Previously Borders were becoming less of significant issue in Europe, since the European Union was established back in 1957 with six original member’s states which now include nineteen more in this economic and political union centralised in Brussels. The ability of free movement of EU citizens between member states plus the easy transfer of goods to trade in 27 economies with lower taxation are obvious incentives to join, however with the decision making coming from one centralised location by imposing polices that have not been produced and approved by individual states means the ability of those individual representatives have a tougher time in truly representing the interest of their people, this would be more challenging for minority members to get a equal say so as more established members. By trying to get rid of these barriers contributed unintentionally to internal divisions, resulting in stronger claim of peripheral borders. Events such as the ones which occurred in the Arab world have contributed to an already tense situation with patrols in the Mediterranean built up now titling Europe Fortress Europe. Only the India- Pakistan, the Senkaku Islands conflict and Cambodia-Thailand probably the most blatant incidences of the frequent significance of borders.
The contrast effects globalisation can have on two different nation states, the tiny Mediterranean state of Monaco smallest country in the world after Vatican City to Ethiopia 27th largest country in the are complete polar opposites. Monaco being is a popular resort, attracting tourists to its casino and pleasant climate. ‘The principality also is a major banking center and has successfully sought to diversify into services and small, high-value-added, non-polluting industries’. So will argue
Ethiopia's economy on the reliant on agricultural employing eighty five percent of its workforce which suffers from poor farming practices and regular occurring droughts which is made worst their borders is being compromised by the participation in transnational agency by the effects of the enhanced green house effect. So the size of territory is insignificant Monaco knowing already that’s it’s at a disadvantage due to size with no recognised natural resources has specialized itself into a service based sectors employing 95% of its workforce which has a better compatibility with today’s globalized world. A viewpoint which you receive might come from someone with a more nationalistic that says that the significant of territory and borders are more important to today than at any other period in time, you may point out the significant GDP and wealth destructions difference between Monaco and Ethiopia as a clear winner in the discussion but Monaco role and the activities it plays in the global market place leave it quite vulnerable.
‘The dependence on its service sector in areas such as banking and tourism for its economic growth and stability has left it quite vulnerable to a downturn experienced in neighbouring France and other European economies which are the principality’s main trade partners. In 2009, Monaco’s GDP fell by 11.5% as the euro-zone crisis precipitated a sharp drop in tourism and retail activity and home sales. A modest recovery ensued in 2010 with GDP growth of 2.5%, but Monaco’s economic prospects remain clouded in uncertainty tied to future euro-zone growth. Weak economic growth also has deteriorated public finances as the principality recorded a budget deficit of 1.9% of GDP in 2010. Ethiopia may not have the same ability to generate has a power presence in human history with all three abrahamic faiths origins begin here so more integrated westernized Ethiopia would be a sad lost for mankind so it will come down to what you value.
To conclude on the whole, the sovereignty or the ability of nation states to uphold power and influence in its own recognised territory is deteriorating everyday in order to keep their economic stability and a competitive nature since it needs to open their markets due to globalisation. But the idea of the nation state has come under some questioning as of late some have actually questioned the nation state of ever being previously completely economically independent as false. It’s difficult to finger out an answer but I would say globalisation hasn’t weaken the influence of the nation state but condition under which their off power is executed.
http://www.economist.com/blogs/freeexchange/2009/01/the_incredible_shrinking_world (accessed 9th November).
Murray Campbell Petrie Campbell Petrie JURISDICTIONAL INTEGRATION: How Economic Globalisation is Changing State Sovereignty By Murray Campbell Petrie 2009
A thesishttp://researcharchive.vuw.ac.nz/bitstream/handle/10063/893/thesis.pdf?sequence=1(accused 12th November)
Will the Nation-State Survive Globalization? By Martin Wolf January/February 2001 (accused 13th November)
United States. Central intelligence Agency, 2007, Monaco (accused 10th November)
United States. Central intelligence Agency, 2007, Ethiopia (accused 10th November)
by
jonjopoo (student)
