Review on Three Articles about Sovereignty, International Relations, and

the Westphalian Myth, The New Sovereignty in International Relations

and Diplomacy Then and Now

Submitted to Complete The Assignment Scores for

Diplomacy and Security in International Relations Studies

by
Deden Kusnadi
218131006

PARAMADINA GRADUATE SCHOOL OF DIPLOMACY

PARAMADINA UNIVERSITY
JAKARTA
2018
 Review on Three Articles about Sovereignty, International Relations, and the
Westphalian Myth, The New Sovereignty in International Relations and Diplomacy
Then and Now

The thirty years' war occurred in 1618 to 1648, was a dispute between universalist
actors consisting of members of the Habsburg dynasty of the Spanish Empire and particular
actors consisting of several European Empires such as the Netherlands, France, Sweden and
Denmark. War occurs because universalist actors believe that the Pope is the highest
authority in the European Kristendom, automatically becoming a supporter of absolutism.
Whereas the particular actor rejected the domination of the church in people's lives,
but instead, they believed in the existence of sovereignty for each country through a feudal
system of empires. In a sense, this Thirty Years War is a form of universalist effort in the
mission of destroying the Habsburg dynasty hegemony through religious conflict with the
church.
More parties were involved in the Thirty Years' War, until finally some parties
realized and felt the negative impact on the European community itself. So that the congress
began to be used as a mediator, as a forum for meeting conflicting representatives. The
Congress had produced an agreement and was approved as the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648.
The Westphalia Treaty was a combination of two covenants that ended the Thirty Years' War,
namely the Münster agreement and also the Osnabrück agreement.
The agreement states that each kingdom becomes a country that has sovereignty over
certain regions or territories. There are two main points contained in the Westphalia
Agreement. The first point states that the Westphalia Treaty is expected to be able to bring
about peace between sovereign states, while the second asserts that everything that happened
before and during the war must be forgotten immediately.
In addition to the end of the thirty years' war between Protestants and Catholics, the
Westphalia Agreement also officially recognized the Dutch and the Swiss Confederation. The
Westphalia agreement involves the Holy Roman Emperor Ferdinand II and the Kingdom
from Spain, France, Sweden, the Netherlands and a number of rulers of other regions in
Europe. Besides ending the Thirty Years' war in Europe, the Westphalia Treaty also affirmed
changes in the world political map.
In addition, this agreement also ended efforts to uphold the Holy Roman empire
which had had a strong influence on countries in the world, especially in Europe. Relations
between countries are released from the issue of church relations and are based on the
national interests of these countries. Previously the church had power over inter-state
relations and the Westphalia Treaty ended it all. The independence of the Netherlands,
Switzerland and small countries in Germany was also recognized in the Westphalia
agreement.
The Westphalia Agreement is the starting point for the development of the science of
International Relations. This agreement gave birth to the importance of a country's
sovereignty. Sovereignty is one of the factors that must be owned by a nation state. In an
article written by David A. Lake about the new sovereignty in international relations, it is
clear that authority has two different points of view. The first point of view explains that
sovereignty is seen as an authority relationship which is marked by the presence of a leader of
a country or a president who has the legitimacy of the people to become the leader of the
country. Whatever the president orders, all people must obey it.
As an authority relationship, sovereignty can also be seen from internal aspects and
external aspects. In the internal aspect, sovereignty may currently be led by a head of
government who is seen as a person who will fight to defend the claims of other countries.
internal sovereignty is usually seen as a prerequisite for the recognition of the international
community. Whereas externally also sovereignty is needed recognition from other countries.
At least with the recognition of other countries, it will be used as a sign that a country is free
from the interests of other countries.
Then the second point of view, sovereignty is also characterized as an authority that
includes orders not to force the people. Although claims are explained by leaders in the
corridors of truth such as about tradition, popular support and others. Except those related to
moral or scientific. Basically an authority is not absolute, because it depends on the size of
the people's trust in the president. A leader who has authority does not mean that his orders
will continue to be followed by his people. At one time the people could turn out to be
opponents of orders issued by a leader.
In addition to sovereignty, the Westphalia Agreement also highlights the importance
of diplomacy in resolving inter-state problems. Previously the form of diplomacy was only
focused on alliances of several countries such as the power of the alliance formed by France,
Britain and Russia to block the threat of German danger in the 1914 decade. Then with the
changing international system and international political order, diplomacy was no longer an
instrument used by a group the state to counteract the strength of its competitors but
diplomacy is used often used by all countries. The formation of the League of Nations marks
a shift in the term diplomacy from old diplomacy to new diplomacy.
New diplomacy is more upholding the value of cooperation and mutual respect for
inter-state sovereignty. Although the League of Nations is considered to have failed in
bridging international peace. However, at least the pattern of new diplomacy is still very
relevant to date. The existence of the United Nations (UN) is seen as a complement to the
League of Nations which this international organization is more binding on its member states
and more effective in the realization of international peace.