| Summary: | The discipline of international relations employs two
concepts - sovereignty and interdependence - as fundamental to
understanding the current international system. The meaning of
both sovereignty and interdependence, and their relation to each
other, however, causes considerable confusion among scholars and
other observers. An international system based on the
sovereignty of its actors seems incompatible with the growth of
international interdependencies. In particular, some observers
argue that sovereignty is ‘modified’ or ‘undermined’ by the
existence of international environmental interdependence, or that
sovereignty is a barrier to the effective management of this
interdependence. The suggested solution is to move to a postsovereign
international governing arrangement.
In international relations, sovereignty may be best
understood as constitutional independence, the fundamental
criterion required for a territorially based entity (a state) to
become a member in the international community. That is, to be
considered sovereign, a state’s constitution must not be part of
a larger constitutional arrangement. Sovereignty should not be
confused with autonomy, or freedom of action in the international
system. While states are extremely protective of their
sovereignty, both in rhetoric and in practice, they are willing
to sacrifice various measures of autonomy through binding
international agreements (such as the Montreal Protocol) to
achieve goals which are important to them, or are considered
greater global goals (such as environmental protection), which
could not be achieved by unilateral action. The proposition that the sovereignty of the state is
undermined or modified by international environmental
interdependence, or is a barrier to the effective management of
that interdependence, suffers from two defects: first, a failure
to distinguish between sovereignty and autonomy; and second, a
failure to identify precisely and accurately the impacts of
environmental interdependencies. Despite the fact that many
international environmental problems (such as air pollution,
depletion of the ozone layer, and climate change) are global in
scope, and that their solutions require international
cooperation, the arguments about the current plight of the
sovereignty of the state made by many observers are unwarranted.
The existence of international environmental interdependence and
the conclusion of international environmental agreements does not
weaken, modify, or make obsolete the sovereignty of the state.
Nor is sovereignty a barrier to obtaining multilateral
regulation. Since state sovereignty is not at risk, and since
solutions to serious global environmental problems are possible
through the restriction of state autonomy, the prescription for a
post-sovereign international governing arrangement due to
international environmental interdependence is unfounded.
Sovereignty remains, currently and for the foreseeable
future, the central concept around which the international system
is organized. Furthermore, it is not the barrier to cooperation
that some observers would have us believe. Perhaps a clearer
understanding of these concepts would not only enlighten
observers and statespeople, but lead to improved, and more expeditious, cooperation on environmental issues of global
importance. === Arts, Faculty of === Political Science, Department of === Graduate
|
|---|
