The state system has been imbedded in international relations and international politics since the creation of the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 AD. The Westphalian ‘state system’ saw the end to the destructive thirty-year war in the seventeenth-century, creating a peaceful resolution to end the conflict and establishing territorial sovereignty. The fundamental roles states have been assigned include create justice and order, welfare, freedom, unity and most importantly protection of the people they govern (Langhorne, 2000). In pre-history, humans transitioned from nomadic behaviour to form bands, tiny societies ranging between five and eighty people for the purpose of security and sustainability. These bands then expanded into larger societies
…show more content…
Some academics argue the state is no longer relevant to the modern era. This is because of the rise of non-state actors such as non-governmental organisations (NGO), international government organisations (IGO), and multinational corporations (MNC), who appear to be more effective in solving international issues, as they are not hindered by national interest. Other academics will argue that state sovereignty is the foundation of international politics and "upholds the claim to the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force in the enforcement of its order.” (Webber, 1919). This paper, however, will take on a third perspective and will argue that even though non- state actors are increasingly effective with international affairs, the state system is still crucial to domestic affairs and creating the legitimacy of these non-state actors. State actors are still the most effective means of maintaining domestic affairs such as unity, domestic security and structure. Nevertheless, as states focus introspectively, placing a greater importance on the advancement of the state rather than pursing international harmony (Richelieu…….) , non-state actors are in a better position to address international affairs, such as global sustainability and international justice due to their detachment …show more content…
Scholte’s define political globalisation as the “de-territorialisation-or ... the growth of supraterritorial relations between people”. The roles carried out by international government organisations and non-governmental organisations are growing in relevance and strength. These bodies are developing a greater influence on global political decisions in comparison to the diminishing state. This is demonstrated through the expansion of and evolution of global governance. International politics has integrated states with international institutions and transnational networks combined. This has resulted in private and non-governmental agencies becoming increasingly influential in the formation and implementation of global policy, whilst decreasing the influence of the state. This concept of global governance is in the position to meet the global needs of the twenty-first-century in way the states cannot. Political globalization has introduced international security and the increased “focus on the global structures and processes of rule making, problem solving, the maintenance of security and order in the world system” (Brown…..). The importance of national security is being replaced by international security, and seeking policies that serve the global common good. This is evident through the creation and formation of the global millennium
Some academics argue the state is no longer relevant to the modern era. This is because of the rise of non-state actors such as non-governmental organisations (NGO), international government organisations (IGO), and multinational corporations (MNC), who appear to be more effective in solving international issues, as they are not hindered by national interest. Other academics will argue that state sovereignty is the foundation of international politics and "upholds the claim to the monopoly of the legitimate use of physical force in the enforcement of its order.” (Webber, 1919). This paper, however, will take on a third perspective and will argue that even though non- state actors are increasingly effective with international affairs, the state system is still crucial to domestic affairs and creating the legitimacy of these non-state actors. State actors are still the most effective means of maintaining domestic affairs such as unity, domestic security and structure. Nevertheless, as states focus introspectively, placing a greater importance on the advancement of the state rather than pursing international harmony (Richelieu…….) , non-state actors are in a better position to address international affairs, such as global sustainability and international justice due to their detachment …show more content…
Scholte’s define political globalisation as the “de-territorialisation-or ... the growth of supraterritorial relations between people”. The roles carried out by international government organisations and non-governmental organisations are growing in relevance and strength. These bodies are developing a greater influence on global political decisions in comparison to the diminishing state. This is demonstrated through the expansion of and evolution of global governance. International politics has integrated states with international institutions and transnational networks combined. This has resulted in private and non-governmental agencies becoming increasingly influential in the formation and implementation of global policy, whilst decreasing the influence of the state. This concept of global governance is in the position to meet the global needs of the twenty-first-century in way the states cannot. Political globalization has introduced international security and the increased “focus on the global structures and processes of rule making, problem solving, the maintenance of security and order in the world system” (Brown…..). The importance of national security is being replaced by international security, and seeking policies that serve the global common good. This is evident through the creation and formation of the global millennium