Governments and Citizens in a Globally Interconnected World

INTRODUCTION:

“Fragmegration” (James Rosenau):

States now face new kinds of pressures, with advances toward supranational integration
on the one hand and local fragmentation (division) on the other.

The United Nations (UN) had 5 founding members after the end of World War II in
1945. By the end of 2012, the United Nations had 193 member-states. Many of these states
emerged as a result of decolonization in the 1950s and 1960s and the breakup of the Soviet
Union in 1991.

Palestine gained recognition in November 2012 as a ‘non-member observer state’ of the

UN (a status also held by the Vatican).

The Republic of China (Taiwan), completely lost its UN membership and its
permanent seat on the Security Council in 1971, when PROC (which took over mainland China
in 1949) replaced Taiwan as China's representative in the United Nations. Taiwan has been
trying without success for years to be granted ‘non-member observer‘standing within the UN.

Today nations are viewed as socially constructed political communities that hold
together citizens across many kinds of cross-cutting identities: ethnicity, language, religion, and
so forth.

The terms ‘nation’ and ‘state’ are often used interchangeably in everyday political
speech and media commentary.

The following are the five major topics that illustrate ongoing changes in the roles
of states and the relationships between states and citizens on:

a. Economic Interdependence;

b. Economic and Political Integration;

c. International Law and Universal Norms;

d. Transnational Advocacy Networks; and

e. New Communication Platforms

A. The State in a World of Economic Interdependence:

Globalization is imposing a forced choice upon states: either conform to free-market

principles or run the risk of being left behind.

“Golden Straitjacket” (Thomas Friedman):

 States are now forced into policies that suit the preferences of investment houses and
corporate executives (The “Electronic Herd”) who move money and resources into countries
favored as adaptable to the demands of international business; and withdraw investment from
countries that are deemed uncompetitive.

This herd is beginning to replace governments as the primary source of capital for both
companies and countries to grow. Economies of countries become more dependent on the
Electronic Herd for growth capital.

National leaders such as Ronald Reagan (USA) and Margaret Thatcher (UK)
pursued the laissez-faire economics of Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman. After the fall of
Soviet communism, laissez-faire economics created the conditions for deregulation,
privatization and free trade to spread around the world.

Countries that took advantage of global markets to specialize and speed their growth:

Under import substitution, Mexico failed to create a viable car industry, but now it took
by storm the global market for auto parts.

Farmers in Argentina and New Zealand made fortunes selling winter fruits and
vegetables to Northern Hemisphere consumers.

Companies in Thailand and Turkey, previously constrained by the difficulty of

borrowing at home, now had access to cheap and plentiful foreign finance.

Neoliberals insist that if poor countries follow their advice about free and open markets,
they will soon be members of the first world club.

The reality:

To make sure that the rich countries maintain control of the third world's wealth and raw
materials and have access to their cheap labor.

South Korea and Japan rejected American ideas about specializing only in what they
do best and trading for the rest.

They concentrated on developing world class capabilities by protecting and subsidizing

new and infant industries like steel, consumer electronics, and semiconductors.

The most successful Korean companies are steel maker POSCO (founded with
government investment) and Samsung (giant family dominated conglomerates with extensive
special relationships with the government).

The Critiques of Globalization (Arguments):

1. States to take the power to determine economic, social and environmental objectives for
national development and the capacity to ensure that transnational corporations meet
these;
2. To set the stage for ‘new forms of participatory democracy whereby citizens become
effectively involved in international policymaking on trade, investment and finance;

3. Support voluntary codes of conduct and higher standards for the treatment of workers
and the local communities in which global conglomerates do business.

B. Economic and Political Integration: (The Case of the European Union)

After WWII, the EU evolved from the European Coal and Steel Community.
Today, EU has 28 member-states (Croatia as the 28th member-state in July 2013). It
practices a single currency and monetary system (among 17 member-states) and a
supranational European Parliament with growing legislative powers alongside the
Council of Ministers, the EU legislative institution comprised of official representatives
from national governments.

Signing of the Maastricht Treaty (1992). A common citizenship that accords citizens of
the member-states the rights to live, work, vote and even run for office in European
parliamentary elections outside one's native member-state.

 In 2012, with plans for “fiscal union” (monetary union) among the 17
member-states of the Eurozone, this means the budgets of the Eurozone
countries will be subject to approval by the European Commission.
 In 2013, the European Parliament also passed legislation to implement
closer integration and supervision of the banking sector.

The European Court of Justice (ECJ). It functioned since 1952 as the top dispute
resolution body for the EU and its predecessors, has set forth provisions such as ‘direct
effect’ and ‘supremacy’.

 Supremacy. Means that EU laws take primacy over national laws when
the two sets of laws come into conflict.
 Direct Effect. Means that member-states are obligated to follow EU laws.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). It is a part of The Council of Europe
which upholds the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), now signed by all 28
of its member-states.

 Any individual, group of individuals, or civil society organization can file

ECHR cases against a member-state, and states can also initiate cases
against each other.
 The court has issued decisions in areas such as freedom of expression,
freedom of religion, protection from discrimination, and the right to a fair
trial.

The European Court of Human Rights (ECHR). It is a part of The Council of Europe
which upholds the European Convention of Human Rights (ECHR), now signed by all 28
of its member-states.
  Any individual, group of individuals, or civil society organization can file
ECHR cases against a member-state, and states can also initiate cases
against each other.
 The court has issued decisions in areas such as freedom of expression,
freedom of religion, protection from discrimination, and the right to a fair
trial.
 UN has never surpassed the states system and instead operates mainly
as a forum for states to air their differences and try to resolve them.
 The UN Security Council awards veto power to each of the five countries
that won the Second World War, as well as the General Assembly's
relative lack of power and its state-based configuration.
 The Cold War stalemate between the United States and the Soviet Union
made it difficult for the Security Council to reach collective decisions.
 The US-led invasion of Iraq in 2003 without the sanction of the Security
Council sent a message that states invading other countries unilaterally
and in contravention of the UN Charter would face no meaningful
consequences of their actions beyond criticism and resentment.
 The UN has also been unable to prevent many atrocities and genocides
around the world during its history.
 UN formed ad hoc tribunals that eventually convicted numerous
individuals from Rwanda and the former Yugoslavia of war crimes.
 Permanent establishment in 2002 of the International Criminal Court
(ICC), with its role in prosecuting individuals accused of genocide and
other crimes against humanity.
 However, China, India, and the United States are not among the 122
countries that as of January 2014 had ratified the court's founding treaty,

The Rome Statute.

 The Security Council agreed to follow the doctrine of “Responsibility To

Protect” (R2P) when it authorized in early 2011 a ‘no-fly zone’, an arms
embargo, and ultimately the use of force in Libya's civil war to protect
civilians from impending government attacks and gave revolutionary
forces a better chance at displacing the regime of Moammar Gaddafi.
 The R2P doctrine signals a growing willingness on the part of states to
intervene in the affairs of regimes which are unable to protect their own
people.
 The North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO), with Britain, France and the United
States taking the lead, intervened in Libya. The Libyan revolution ousted Gaddafi with
the NATO air strikes.
o In Syria, Bashar Hafez al-Assad remained in power at the start of 2014 even
though his government and military forces had committed far worse atrocities
against thousands of fighters and protesters, including a chemical weapons
attack in August 2013 that killed an estimated 1,400 civilians.
 o After U.S. President Barack Obama threatened to launch limited military strikes
against Syria, the Syrian government promised in an agreement worked out by
the UN for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons and the United Nations Security
Council to destroy its stockpiles of chemical weapons.

o Despite the statist orientation of R2P, it does signal an important shift: the
protection of human beings which takes higher priority than the protection of any
particular government from external intervention.
o Some global surveillance operations are conducted by the United States National
Security Agency (US NSA) and its government and business partners around the
world, from interceptions of e-mail messages to the tracking of mobile phones
which signify government intrusions into private affairs.
o Passport control officers in many countries now commonly take mandatory
photographs and collect fingerprints of everyone passing through checkpoints.
Many countries have also recently been adding “biometric authentication”
components into the issuing of passports and visas.
States now compete not only for economic advantage but also for moral credibility, and
this is particularly evident in the ways that many civil society organizations and think
tanks now rank states and release annual indexes.

1. Transparency International’s “Corruption Perceptions Index”

2. Freedom House’s “Freedom in the World Index” of political rights and civil liberties

3. The “Democracy Index” published by The Economist Intelligence Unit

4. The “Press Freedom Index” compiled by Reporters Without Borders

5. The “Failed States Index” from Foreign Policy Magazine and The Fund for Peace

6. The “Better Life Index” launched in 2011 by the Organization for Economic Co-operation
and Development (OECD)

-All have an impact on a country's competitiveness and “soft power.”

D. States as Targets: The Rise of Transnational Activism

Transnational activism has deep roots that go back to 19th century campaigns
against slavery; against foot-binding practices in China; and for women's voting rights.

“Boomerang Pattern of Influence”

It is when domestic civil society organizations (CSOs) join forces with compatible
advocacy groups overseas that can pressure the national governments in question.
  The Norwegian Nobel Peace Prize Committee called attention to the
rising trend of Internet activism by awarding the Peace Prize to the
International Campaign to Ban Landmines and its coordinator.
 The global advocacy campaign to ban landmines as a weapon of war
specifically targeted states and urged them to sign the Ottawa Treaty that
now has 160 countries on board.
 However, similar to the International Criminal Court, China, Russia, and
the United States have not signed.

The Sustained Global Citizens Campaign:

Also called as the Global Justice Movement which called for alternatives to
neoliberal economic globalization. Many scholars and activists trace the contemporary
origins of this movement to the transnational campaign launched in 1994 in Chiapas,
Mexico, by the Zapatista Army of National Liberation as a reaction to the North American
Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA).

Alter-Globalization Movement (1999)

This was a reaction to the meeting of the World Trade Organization (WTO) in
Seattle. The movement was framed as an “anti-globalization” movement rather than for
an alternative model of globalization more attentive to human rights, participatory
democracy, local control, sustainability and cultural diversity.

This led people to think of themselves as ‘global citizens’ and to link this idea
substantially with concepts of awareness, responsibility, participation and cross-cultural
empathy.

The World Social Forum

Served as a reaction to the World Economic Forum with a culture of avoiding

hierarchy and centralized control, rather, promotes socially and environmentally
responsive alternatives over the dominance of the world's largest corporations and
national governments.

 The revolutions in Tunisia and Egypt in early 2011 showed how engaged
citizens could topple dictatorships.
 Protests in Myanmar (Burma) by cyber-activists eventually pushed the
government there to open up partially.
 In China, citizens are more connected and vocal than before, even if the
government is still working to manipulate public opinion and crush
dissent.
 Facebook, Twitter and their localized counterparts around the world now
figure heavily in much of the new scholarship in transnational advocacy
movements.

E. Communication Networks, New Media and the State

 Technological advances have also made it easier for authoritarian states from
Russia to Saudi Arabia to Myanmar to silence bloggers using software programs that
filter Internet content and “denial-of-service”, making the targeted computers or web
servers temporarily unavailable.

 Censorship is expensive and could only be carried out by one party, the
government.
 Even the world's most isolated and repressive state, North Korea,
maintains websites trumpeting their national leaders and churning out
colorful news releases.
 Ambassadors from many countries now take “public diplomacy” literally
and maintain Facebook groups, Twitter feeds, and dual blog postings
written in both the language of the country they represent and the
language of the country where they are serving.
 And across all levels of government, interactive “e- government” sites
have spread worldwide in tandem with constitutional democracies;
citizens can communicate back and forth with government officials online
not only to gain information about government policies and initiatives but
to articulate their concerns.

No longer is the American vanguard of CNN a hegemonic presence:

BBC World (United Kingdom), Al Jazeera English (Qatar), Al Arabiya (Saudi

Arabia), France 24, Russia Today, CCTV (China), NHK World (Japan) are among the
most visible players in this growing industry;

Wikipedia and WikiLeaks obviously fall into a similar category of information

sharing by global citizens for global citizens.

o Television news played a pivotal role during the dismantling of the Berlin
Wall in 1989.
o Likewise, Al Jazeera played a similar role in the Arab Spring Revolutions,
broadcasting videos filmed by protesters with their mobile phones and
forwarded via e-mail to their studios.
o Al Jazeera tends to go easy on the Emir of Qatar, while Russia Today
features a delicate but Putinesque view of the world.
o In this new world of state-run broadcasting, the lines between journalism
and propaganda are often blurred and concealed; and also defended, if
not legitimized, by the government.

REFERENCE:

Schattle, Hans (2014). Governments and citizens in a globally interconnected world of

states. In M. B. Steger, P. Battersby, & J. M. Siracusa (Eds.), The SAGE

handbook of globalization (pp. 105-122). London: SAGE Publications Ltd.