PIDOM KOULAGNA ÉTIENNE

Student number : 21910691

CYPRUS INTERNATIONAL UNIVERSITY

FACULTY OF ECONOMICS AND ADMINISTRATIVE SCIENCES
INTERNATIONAL RELATIONS DEPARTMENT
Ph. D. PROGRAM

INRE602
FOREIGN POLICY ANALYSIS
2021-2022 Fall Semester
Short Paper Question

 Has the process of globalization made study of foreign policy irrelevant? Discuss.

ABSTRACT

Foreign policy, long accustomed to the evolution of the interstate environment, is now
undergoing major changes on the international scene. Indeed, it finds itself obliged to evolve
in a globalization where new actors appear who profoundly modify the traditional
configuration which was granted to it by realists as being the sole designer of diplomatic
action on the international scene (Raoul Delcorde, 2019). . These transformations not only
influence the number and qualities of actors who now orient or develop it, but also its
application, goals and objects. Faced with the issue of the place of foreign policy in this
changing new world, it should be noted that the approaches differ depending on the many
reflections that were carried out at the end of the cold war marked by the triumph of the
liberal ideological in the world.

Keywords: Foreign policy, globalization, international scene

 INTRODUCTION

If globalization today results in a sort of questioning of the borders defining the State and
whose defense of integrity is the first element of its foreign policy, the phenomenon does not
mean the disappearance of the entities. states. On the other hand, it gives a meaning to the
new situation on the international scene which has seen the appearance of new non-state
actors, who seem to occupy more and more a preponderant place in the political game, and
who redistribute the cards in the new functioning of the government. international system
(Moisi, 2000). These actors through globalization bring a new approach based on a firm need
to strengthen multilateral consultation by moving away from unilateral decision-making,
according to realists within the remit of states through their foreign policies. Indeed, the
globalist approach places a strong emphasis on the term of governance which reconciles
private and public actors in the development of policies on the international scene, giving in
the same momentum a very limited room for maneuver to the emancipation of State
sovereignty (Raoul Delcorde, 20019). A logic that increasingly limits the importance of the
study of foreign policy as a trademark of states, which applies it to defend their national
interests on the international stage. In this new framework of analysis, the state's foreign
policy appears less and less visible in the face of global security or even community interests.
This is to say quite simply that the conduct of foreign affairs is much more marked by a game
of interdependence specific to liberal and transnational logics (Claude Roosens, 1999). The
existence of the state actor therefore finds itself called into question by the dynamics of
transnational flows and the limits of defined policies. Within the framework of the European
Union, the constitution of a set of common programs between different members now appears
to be a limitation to be taken into consideration of the classic conception of foreign policy as
being the sole responsibility of the state. In projecting his foreign power the "mighty
Leviathan" can be challenged by the regionalization embodied by supranational authority.
State-defined foreign policy would therefore no longer be seen as the most legitimate political
form to intervene (Amitav Acharya, 2001). Therefore, should the questioning of the State's
inadequacy in the process of globalization be seen as a sign of the uselessness of the study of
its foreign policy? The answer to this question requires in the analysis a reading of the
reduction in the scope of the foreign policy of the State in the process of globalization (I), but
also to establish another analytical grid demonstrating the importance of the foreign policy of
the State in certain fields on the international scene (II).

I-THE WEAKNESS OF THE STATE'S FOREIGN POLICY IN A GLOBALIZATION

PROCESS.

If in the past the State played a fundamental or even a complete role on the international scene
due to its status as Sovereign. It must be said that the process of globalization that began in
the 1980s with market economies and the opening of borders saw the emergence of a
multitude of actors with whom the state must deal today (Zaki Laïdi, 2004). First of all, it is
important to remember that the globalization of economic flows no longer allows state
governments to have traditional intervention capacities, because the latter's room for
maneuver is severely limited by the appearance of other actors. (multinational firms, global
regulatory banks ... (A), and it is also in this same debate interesting to see the great
importance that international organizations play today in decision-making, making more and
more a strong obstruction to traditional foreign policies of States It is the evolution of the
international system towards a strengthening of common policies to the detriment of the
unilateralism which defined each State on the international scene (B).

A-THE LESS STRONG STATE FOREIGN POLICY ONLY HAS ONLY TO ACT IN A
GLOBAL ECONOMY.

The study of foreign policy is all the more lacking in relevance in the current new global
situation, but it may be necessary to analyze much more from an angle more opposed to the
classic perception which attributed to it a symbolic value specific to the States. sovereign.
Indeed, globalization gives a more negative coloring of the sovereignty of the States as
present by the realists. Because it should be noted that the concept of state sovereignty has its
origins since 1648 with the famous Treaty of Westphalia and has two levels of analysis of
sovereignty (Christian Chavagneux, 1999). On the one hand, it involves the internal autonomy
of the state, characterized by its right not to recognize other authorities above it. On the other
hand, there is the external dimension referring to its recognition by others as an independent
actor, able to act voluntarily on the international scene through its foreign policy. It is clear
that the latter seems more and more obsolete with the appearance of globalization which
offers other levels of analysis namely, international cooperation, interdependence, economic
and transnational flows, which do not allow plus a great maneuver of action by the state's
foreign policy on the international scene (Sassens, 1995).

If for many thinkers, globalization implies the economic dimension, strongly driven by
capital, and also by investments supporting a certain transnational production as financial
flows. It must be said that globalization goes beyond the simple economic dimension. It
touches on a multitude of fields which range from political and economic aspects to socio-
cultural issues including the environment. This enlarged perspective of globalization simply
shows that now on the international scene exists a powerful international order in which the
foreign policy of the State alone no longer has a great weight in the action (Ohmae. K, 1995)
Globalization thus becomes the birth of an economic system global in which the state no
longer really has a real influence on decisions, including the most powerful states. A strong
extension of networks of transnational links and communication over which States really no
longer have a certain control, the proliferation of international organizations play an
increasingly important role in the development of States policies and influence more the
behavior of States on the international scene (David Held, 2002). Indeed, whether they are
today of a communicational nature with the appearance of social networks, migrations or
financial flows, the policies developed by States encounter enormous difficulties in acting in
complete autonomy, as can be seen by example today with the digital giants (GAFAM,
BATX) which seem more and more to become super states by controlling or considerably
reducing the sovereignty of states through “big data” for example.

B-GRADUAL LIMITATION OF STATE ACTION ON THE INTERNATIONAL SCENE

BY THE APPEARANCE OF OTHER LEVELS OF DECISIONS.

The liberalization of financial flows and the establishment of regional and sub-regional
groupings are now shaping new decision-making poles other than those of states in the past
(Campanella. M.L, 1993). These new institutional actors are forcing states to implement
appropriate policies. It is no longer the States which decide how to conduct a policy, for
example in international finance. It is these supranational institutions that develop policies
deemed benevolent, which they often impose on member states. State policy therefore no
longer finds a certain credible place in this great whole (Erik Helleiner, 1995). We remember
the famous reduction in the amounts of European sovereign debt vis-à-vis the PIGS countries
(Portugal, Italy, Greece and Spain) or the austerity policy imposed on Greece by the European
Union during the crisis. economic and financial year 2008. All these facts demonstrate how
power is no longer within the reach of States. The economic policies developed by the States
are quite simply subordinated by international bodies which play the role of regulating the
economy and international finance

Today, it should be said that it is difficult to claim that the economic policies of the state are
exempt from interventionism by these international economic bodies or even these regional
groupings (Moisi, 2000). The case of African countries seems very edifying in more ways
than one. Indeed, since the economic crisis that affected most of the States of the world in the
1990s, African countries have no longer really remained masters of the multi-sectoral policies
of the States. Placed under structural adjustment programs , the management and organization
of the economic and functional structures of the State, whether internally or externally, are
defined by international economic bodies (World Bank, International Monetary Fund). All
these dimensions show how the State no longer has sufficient traditional tools of power that
allowed it to act freely on the international scene (Zaki Laïdi, 2004).

We must also add the role that international organizations play in the behavior of States on the
international scene. No longer really having a great power to impose its sovereign vision
internally, as well as externally, the behavior of certain States is often conditioned by the
application of certain principles (respect for human rights, democracy, environmental issues
…) By certain institutions (European Union, World Bank, African Union…) in return for
financial assistance or the use of restrictive means vis-à-vis these States, this is the case for
example of economic sanctions , the embargo.

II-FOREIGN POLICY CONSERVES SOME LEVEL OF MANEUVER IN ESSENTIAL

AREAS AND A FUNDAMENTAL ROLE IN GLOBALIZATION.

If the international system is not only a place where only sovereign States interacted with the
appearance of new actors who play a very important role on the international scene, the fact
remains that States, through their foreign policies, play a role. still the privileged role in this
new world order on several questions (A). In addition, globalization should be seen as a
process that originated from the state, and whose action is the result of state policy (B).

A-THE PREDOMINANCE OF STATES FOREIGN POLICIES IN THE GLOBALIZATION

PROCESS
While globalization has considerably reduced state sovereignty, it is important to point out
that state foreign policy still retains its fundamental role. In some areas, despite the process of
regional or institutional groupings in which states find themselves, they retain a certain almost
absolute sovereignty (Raul Delcorde, 2019). This is the case, for example, in areas related to
taxation, security at certain levels and issues related to state diplomacy. It is in this sense that
Pierre de SENARCLENS affirmed that "the role of the State in certain areas of society has
continued to grow and that in all regions of the world" (Pierre Senarclens, 1998). One can
rightly take an example within the European Union, which has struggled until now to
constitute a real Union for the defence of security or even a Community foreign policy, quite
simply because its member states, despite the efforts to cede part of their sovereignty to
supranational bodies, consider questions of security and diplomacy as two sensitive areas,
which only the state must manage.

Nowadays, we can oppose the realistic perception that prevailed during the Cold War, while
trying to give firm importance to the classical approaches of Thomas Hobbes or Machiavelli
of the international system (Dominique Moisi, 2000). This perception finds a certain
explanation in the current world insofar as, due to the heterogeneity of the international
system and the precariousness of its regulatory systems, foreign policies become the most
essential framework of expression for States to manifest and create conflicts of interests and
values, command relationships in interactions between states (Claude Roosens, 1995). For
even if globalization has been able to facilitate the establishment of a common cooperation
framework which increasingly limits the scope of State policy on the international scene, the
fact remains that The norms and procedures of this international law remain very fragile, as
there really is no authority capable of enforcing or imposing sanctions in the event of a
violation. Only the good faith of the State can lead it to act in accordance with the principles
conveyed by international institutions (Pierre Senarclens, 1998). The case of the United States
and the United Kingdom going to war against Iraq against the consent of the United Nations
is tangible proof of the superior authority of state policies on the international stage. In this
current process of globalization, it must nevertheless be pointed out that these pre-existing
"anarchy" conditions give States a great opportunity to make legal commitments
internationally, without having to comply with them.

B-FOREIGN POLICY AS A BASE FOR CREATION AND EVOLUTION OF THE

GLOBALIZATION PROCESS.
While the different modes of intervention of the foreign policy of the State have certainly
changed during these last decades, it should be specified that the decisive role of the States in
the formulation of the policies which led to the economies to internationalize remains The
most important. Indeed, the phenomenon of globalization driven by the liberalization of trade
was above all a will of the political visions of developed States. The exponential increase in
the volume of world trade was undoubtedly made possible by the policies developed by states
which had a certain interest in its genuinely developing international trade (Amitav Acharya,
2001). It is indeed in this approach that the political power of the States imposed an approach
of the world economy. In this logic, States appear as the main holders of political authority
and providers of the rules and procedures which give a certain legitimacy to the various
international institutional mechanisms to generate the cohesion of societies and to facilitate
the channels necessary for production, and distribution services (Claude Roosens, 1995)
According to neofunctionalists, international organizations or even actors are born from the
desire of States to cede part of their sovereignty to supranational bodies, which in return have
the role of pursuing the interests common to these States. This reminds us that the process of
globalization, which has been materialized by the entry of new actors other than the State,
exists with the sole aim of pursuing the interests or policies of States on a larger scale. (Raoul
Delcorde , 2019). We cannot therefore see in globalization a weakening of state action on the
international scene, but rather a manifestation of state authority or state policy through a
different channel of approach. traditional he used. WTO negotiations and free trade
agreements are means set up by states to better regulate their economies.

The analysis of the international economic policy framework highlights and puts forward
theoretical approaches resulting from realism in a certain dimension, because it proposes the
dialectic between the logics of power of power in one measure and the dynamics of the
markets of the other (Dominique Moisi , 2000). She specifies that the various stages of
globalization which led to the establishment of the European Union, for example, were the
result of the cohesion of political visions assumed by states and governments.

CONCLUSION

The analysis of the place of the study of foreign policy in the process of globalization that
began in the 1980s is of capital interest to the extent that the problematic of the classic
perception of the sovereign state on the international scene divides several camps. in political
and academic circles. While it is true that with the onset of globalization, the card game has
been redistributed with the entry of other decision-making actors on the international scene,
increasingly putting back its place as a single actor, it does not The fact remains that he
remains the privileged actor on the international scene. For globalization is above all an
emanation of the political will of states to increase their interests on a global scale. Even if its
spectrum of action is no longer as visible as it was when it acted individually through its
diplomacy, the state continues to influence the development of the international system
through bilateral and multilateral cooperation.

BIBLIOGRAPHY

Zaki Laïdi, la grand perturbation, Flammarion, 2004

Sassens. S, ’’losing control: sovereignty in an age of globalization,’’ New York, Columbia

University, 1995

Senarclens Pierre, ’’Globalization-Sovereignty and Theories in International Relations,

Armand Colin, 1998

Dominique Moisi, ’’foreign policy’’, n ° 3-4, automne / hiver, 2000

Claude Roosens, ’’Foreign Policy in Search of Recognition’’, Studia diplomatique vol. 52, n
° 1/2, 1999

Amitav Acharya, ’’globalization and sovereignty: a reassessment of their link’’ revue

internationale de diplomatie comparée, vol. 8, 2001

K. Ohmae, the End of Nations States, New York, The free Press, 1995

Campanella. M.L, ’’The effects of globalization and turbulence on policy making process’’,
government and opposition, vol. 28 n ° 2, 1993
Erik Helleiner, ’’Explaining the globalization of financial markets: bringing States Back’’ in
Review international political economy, vol. 2 n °8 1995.

Christian Chavagneux, ’’la diplomatie économique: plus seulement une affaire de l’État’’,
pouvoir, 1999