Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Contemporary Global Governance
Contemporary Global Governance
GLOBAL GOVERNANCE
CHAPTER 5
References:
• It tackles about the discussion of various political flows, but the main focus
is on the development and functioning of global political structures. Starting
with more traditional structures such as the nation - state, the discussion
moves on to the development of regional and global political structures,
processes and of course contemporary global governance.
POLITICAL FLOWS
• The global flow of people, especially refugees and
illegal immigrants, poses a direct threat to the nation -
state and its ability to control its borders.
• The looming crises associated with dwindling oil and
water supplies threaten to lead to riots and perhaps
insurrections that could lead to the downfall of extant
governments.
• The inability of the nation - state to control economic
flows dominated by MNCs, as well as the current
economic and financial crisis that is sweeping the
world, is also posing a profound threat to the nation -
state (e.g. in Eastern Europe).
• Environmental problems of all sorts, especially those
related to global warming, are very likely to be
destabilizing politically.
• Borderless diseases, especially malaria,
TB, and AIDs in Africa, pose a danger to
political structures.
• War is the most obvious global flow
threatening the nation – states involved,
especially those on the losing side.
• Global inequalities, especially the
profound and growing North-South split,
threaten to pit poor nations against rich
nations.
• Terrorism is clearly regarded as a threat
by those nations against which it is
waged (hence the so - called “war on
terrorism” in the US).
GLOBAL PROBLEMS
Example
• In terms of the global economy, nation - states have become little more than bit
actors”(Ohmae, 1996: 12). It refers to the borderless global economy that nation -
states are unable to control.
• B. The decline of the nation - state is linked to technological and financial changes,
as well as to “ the accelerated integration of national economies into one single
global market economy ” (Strange 1996 : 13 – 14). While nation - states once
controlled markets, it is now the markets that often control the nation - states.
2. Other factors threatening the autonomy of the nation – state
• Many of these flows have been made possible by the development and continual refinement of
technologies of all sorts. The nation - state has become increasingly porous. While this seems
to be supported by a great deal of evidence, the fact is that no nation - state has ever been
able to control its borders completely (Bauman 1992: 57). Thus, it is not the porosity of the
nation - state that is new, but rather what is new is a dramatic increase in that porosity and
the kinds of flows that are capable of passing through national borders.
• International Human Rights
• Another threat to the autonomy of the nation - state is the growing interest in international human rights
(Elliott 2007: 343 – 63; Chatterjee 2008; Fredman 2008 ).
Human Rights
• defined as the “entitlement of individuals to life, security, and well -
being” (Turner 1993: 489 – 512; 2007 : 591), has emerged as a major
global political issue. It is argued that because these rights are
universal, the nation - state cannot abrogate them. As a result,
global human rights groups have claimed the right to be able to
have a say about what is done to people within (for example,
torture of terror suspects) and between, illegal trafficking in
humans [Farr 2005] sovereign states.
• Thus, in such a view, human rights are a global matter and not
exclusively a concern of the state (Levy and Sznaider 2006 :657 –
76). Furthermore, the implication is that the international
community can and should intervene when a state violates human
rights or when a violation occurs within a state border and the state
does not take adequate action to deal with the violation.
Universal Declaration of Human Rights
For example, according to Article 13:
• (1) Everyone has the right to freedom of movement and residence within
the borders of each State.
• (2) Everyone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to
return to his country.
• It is clear in this Declaration and its Articles is that human rights take
precedence over the nation - state and that the UN is seeking to exert control
over the state, at least on these issues.
UNITED NATIONS
• The United Nations (UN), in spite of its myriad problems, is the premier
global organization in the realm of politics.
ROLES AND FUNCTIONS of the UNITED
NATIONs
• UN stands in opposition, at least in general, to those who argue that globalization
has brought about, or is bringing about, the demise of the (nation - )state. The UN
is a global setting in which nation - states meet and deliberate.
However, the UN is not merely a setting in which nation - states meet; it is also an
independent actor.
• A turning point in the military role of the UN was the 1991 authorization by the Security
Council of the use of force todeal with Iraq ’ s invasion of Kuwait. Throughout the 1990s the UN
engaged in a wide variety of actions that were not anticipated by its founders and which had
been regarded previously as the province of states. These included:
• In addition, they are not democratic, often keep their agendas secret, and are not accountable to anyone other than their members.
• They are elitist (many involve better - off and well - educated people from the North) – that is, undemocratic – organizations that seek to impose
inappropriate universal plans on local organizations and settings.
• Thus, they have the potential to be “loose cannons” on the global stage.
• They are seen as annoying busybodies that are forever putting their noses in the business of others (Thomas 2007: 84 – 102).
• They often pander to public opinion and posture for the media both to attract attention to their issues and to maintain or expand their power and
membership.
• As a result, they may distort the magnitude of certain problems (e.g. overestimating the effects, and misjudging the causes, of an oil spill) in order
to advance their cause and interests.
• Their focus on one issue may adversely affect the interest in, and ability to deal with, many
other important issues.
• The nature of the focus, and indeed the very creation, of an INGO may be a function of its
ability to attract attention and to raise funds. As a result, other worthy, if not more worthy,
issues (e.g. soil erosion, especially in Africa) may fail to attract much, if any, attention, and
interest.
• In some cases, well - meaning INGOs conflict with one another, such as those wishing to
end certain practices (e.g. logging) versus those that see those practices as solutions (e.g.
logging producing wood as a sustainable resource that is preferable to fossil fuels).
• The North’ s control over INGOs has actually increased, leading to questions about their
relevance to the concerns of the South.
• However, perhaps the strongest criticism of INGOs is that they “seem to have helped
accelerate further state withdrawal from social provision” (Harvey 2006 :52). In that sense
they can be seen as neo - liberalism’ s “Trojan horses, ” furthering its agenda while seeming
to operate against some of its worst abuses.
Intergovernmental Organizations (IGOs)