POLI 3991 Final
The Impact of Globalization on the Nation-State
The world has experienced considerable interconnection in a process that scholars refer to as globalization. They have affected various aspects of life, including multiple aspects of the state. Cultural, economic, demographic, and technological forces are behind the interconnection between countries and cultures, and changed the relationships and interactions between nations across the world. Globalization has affected politics, public policy, administration, and institutional relations within countries. Globalization refers to the interconnectedness between nation-states through information and communication technologies, and the ease of movement of people and goods from one region to another (Baylis, 2020). The global transformation is ubiquitous despite the controversy surrounding its effect on countries and people. A critical question related to globalization is whether the role of the nation-state remains the same or global organizations, such as the World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Trade Organization (WTO), have taken over and transformed their role in global affairs. Although some people believe that globalization is a positive force, it has led to the complete demise of the nation-state as a central social and political organizing structure.
Different views have emerged regarding the role and impact of globalization, while some are pro-, others are anti-, considering its effect on the nation-state. Although some people argue that globalization has led to the beneficial reality of the world as a result of opening up markets to global players, opponents maintain that it is a monster whose aim is to end the sovereignty of the nation-state. Countries around the world have maintained their independence, especially concerning their internal economic and political affairs. However, globalization has changed internal and external aspects of nations due to the creation of other organizing structures that control global issues, such as international agencies (World Bank, IMF, and the WTO) (Wouters & Odermatt, 2014). The role of the nation-state declined to the point that it became a “toothless” partner in international affairs. Hence, Regardless of the goal of globalization, the process has completely changed the nation-states and the way it conducts its internal and external relationships, such as advancing democratic ideals.
The nation-state has become increasingly interconnected and it becomes impossible to play its conventional role, such as protecting its internal security. The demands for global democratic governance have created a new form and roles for the nation-state. Globalization no longer allows nation-states to have an active role or use its power in local and global politics. Instead, global forces and actors, such as the World Bank, IMF, and the WTO), have invaded domestic affairs and presented them in the international discourse (Farrell & Newman, 2014). For example, environmental challenges facing countries are no longer considered national problems. Instead, global actors unite, and strive to solve them as an international agenda. Universal institutions and organizations engage in concerted efforts to deal with numerous challenges that affect nation-states, such as poverty. Thus, globalization denies the nation-state the room to create, and solve its challenges using local resources.
The nation-state could have adequate tools and resources to create effective policies to solve national problems, and achieve social and political development. However, globalization has ceased control over the local resources and denied the nation-state control over its capacity to organize local structures and systems to deal with domestic affairs. Notably, although local governments create policies to handle public policy, they use global standards which limit the power of the nation-state. Everyone appears to accommodate the demands of globalization, which denies states control over their social and political systems, as well as people (Ying, Chang, & Lee, 2014). For example, a country could limit the opportunity for an individual or company to operate profitably locally. However, the same person or firm could internationalize its operations and act productively. The reality shows that the nation-state no longer has power over its local activities as the world has become a global village.
Globalization has designed a global economic order, which dictates how countries should relate to others. Interestingly, nations should adhere to the global economic order or risk failure since the system controls all operations globally. The change has established an economic monopoly that changes the nation-state through capitalist ideology. The world economic order operates successfully through the influence of the international agencies in the Global North, including the World Bank, IMF, and the WTO (Edwards & Gaventa, 2014). The organizations have a considerable influence on the economic performance of many countries around the world. Unfortunately, in some nations, uniquely the least developed and developing ones, the impact is negative. For example, in an attempt to force them to operate at the same level as others in the economic system, the countries have significant debts that they are unable to come out of. Many African countries have huge debts that they cannot repay without facing worse economic ramifications.
Developing countries are worse affected by the globalization process because of the demand to engage in the globalization process. Globalization affects developing nations in numerous ways. First, in the wake of globalization, international organizations, such as the World Bank, have been increasingly ‘generous’ with their loans. Therefore, to catch up with business partners around the world, developing nations have debts that have become almost impossible to service. Furthermore, globalization has opened up the boundaries of the developing countries to globalizing forces, such as multinationals. The companies enter the states and exploit their natural and human resources. They take advantage of cheap labour in their target markets (Asteriou, Dimelis, & Moudatsou, 2014). In addition, most of the revenue that multinationals generate return to their home countries, which are mostly developed nations. As a result, developing nations fail to benefit from the operations that exploit their resources. Finally, multinationals have caused environmental degradation through the exploitation of natural resources and pollution, especially climate change. Unfortunately, governments in developing countries have no power to reverse the process.
The nation-state can no longer control its factors of production and the output from its natural resources due to the global forces. Any actors, individuals, and groups have felt the negative impact of the operations of the global economic order. For example, the Seattle protests in 1999 against WTO reveals that many people have realized the detrimental effect of globalization on national affairs (Collier, 2018). The global players transform the way the nation operates economically and politically. Governmental and non-governmental agencies, such as the United Nations (UN), Action for a Global Climate Community (AGCC), European Union (EU), and multinational companies run the global system with a detrimental impact on the nation-state (Spring, 2014). Unfortunately, nations around the world continue to ratify such alliances without considering how they could affect their local economic system and politics. Many countries are misled to believe that global partnerships serve their national interests, while, in reality, they advance the goals of the global economic order.
In the wake of globalization, nation-states have a minimal implication on global affairs. Similarly, national governments are powerless since global governance belongs to international organizations (Baylis, 2020). For example, the governmental systems cannot create legal frameworks of institutions for global governance since organizations, such as the United Nations, perform the role. For instance, when the nation-states unite for military or humanitarian action, they operate according to the UN rule through agencies, such as the Security Council. Therefore, regardless of the military strength or capability of a nation, globalization no longer allows them to act independently, especially when relating to other nation-states (Fornés & Mendez, 2018). Thus, the global order comes with its governing structures that have little to do with the nation-state. Besides, whenever the nation-state plays a role in the globalization process, it has to comply with global governance requirements.
Another area that the power and role of the nation-states have diminished is in business and economical operations. Globalization has opened up national borders to external forces, such as multinationals. In the current system, countries have to comply with rules, such as the elimination of tariffs to support free trade or they risk missing out of the so-called benefits of globalization. For example, even countries, such as China, that have traditionally closed off their borders to external influence are forced to accept a market economic system. China has become one of the most important actors in the globalized world, such as becoming the leading exporter of manufactured goods across the globe (Fornés & Mendez, 2018). From the analysis, it is evident that the globalization process has reduced the power of nation-states to control their internal and external affairs, including their markets. Nation-states have to agree to the new rules of financial operations to have a chance to survive in the globally competitive world.
Globalization has created a partial denationalization that affects all countries around the world due to global interconnectedness. The denationalization is underway and will continue to change the nation-state as states continue to rely on the global economic order to survive. It is possible that, with time, a complete denationalization might occur and eliminate the traditional idea of the nation. Baylis (2020) reveals the emergence of a novel type of authority and practices of the state characterized by the new developments. Governments no longer have a private agenda in a country due to the forces of globalization. For example, the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA) has affected the working of the nation by opening it up to the influence of globalization (Fornés & Mendez, 2018).. Furthermore, governments can no longer adapt or maintain a protectionist tendency and conduct the conventional role of protecting its people from external control, which is the reality of the partial denationalization reality.
Globalization redefines national sovereignty regardless of the gains made since many countries achieved their independence. Political scientists and scholars in international relations view freedom as the right of nations to have an autonomous rule, as well as the capacity to create internal policies without external interference (Baylis, 2020). Traditionally, countries have related to others in the global system in their terms. However, in the wake of globalization, it is no longer possible. Currently, only issues that meet the international standards are considered a priority, which means that some problems that affect the people could be left unaddressed. For example, attempts to address challenges, such as poverty or unemployment, are considered from a global perspective, such as defining the international poverty line below which people are considered to be poor (Fornés & Mendez, 2018). The nation longer has the power to determine its problems and create effective solutions. As a result, the globalization process has affected the ability of the countries for self-governance, and to define policies that address their local issues. Therefore the power of the nation-state is almost completely eliminated.
Globalization impacts are a new reality that nation-states have to experience. The interconnectedness of the global system is a controversial topic regarding its nature, influence, and outcome for the nation-state. Regardless of perceived benefits, globalization has reduced the power of the nation-state in internal and external affairs. It is almost eliminating the idea of the nation-state as it has traditionally existed. The national government no longer plays a significant role in the design of the political, economic, and social agenda for their countries since they have to comply with global demands. International organizations, such as the WTO, The World Bank, and IMF, set the agenda for nations, while the impact differs from country to country, and they all suffer some extent of the loss of sovereignty. Unfortunately, if the trend continues in the 21st century without any hope to revert to the traditional reality, globalization might eliminate the power of the nation-state.
References
Asteriou, D., Dimelis, S., & Moudatsou, A. (2014). Globalization and income inequality: A panel data econometric approach for the EU27 countries. Economic Modelling, 36, 592-599. doi:10.1016/j.econmod.2013.09.051
Baylis, J. (2020). The globalization of world politics: An introduction to international relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press.
Collier, J. (2018). Globalization and ethical global business. In Business Ethics and Strategy, Volumes I and II (pp. 215-219). London: Routledge.
Edwards, M., & Gaventa, J. (Eds.). (2014). Global citizen action. London: Routledge.
Farrell, H., & Newman, A. L. (2014). Domestic institutions beyond the nation-state: Charting the new interdependence approach. World Politics, 66(2), 331-363. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1017/S0043887114000057
Fornés, G., & Mendez, A. (2018). The China-Latin America axis: Emerging markets and their role in an increasingly globalised world. New York: Springer.
Spring, J. (2014). How educational ideologies are shaping global society: Intergovernmental organizations, NGOs, and the decline of the nation-state. London: Routledge.
Wouters, J., & Odermatt, J. (2014). Comparing the ‘four pillars’ of global economic governance: a critical analysis of the institutional design of the FSB, IMF, World Bank, and WTO. Journal of International Economic Law, 17(1), 49-76. doi:10.1093/jiel/jgu008
Ying, Y. H., Chang, K., & Lee, C. H. (2014). The impact of globalization on economic growth. Romanian Journal of Economic Forecasting, 17(2), 25-34. Retrieved from http://www.ipe.ro/rjef/rjef2_14/rjef2_2014p25-34.pdf
Order an Essay Now & Get These Features For Free:
Turnitin Report
Formatting
Title Page
Citation
Outline
