Search

Begin New Search Topic Sovereignty Political Geography Global Focus

21. Eurasia, the Hegemon, and the Three Sovereigns

Author:
Pepe Escobar
Publication Date:
09-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Baku Dialogues
Institution:
ADA University
Abstract:
I t is my contention that there are essentially four truly sovereign states in the world today, at least amongst the major powers: the United States, the Russian Federation, the People’s Republic of China, and the Islamic Republic of Iran. These four sovereigns—I call them the Hegemon and the Three Sovereigns—stand at the vanguard of the ultra-postmodern world, characterized by the supremacy of data algorithms and techno-financialization ruling over politics.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Sovereignty, Power Politics, Geopolitics, Emerging Powers, and Regional Power
Political Geography:
United States, China, Iran, Global Focus, and Russian Federation

22. Europe’s Quest for Technology Sovereignty: Opportunities and Pitfalls

Author:
Fredrik Erixon and Matthias Bauer
Publication Date:
05-2020
Content Type:
Research Paper
Institution:
European Centre for International Political Economy (ECIPE)
Abstract:
Covid-19 and its broader implications have highlighted the importance of Europe’s digital transformation to ensure Europeans’ social and economic well-being. It provides important new learnings about Europe’s quest for “technology sovereignty”. While the debate about technology sovereignty is timely, the precise meaning of sovereignty or autonomy in the realm of technologies remains ambiguous. It should be noted that the political discussions about European technology sovereignty emerged far before the outbreak of the Coronavirus. The European Commission’s recently updated industrial and digital policy strategies “institutionalised” different notions of sovereignty, reflecting perceptions that more EU action is needed to defend perceived European values and to secure Europe’s industrial competitiveness. Often the political rhetoric reflected perceptions that Europe is losing global economic clout and geopolitical influence. It was said that dependency on technological solutions, often originating abroad, would require a European industrial and regulatory response. Against this background, the Corona crisis provides two important lessons for EU technology policymaking. Firstly, during the crisis digital technologies and solutions made European citizens stronger. Technology kept Europe open for business despite the lock-down by enabling Europeans to work from home, receive essential home deliveries, home schooling, online deliveries and to use online payments, etc. In addition, Europe’s citizens became more sovereign with respect to accessing information and data that helped track and contain the spread of the virus. Secondly, the crisis tested Europe’s resilience and perceived dependency on (foreign) technology solutions. Early developments indicate that Member States’ homemade solutions did not fare better than existing European and international solutions. A few national and EU IT solutions failed while existing European and global solutions, from cloud infrastructure to communications, payments to streaming services, all continued to work well. Politically, however, the crisis could be used to justify more EU or national government interference in Europe’s digital transformation. Indeed, for some the debate about European technology sovereignty is largely about designing prescriptive policies, which paradoxically risk reducing Europeans’ access to the innovative technologies, products and services that helped Europe through the crisis. Policies taken into consideration include new subsidies to politically picked companies, or new rules and obligations for certain online business models. Policy-makers advocating for such policies tend to ignore critical insights from the Covid-19 crisis and failed industrial policy initiatives, including sunk public investments and protracted subsidies for industrial laggards. In a time of economic hardship, the EU and national governments should be wary of spending even more taxpayer money to replicate existing world-class technology solutions, that in most cases are used in combination with local technologies, with “Made in EU” services of inferior quality and reliability. Moreover, due to different levels of economic development and differences in regulatory cultures, prescriptive technology policies would exclude many Member States from utilising existing and new opportunities that arise from digitalisation, slowing down economic renewal and convergence. The EU cannot be considered a monolithic block that thrives on a unique set of prescriptive technology policies. Before the Corona pandemic, initiatives towards European technology sovereignty were mainly pushed by France and Germany, fed by concerns over their companies’ industrial strength in times of growing economic and geopolitical competition. Industrial and technology policies favoured by the EU’s two largest countries will have a disproportionately negative impact on Europe’s smaller open economies, whose companies and citizens could be deprived from cutting-edge technologies, new economic opportunities and partnerships on global markets, undermining these economies’ development and international competitiveness. Any EU-imposed technology protectionism along the lines suggested by some policy-makers in large EU Member States would leave the entire EU worse off. It would disproportionately hurt countries in Europe’s northern, eastern and southern countries more than the large countries whose economies are generally more diverse than Europe’s smaller Member States. It would, however, make sense for the EU to agree on a shared definition of “technology sovereignty”. Different interpretations could cause serious policy inconsistencies, undermining the effectiveness of EU and national economic policies. Anchored in technological openness, technology sovereignty can indeed be a useful ambition to let Europe’s highly diverse economies leapfrog by using existing technologies. To become more sovereign in a global economy, Europeans need to focus on becoming global leaders in economic innovation – not just in regulation. If anchored in mercantilist or protectionist ideas, technological sovereignty would make it harder for many Member States to access modern technologies, adopt new business models and attract foreign investment – with adverse implications on future global competitiveness, economic renewal and economic convergence. Policymaking towards a European technology sovereignty that benefits the greatest number of Europeans – not just a few politically selected “winners” – should aim for a regulatory environment in which technology companies and technology adopters can thrive across EU Member States’ national borders. The European Single Market has deteriorated in recent years and significantly during the crisis. The new von der Leyen Commission has now repeatedly called for a strengthening of the Single Market. Becoming a world leader in innovation requires a real Single Market in which companies can scale up, with as few hurdles as possible, and then compete globally. It should be supplemented by pro-competitive policies and incentives for research and investment. Brussels cannot set the global standards in technology policymaking alone. Europe’s policy-makers should aim for closer market integration and regulatory cooperation with trustworthy international partners such as the G7 or the larger group of the OECD countries. It is in the EU’s self-interest to advocate for a rules-based international order with open markets. International cooperation should be extended beyond trade to include cooperation on technology policies, e.g. artificial intelligence. Regulatory cooperation with allies such as the USA is essential to jointly set global standards that are based on shared values. Both the EU and the US have much more to gain if they prioritise such alignment, to advance a shared vision for a revamped open international trading system, in a world increasingly influenced by regimes with fundamentally different views on state intervention and human rights. Anchored in technological openness, the EU and the US can promote technology sovereignty that allows for development and renewal elsewhere in the world.
Topic:
Industrial Policy, International Political Economy, Science and Technology, Sovereignty, European Union, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
United States, Europe, and Global Focus

23. Immigration Policy as Foreign Policy

Author:
Howard Duncan
Publication Date:
12-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Uluslararasi Iliskiler
Institution:
International Relations Council of Turkey (UİK-IRCT)
Abstract:
Immigration policy has taken centre stage in the social sciences over the past 20 years. Despite the proliferation of articles and books in this field, very little attention has been paid to immigration policy as foreign policy. It is domestic policy that prevails in the literature, most notably about the effects of immigration on destination societies. This article distinguishes the domestic and foreign policy aspects of immigration policy, acknowledging as it does so that foreign policy is virtually always an expression of national self-interest. It concludes with observations on the realist and idealist/liberal approaches to international relations theory including with respect to the recently adopted United Nations Global Compact for Safe, Orderly, and Regular Migration and the United Nations Global Compact on Refugees. Its purpose is to draw attention to this neglected aspect of immigration policy and to encourage others to explore it in greater detail, from the perspectives of both individual states and the world’s international institutions.
Topic:
International Relations, Foreign Policy, Migration, Sovereignty, United Nations, Immigration, and Border Control
Political Geography:
Global Focus

24. The Right to a Nationality: No Time to be Complacent

Author:
Erika Feller
Publication Date:
03-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Institution:
Brown Journal of World Affairs
Abstract:
The right to a nationality is often taken for granted. Over the course of decades, UN member states have enshrined this right through fundamental instruments, notably the UN Covenant on Civil and Political Rights. Yet con- servative estimates hold that approximately 10 million people spread across every continent are denied a nationality.1 Some, but not all, are refugees. Collectively, these individuals are stateless—they lack any claim to a nationality recognized or assumed by any state. For many years, statelessness was a forgotten issue, relegated to the realm of state sovereignty prerogatives. Recently, states and the UN have begun to focus on the pressing nature of the problem. They have made progress in addressing statelessness as a global, collectively shared challenge. However, the UN target of eradicating statelessness by 2024, while a fine aspiration, continues to face significant hurdles. These obstacles include a serious dearth of informa- tion about the problem’s scope, discriminatory national legislation and policies that obstruct UN efforts, an ambiguous international legal framework, and the absence of solutions that are accessible to stateless individuals.
Topic:
Sovereignty, United Nations, Citizenship, Stateless Population, and Nationality
Political Geography:
Global Focus

25. Alternatives to the State: Or, Why a Non-Western IR Must Be a Revolutionary Science FacebookLinkedInTwitterMendeleyEmail

Author:
Erik Ringmar
Publication Date:
07-2020
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
All Azimuth: A Journal of Foreign Policy and Peace
Institution:
Center for Foreign Policy and Peace Research
Abstract:
The idea of the sovereign state is at the core of the Western understanding of international politics. If we are serious about coming up with non-Western theories of international politics, it is the state that must be questioned. This article suggests some ways in which this can be done. Only once we have unthought the state can we reconstruct international politics as a more equitable, and peaceful, world order.
Topic:
International Relations, Politics, Sovereignty, State, Ottoman Empire, and Pan-Africanism
Political Geography:
Global Focus

26. Global Forums: Are They Must or Waste for the Global Governance?

Author:
Gülen Derya Zayim
Publication Date:
02-2019
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Global Political Trends Center (GPoT)
Abstract:
The age of globalization has brought about interdependency between the nation-states in all aspects of life while uncovering challenges for the sovereignty of the nations. Therefore, how an integrated world system involving multiple actors can efficiently be governed remain a subject of serious discussions. This study briefly explains the historical background of G7/8 along with its evolution to G20 and discusses their effectiveness and legitimacy in the context of global governance. It is worthy to discuss the issue since these global forums’ legitimacy and effectiveness subject to both critics and praises. Although the lessons from the global financial crisis consolidates the idea of global coherence, integrity and compliance, diverging political and economic conflict of interest of nations still make the international forums’ existence and future position in global governance open to discussions. Additionally, the last part of the study draws conclusion about Turkey and its place in global governance.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Financial Crisis, Governance, and G20
Political Geography:
Turkey, Middle East, Global Focus, and Mediterranean

27. The parting of the seas: norms, material power and state control over the ocean

Author:
Rodrigo Fracalossi de Moraes
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Revista Brasileira de Política Internacional (RBPI)
Institution:
Instituto Brasileiro de Relações Internacionais (IBRI)
Abstract:
The paper argues that the norm of sovereignty was extended to sea areas with only minor adaptations. Using an English School approach, it explores the political evolution of control over the seas, demonstrating why and how the norm of sovereignty prevailed over alternative norms and principles regulating control of the seas. The paper then compares the positions of Brazil, China and the United States on the current international regime of the ocean.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Law, Maritime, and Jurisdiction
Political Geography:
Global Focus

28. Unresolved Subjects in the Cinema of Statelessness

Author:
Noah Viernes
Publication Date:
12-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Review of Human Rights
Institution:
Society of Social Science Academics (SSSA)
Abstract:
Cinematic projections of refugees, exiles, and forced migration depart from the conventions of documentary fact to expand the experience of statelessness. For instance, Pierre-Yeves Vandeweerd’s post-ethnographic work configures voices and bodies onscreen to communicate political subjectivities lost to names, dates, and macropolitical events. These films thereby return existing questions about the unresolved sovereignties of states.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Film, Borders, State, and Stateless Population
Political Geography:
Global Focus

29. Local Self-Government as a Problem of Political Theory

Author:
Łukasz Swieciki
Publication Date:
01-2019
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Polish Political Science Yearbook
Institution:
Polish Political Science Association (PPSA)
Abstract:
The article aims at restoring local self-government as a research problem of political theory. In contemporary political science literature, local self-government is not treated as one of its normal, standard research problems. The main obstacle of its ambiguous position within political theory is, as I argue, the forced and imposed apolitical character of local self-government considered as a part of public administration. Despite some degree of organizational, especially institutional and legal, self-determination, the local self-government is not a political, i.e. sovereign entity. However, its non-sovereign status, which is legally established, does not exclude the existence of political potency in it.
Topic:
Sovereignty, Political Theory, Governance, Legitimacy, and Local
Political Geography:
Global Focus

30. Constitutionalism and the Mechanics of Global Law Transfers

Author:
Andreas L. Paulus and Johann Ruben Leiss
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Institution:
The Goettingen Journal of International Law
Abstract:
This article explores rule of law transfers from an international perspective. Based on the observation that the proposal of an emerging international constitutional order seems to have lost momentum this article emphasizes a global legal reality that is characterized by a complex and rather non-hierarchical interplay between various (fragmented) international legal orders and suborders as well as national legal orders. This article discusses four legal mechanisms that are of pivotal relevance with respect to global rule of law transfers. These mechanisms include, first, so-called “hinge provisions” as doorways between different legal orders, second, harmonious interpretation as a legal tool of integration, third the sources of international law enabling transmission of norms and providing a framework for judicial interaction and, fourth, judicial dialogue as an informal means of rule of law transfer.
Topic:
International Cooperation, International Law, Sovereignty, and Rule of Law
Political Geography:
Global Focus