S. KRASNER - 'RETHINKING THE SOVEREIGN STATE MODEL'

Peace of Westphalia - critical moment in the development of the modern international system: sovereign states, boundaries, exclusive authority
Westphalian sovereign state model - principles of autonomy, territory, mutual recognition and control: analytical assumption for neo-realism and neo-liberal institutionalism, benchmark for those who claim there is an erosion of sovereignty in the contemporary world
Westphalian model never actually been accurate for the entities regarded as states
Autonomous - free from intervention by external actors: only developed in the late C18
Independent rational actors - misleading because doesn't make clear that in many situations rulers have not been autonomous
Principle of autonomy has been violated in the name of many other norms: human rights, minority rights, democracy, communism, fiscal responsibility, international security
Mutual recognition - not always done to juridically independent territorial entities
Sovereign state model basic rules are widely understood but also frequently violated
SOVEREIGN STATE MODEL - system of political authority based on territory, mutual recognition, autonomy and control
TERRITORY - political authority is exercised over a defined geographic space
AUTONOMY - no external actor enjoys authority within the borders of the state
MUTUAL RECOGNITION - juridically independent territorial entities recognise each other as being competent to enter into contractual arrangements (treaties)
CONTROL - sovereign state has the authority to act and also effectively regulate movements across their borders and within them
Territorial violations: authority structures are not coterminous with geographic borders (EU - QMV, Andorra - France/Spain)
Autonomy violations: external actor able to exercise some authoritative control within the territory of a state (IMF conditionality)
Compromises of Westphalia - conventions, contracting, coercion and imposition
CONVENTIONS - rulers enter into agreements (human rights accord) with expectations of some gain, but their behaviour is not contingent on what other do
CONTRADICTING - rulers agree to violate the sovereignty of their own state contingent on other signatories honouring their part of the bargain
COERCION - rulers of stronger states make weaker ones worse off by making credible threats which undermined the bargaining position of the weaker state
IMPOSITION - target is so weak that it has no option but to comply with the preferences of the stronger
Every major peace treaty since 1648 Westphalian has violated the sovereign state model
Compromising the sovereign state model is available because there is no authority structure to prevent it (that would in turn take away sovereignty): nothing can prevent rulers from transgressing against the autonomy of other states or recognising entities that are not juridically autonomous (realist)
Actors say one thing and do another - actors endorse norms that can be mutually inconsistent (universal human rights, non-intervention), and logic of consequence usually trumps logic of appropriateness (organised hypocrisy)
Problem with uniting principles and actions, norms embraced by local and foreign actors do not always coincide
FOUR TYPES OF SOVEREIGNTY:

Interdependence sovereignty - ability of state to control movement across their borders. Is this being eroded by globalisation through advancement in technology which is dramatically reducing the costs of communication and transportations. States cannot regulate trans-border movements of goods, capital, people, ideas or disease vectors. Cannot control the internet. Cannot guarantee health. Problem of control, globalisation has eroded state ability to manage their borders
Domestic sovereignty - authority structures within states and the ability of these structures to effectively regulate behaviour. Bodin and Hobbes: religious wars destroying stability of their own politics, wanted a stable system of authority that would be acknowledged at legitimate by all members regardless of religion. Authority structures taken many different forms (monarchies, democracies, federal systems). Acceptance or recognition of a given authority is one aspect of domestic sovereignty, the other is the level of control that officials can actually exercise. Varied dramatically. Legitimate and effective authority structure. Loss of interdependence sovereignty (matter of control) implies loss of domestic sovereignty
Vattelian sovereignty - exclusion of external sources of authority both de jure and de facto. Notion that states could do as they pleased within their own borders had almost nothing to do with the Peace of Westphalia. Principle that rulers should not intervene in or judge domestic affairs in other states was introduced in late C18
International legal sovereignty - mutual recognition. Basic rule of international legal sovereignty is that recognition is accorded to juridically independent territorial entities which are capable of entering into voluntary contractual agreements. States in the international system are free and equal. Consistent with any agreement provided that the state is not coerced.

Difficult for states to comply with all branches of sovereignty - EG: Somalia 1990s, enjoyed international legal sovereignty and mutual recognition but did not have vattelian sovereignty (failed state)
Sovereignty is a 'basket of principles/goods' that do not necessarily go together

	Erstellt von Annie May Jackson vor fast 9 Jahre

Extra reading: Theories of the state