The Role Of The State In The Globalization Context

The Role Of The State In The Globalization Context : In our ever modernizing planet, globalization is compressing the planet through changes within the ‘spatial organisation of social relations and transactions creating transcontinental and interregional flows and networks’ (Held et al 1999: 16). Hyperglobalists believe that globalization has made the state superfluous (Heywood, 2007: 103) while others believe it's ‘globaloney’ and has had no effect on the state’s role whatsoever (Brown & Ainley, 2009: 177): the foremost likely option is between the 2 , that globalization has changed the role of the state to some extent. the first state role was created from the Westphalian Model, portraying the state because the highest power with complete sovereignty, with an indoor role to supply to and govern for the people of the state and an external role as an actor in world politics; the present role of the state is different politically, socially, technologically and economically.

Globalization has changed the role of the state politically due to strengthened interstate relationships and dependence on each other . States were created to be sovereign but now, thanks to globalization, often give their sovereignty away to ‘pooling’ (Shaw, 2000: 185) in conventions, contracting, coercion and imposition (Krasner, 1995/6). This has led to increasingly similar jurisdictions across states and to power being seen as economic instead of political progress (Shaw, 2000: 186-187) because states now make political progression and regression together, causing states to become more developmental (Heywood, 2007: 100). The Role Of The State In The Globalization Context

The state role has changed because most states now have high dependence on others. it's hard to imagine Britain governing and acting as a state independently of the USA’s influence and relationship. Since the Second war , Britain and other Western states became ‘structurally dependent, militarily and financially on the USA’ (Shaw, 2000: 116). Britain, along side many other countries, relies on the US as a inner spirit because although all states supposedly have sovereignty, they naturally search for authoritative power to rest on . Without a ruling global power, the US may be a figure of authority to believe that has ‘generally played a number one role’ (Shaw, 2000: 241) since 1945 because it's had the ‘capacity, will and acceptance to supply leadership’ (Brown & Ainley, 2009: 143). This has resulted during a lack of clarity by Britain and other states in acting autonomously: many of the government’s decisions for the state are supported the judgements of the state’s friends, allies and even enemies. Thus, the state’s role has changed from being an authoritative figure to a dependent figure counting on others making decisions or making decisions supported other’s beliefs. However, this might be seen as positive, as a robust state relies on strong allies.

Socially, globalization has had a problematic effect, making people and states more in danger and causing the state’s role to vary to encompass solving these issues and becoming a protector instead of a controller. the most example of globalization’s negative state impact is that the formation of terrorism. Our world’s ‘old wars’ of armies and battles are being replaced by ‘new wars’ where nuclear weapons and terrorism rule (Kaldor, 1999). Terrorism may be a new controlling power with its own network system, showing a decrease within the role of the state socially, as people are creating their own authorities to regulate their people and take over the role of the state. The new terrorist threat has caused the state to figure in areas that were previously unnecessary, controlling the threat’s impact. After the 9/11 terrorist attacks, the US believed that states should become more sovereign as a results of the increasing terrorist threats to our society (US National Security Strategy, 2002). Since the Treaty of Westphalia, state sovereignty has decreased greatly, but now terrorism is possibly having a reverse effect, making our states more like they were originally instead of differing them further. this is often a debatable move, as faced with an increasingly powerful network, would we not be stronger if forces were united instead of states separating and standing alone? this concept is supported within the European Security Strategy (2003: 1) released after 9/11, which says that ‘no single country is in a position to tackle today’s complex problems on its own’, illustrating how globalization problems have decreased state power and effectiveness. The Role Of The State In The Globalization Context

The expanding epidemic of AIDs and other deadly diseases thanks to amplified cross-border movement may be a social problem of globalization changing the role of the state. In 1988, just seven years after AIDs was recognised, there was 150,000 cases worldwide and quite 400,000 by 1991 (Baylis & Smith, 1999: 25). Although a worldwide issue, during which global companies, campaigns and NGOs all work to assist , the state has also had a crucial role to play in combating further spreading of this disease by ‘activating their public health systems, both individually and thru regular intergovernmental consultations’ (Baylis & Smith, 1999: 25). The state’s role during this area should be further enhanced as an important method to prevent future spreading of AIDs through education, provided by positive relationships between developed and non-developed states.

Our progressively clever world allows barriers between states to be broken through technological globalization (Cable, 1999: 32). The media may be a major factor: worldwide newspapers and tv stations are now commonplace, creating the impression of the planet being one state and raising awareness of events elsewhere within the world because states are not any longer separated. An example of the globalizing media is BBC Worldwide, our own state’s media system which has become a worldwide organization whose mission is ‘to maximise profits…by creating, acquiring, developing and exploiting media content and media brands round the world’ (http://bbcworldwide). The state’s role has changed thanks to the forming of an interstate shared media because it now has reduced control over the knowledge being provided to the state’s people.

The increased use of the web may be a second aspect of technological advancements affecting the state’s role. People are easily contactable across the planet , creating stronger relationships between states. almost like the media, the web makes information available to everyone therefore the state doesn't now got to transfer information to its people. The state can not control all in-state language and education thanks to the worldwide mass media (Baylis & Smith, 1999: 21) and, as a result, the state is not completely relied on for educating its citizens.

Finally, globalized economic changes have a considerable effect on the state’s role. the worldwide economy has been created by online banking, stock markets and, largely, global franchises. Although these franchises often are stereotypical representations of globalization easily seen round the world – with businesses like McDonalds coating Asia and uncoiling in Africa – the worldwide franchise system remains overrun by USA origin. In 2011, just over 15% of the highest 100 Global Franchises were businesses with an origin outside the USA and within the top 20 just one was (http://franchisedirect). America still overpowers all states on the worldwide market and its state role is far stronger than the remainder of the world’s economically. Has this type of globalization had a positive impact on states and interstate relationships, or is it just allowing the USA to exercise more economic power over the remainder of the planet than previously? the worldwide economy are often viewed positively because it's enhanced trade between states and thus the economy and interstate relations benefit. However, negatively because America is overpowering and other states cannot control their own global companies because they're not in their territories. The Role Of The State In The Globalization Context

National economies have had a downturn thanks to the worldwide economy’s development and strengthening interstate relations. Brown and Ainley (2009: 180) say that ‘when what was being produced was things, where they were produced was crucial and one could possibly believe a national economy’ but now much of the economy is engaged in intangible assets or goods are imported, therefore not helping our own state’s national economies. The state not controls currency due to intangible assets and importation also as online and electronic banking and a shared currency between many nations , like in much of Europe (Baylis & Smith, 1999: 21).

Globalization has changed the role of the state in many ways: politically through interdependence and independence of states, socially through the issues and threats of terrorism and deadly diseases, technologically through the media and internet and economically through the change from national to global economies. The state has moved from a controlling to a protecting role internally in facing the issues that globalization has caused, but also from an authoritative to a dependent figure externally between the sovereign state age to current unfailing interdependence. Globalization is usually seen to possess lowered the importance of the state, but within the end, the states which will remain the foremost successful within the face of globalization is those that adapt to the changes their role makes. within the words attributed to Darwin (1809 – 1882), ‘It isn't the strongest of the species that survives, nor the foremost intelligent, but rather the one most aware of change.’ The Role Of The State In The Globalization Context