacher only box

Suggested Answers:

1. How do each of the challenges noted in the article actually challenge sovereignty?

Armed intervention across borders directly challenges sovereignty by violating the principle that countries
should respect one another’s borders and not use force to change them​.

Economic sanctions impose penalties that can force changes in behaviour, impacting a country's ability to
govern its own economic affairs and policies​.

Conditions imposed by organizations like the IMF or political influence exerted through bilateral loans can
infringe on a country's control over its internal economic policies​.
 Cyberattacks can have cross-border physical impacts, such as disrupting critical infrastructure, thereby
interfering with a country's internal affairs and challenging its sovereignty​.

Interfering in a country's electoral process challenges its sovereignty by infringing on its right to choose its
political system and leaders autonomously.

Separatist movements within a country seeking independence or autonomy challenge the central
government's authority and control over its territory​.

Transnational crimes like human trafficking or the actions of terrorist groups can undermine a government's
sole right to use force within its borders and regulate border crossings​.

Global issues like climate change or pandemics can have international repercussions, challenging the
traditional concept of sovereignty.
2. What are five ways in which states can counter challenges to sovereignty?

States can use military action to defend against armed aggression, asserting sovereignty through self-
defence.

In response to cyberattacks, states can employ their own cyber capabilities to retaliate or defend against
such attacks​.

States can use sanctions, including asset freezes and travel bans, as a lower-cost and lower-risk response to
sovereignty violations.

States can resolve disputes through diplomatic efforts, including direct communication, negotiation, or using
international platforms like the United Nations.

Sometimes, states may choose not to respond directly to sovereignty challenges, especially if they lack the
military or economic power to do so effectively​​.

Guiding Questions

Complete the following questions as you read through the sections of the reading on sovereignty.

1. How does the desire for agency and independence in humans relate to the concept of sovereignty in states?
2. What is the difference between a state and a nation? Provide an example to support your explanation.
3. Explain the three central aspects of sovereignty.
4. Barnett, Brown, Lunch and Telhami wrote in Foreign Affairs (May/June 2023) that "the state and sovereignty are not the
same. The state is defined by what it controls, whereas sovereignty depends on other states recognizing the legality of
that control." How might you respond to this claim when considering internal and external sovereignty?
5. Compare and contrast the Declarative Theory and the Constitutive Theory of Statehood. Why might a territory like
Palestine meet the criteria for statehood under the Declarative Theory but not be considered a sovereign state?
6. What role might the United Nations' procedures for membership play in nations achieving statehood?
7. Define self-determination and explain its importance in global politics.
8. How can economic factors from wealthier countries affect the sovereignty of poorer countries?
9. Explain how nonstate actors can challenge the sovereignty of states.
10. How does international law challenge and uphold state sovereignty simultaneously?
11. How can a state's participation in international law be seen as an exercise of its sovereignty?
12. Explain how globalization and environmental issues are reshaping the concept of sovereignty.
13. What are the roles of NGOs, MNCs, and IGOs in challenging the traditional concept of state sovereignty?
14. Explain the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) concept and its implications for state sovereignty.
15. Discuss Kofi Annan's principles of responsible sovereignty and their relevance to our discussion of sovereignty.
16. Describe how European integration challenges the traditional notion of state sovereignty.
 Teacher only box

Suggested Answers:

1. How does the human desire for agency and independence relate to the concept of sovereignty in states? Humans
and states alike seek recognition and respect for their independence.
2. What is the difference between a state and a nation? Provide an example to support your explanation.

- State: A political entity with a defined territory, permanent population, government, and capacity to enter into
relations with other states.
- Nation: A cultural and ethnic concept referring to people sharing common cultural elements like language and
traditions.
- Example: The Kurds are a nation spread across multiple states (Turkey, Iraq, Iran, Syria) but do not have a
recognized state.

3. Explain the three central aspects of sovereignty.

- Absoluteness: The supreme authority within a territory, implying complete internal control.
- Territoriality: Sovereignty is defined by geographic borders within which the sovereign authority applies.
- Internal and External Dimensions: Internally, a state's governance is acknowledged by its citizens; externally, it's
recognized by other states.
4. Barnett, Brown, Lunch and Telhami wrote in Foreign Affairs (May/June 2023) that "the state and sovereignty are
not the same. The state is defined by what it controls, whereas sovereignty depends on other states recognizing
the legality of that control." How might you respond to this claim when considering internal and external
sovereignty? Students might suggest that they are actually differentiating between forms of sovereignty more than
drawing a distinction between the state and sovereignty.
5. Compare and contrast the Declarative Theory and the Constitutive Theory of Statehood. Why might a territory like
Palestine meet the criteria for statehood under the Declarative Theory but not be considered a sovereign
state? Declarative Theory: Focuses on meeting criteria like a permanent population, defined territory, government,
and capacity for relations. Constitutive Theory: Emphasizes recognition by other states as crucial for statehood.
Palestine meets declarative criteria but lacks international recognition by several key states, hindering its status
as a sovereign state under the Constitutive Theory.
6. What role might the United Nations' procedures for membership play in nations achieving statehood? The
constitutive theory includes acceptance into international organizations like the UN. Welcoming a new state into
the UN would be a symbolic way to say to the rest of the world that the new state has been acknowledged by the
largest and perhaps most influential international organization.
7. Define self-determination and explain its importance in global politics.

Self-determination refers to the belief that people should have the right to decide if they want their own
independent country. It is rooted in the idea that distinct groups, particularly those defined by religion, language,
or tribal affiliations, have the right to determine their political status and pursue sovereignty.

Importance: shapes international relations and the world map. It is especially relevant in areas with diverse
cultural, religious, or linguistic groups. The principle raises challenging questions about who qualifies for
statehood and the criteria for such recognition.

8. How can economic factors from wealthier countries affect the sovereignty of poorer countries?

Economic dependence, debt, and loan conditions from wealthier states or international financial institutions can
compromise the policy-making autonomy and domestic priorities of poorer countries, affecting their sovereignty.

9. Explain how nonstate actors can challenge the sovereignty of states. Nonstate actors like terrorist groups,
multinational corporations, and NGOs can challenge state sovereignty by influencing political decisions,
undermining government authority, and operating across borders in ways that evade state control.
10. How does international law challenge and uphold state sovereignty simultaneously? Challenges sovereignty by
imposing restrictions and norms on states. Upholds sovereignty by protecting state rights and territorial integrity
under international law.
 11. How can a state's participation in international law be seen as an exercise of its sovereignty?

Compliance is mostly voluntary, and the consequences for not following international laws are usually less severe
than domestic legal penalties, keeping a state's legal independence intact.

12. Explain how globalization and environmental issues are reshaping the concept of sovereignty. These forces
challenge traditional sovereignty by transcending borders (e.g., climate change, global markets), requiring
cooperative and sometimes sovereignty-limiting responses.
13. What are the roles of NGOs, MNCs, and IGOs in challenging the traditional concept of state
sovereignty? Influence policies, shape global agendas, and operate transnationally, often bypassing or working
parallel to state mechanisms, thus challenging the exclusive authority of states.
14. Explain the Responsibility to Protect (R2P) concept and its implications for state sovereignty. Suggests conditional
sovereignty based on state responsibilities to protect citizens from atrocities. Implications: legitimizes international
intervention when states fail in this duty.
15. Discuss Kofi Annan's principles of responsible sovereignty and their relevance to our discussion of sovereignty.
Emphasizes that sovereignty includes responsibilities towards citizens and the international community; states
should protect human rights and cooperate in addressing global challenges. As it relates to sovereignty, it implies
that sovereignty is conditional, not absolute.
16. Describe how European integration challenges the traditional notion of state sovereignty. It involves pooling
sovereignty in certain areas (e.g., trade, law) to a supranational entity (EU), limiting absolute national decision-
making in favour of shared governance and collective benefits.

Applying Your Knowledge / Global Politics in Action

Struggles for Sovereignty

Watch the following introductory video to this inquiry and answer the guiding questions below.

Guiding Questions:

1. How has the number of countries in the United Nations changed since 1945?
2. Why do national governments typically oppose secession?
3. What are the four criteria of the Montevideo Convention for statehood?
4. What challenges does Somaliland face in its quest for international recognition?
5. What were the outcomes for Eritrea and South Sudan after achieving independence?

Teacher only box

Suggested Answers:

1. How has the number of countries in the United Nations changed since 1945? From 51 States in 1945 to 193
today.
2. Why do national governments typically oppose secession? National governments often oppose secession due to
concerns about national unity, territorial integrity, and political stability.
3. What are the four criteria of the Montevideo Convention for statehood? A permanent population, defined territory,
government, and capacity to enter into relations with other states.
4. What challenges does Somaliland face in its quest for international recognition? There is no international
recognition, potential regional instability, and the risk of war.
 5. What were the outcomes for Eritrea and South Sudan after achieving independence? Eritrea has a despotic
government and poverty; South Sudan experienced civil war, hyperinflation, and famine after independence.

The Inquiry

You will be assigned a case study from the list below. In your groups, you will need to develop a 5-minute presentation that
addresses the following:

Background/contextual overview (Think: W5 (who, what, where, when, why))

Do they meet the declaratory theory of statehood requirements? If so, explain. If not, which areas have they fallen
short?
To what extent have they met the constitutive theory of statehood?
Are they members of international organizations?
Summarize the central barriers to full statehood.

Scroll to the bottom of this page to find an introductory overview of your case study. You will have to do additional research
to find more information (e.g. UN resolutions, Security Council, ICJ, government statements, regional decisions, etc.)

Crimea (Russia/Ukraine)
Chagos Islands (Mauritius/UK)
Kurdistan (Syrian)
Kashmir (India/Pakistan)
Catalonia (Spain)
Scotland (U.K.)
Kurdistan (Iraqi)
Papua (Indonesia/Papua New Guinea)
Palestine
Another of your choosing (like Somaliland?

As a conclusion to our presentations, consider the various cases presented in the video. What common challenges and
considerations do regions/nations face in their pursuit of independence/statehood?

This recent article from The Economist, "What Does it Mean to Recognise Palestinian Statehood?" provides an excellent
overview of the ambiguity surrounding statehood and the role that a seat in the General Assembly plays in the process.

The South China Sea

First, by watching this video and reading this primer and this CFR infographic, describe the multiple causes of the
dispute.

Proceed to this link and click on the "preventative options" section. Three possible options for resolving the dispute are
offered.

After gaining an understanding of the situation and reading through the seven options, in your groups, you have three tasks:

1. Which of the three preventative policy options — deterrence by punishment, deterrence by denial and/or
accommodating China’s objectives — is the best option for resolving the crisis? Explain why it is the best option for
resolving the crisis. This does not need to be the most likely option (see task 2 below).
 2. Which of the three preventative policy options do you think is the most likely option to be taken? Why do you think this
will be the case?

3. In the event of a military conflict, the website suggests four possible alternatives for resolving the conflict. Again,
which approach do you think is the best way to resolve a military conflict, and which do you think is most likely?

Once you finish with the activity, read through the "recommendations" section.