Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
The deep integration of hyper-globalization conflicts with and threatens the sovereignty of the nation state. Rodrik concludes that hyper-globalization is globalization that has gone too far. He rejects the solution of using intergovernmental organizations as a way to provide governance, because by definition that requires nation states to give ...
The Peace of Westphalia in 1648 is commonly considered to have established territorial integrity as a cornerstone of sovereignty, embodied in the concept of Westphalian sovereignty, but even this did not necessarily reflect any absolute right to particular territory. [13] Even after Westphalia, territorial exchange remained common between states.
Collective security is arrangement between states in which in the institution accepts that an attack on one state is the concern of all and merits a collective response to threats by all. [1] Collective security was a key principle underpinning the League of Nations and the United Nations. [ 1 ]
Walt argues that the more other states view an emerging power as possessing those qualities, the more likely they are to view it as a threat and balance against it. The balance of threat theory modified realism (as well as the neorealism of Kenneth Waltz) by separating power from threat. In the balance of power theory, which had previously ...
Globalization can be partly responsible for the current global economic crisis. Case studies of Thailand and the Arab nations' view of globalization show that globalization is a threat to culture and religion, and it harms indigenous people groups while multinational corporations profit from it.
The Westphalian system, also known as Westphalian sovereignty, is a principle in international law that each state has exclusive sovereignty over its territory.The principle developed in Europe after the Peace of Westphalia in 1648, based on the state theory of Jean Bodin and the natural law teachings of Hugo Grotius.
In the post-World War II period, states sacrificed globalization while embracing democracy at home and national autonomy. [7] The trilemma suggests that the backlash against globalization in the last few decades is rooted in a desire to reclaim democracy and national autonomy, even if it undermines economic integration. [7]
Robert Jervis gives the example of Germany and Britain before World War I. "Much of the behaviour in this period was the product of technology and beliefs that magnified the security dilemma". In that example, strategists believed that offense would be more advantageous than defense, but that ultimately turned out to not be the case.