Has globalisation eroded sovereignty?

What is the structure of the essay?

P1 - Economic globalisation

P2 - Cultural globalisation

P2 - Political globalisation

Introduction

Define globalisation

This essay will discuss three types of globalisation: economic, cultural, and political.

Define sovereignty

Hyperglobalisers would argue that sovereignty is eroded as a product of globalisation as the presence of economic and cultural interconnectedness is undoubtable.

May loosely argue for political interconnectedness too as states are often contractually bound by IGOs .

Sceptics may argue that sovereignty is not eroded as states still control domestic fiscal policy, states can break free from contractual obligations, and states can control culture influence.

However, more persuasive to say that globalisation has eroded sovereignty.

P1 - Economic globalisation has eroded sovereignty as dependence on other states leads to ‘bending the knee’ to economically stronger states

• Economic globalisation pertains to foreign investment, global supply chains, and multinational cooperations.

• Sovereignty being eroded by economic globalisation can be evidenced by the UK’s permission for China to construct their mega embassy, despite major security concerns being situated near crucial internet infrastructure

  • Reuters posits that Britain was making ‘trade-offs’ in order to stabilise economic relations - possibly due to Chinese manufacturing superiority.

• Similarly, Victor Gao, a Beijing aligned commentator, warns that blocking the embassy’s construction would lead to economic retaliation.

  • This suggests that economic sovereignty is dependent on contextual importance bigger or more sovereign countries.

    • For the vast majority of countries, those not the USA or China, economic dependence means that states have to ‘bend the knee’ in fear of sanctions or trade disruptions.

  • This shows how economic globalisation inherently weakens practical sovereignty; while states remain legally sovereign, such vulnerability makes autonomy theoretical.

P1 - Even under vulnerability, states can still remain sovereign

• Despite economic vulnerability, states can still remain sovereign, showing that sovereignty is not eroded.

  • For example, the 2025-26 US-China trade war, which exhibited 125% tariffs, shows that states are willing to absorb economic costs to remain sovereign.

  • Similarly, despite 13 rounds of EU sanctions, and US pressure, since their invasion of Ukraine, Russia have not yet faltered, instead turning to China, Iran, and North Korea.

• Such ability to accept economic cost shows that states posit that sovereignty is not eroded by globalisation.

  • This shows that economic constraints certainly influence decisions, but is not remove authority to make the decisions.

• However, this is not universal - China and the US are economically incomparable to the rest of the world

  • The cost of defiance for other states is far too high, thus suggesting that globalisation has eroded sovereignty, but not for the US or China.

P2 - cultural globalisation has eroded sovereignty as there are no strict cultural zones anymore

• Cultural globalisation refers to the spread of ideas. norms, and values across borders, often spread by the internet, industries, and migration.

• It can be said that globalisation eroded cultural sovereignty due to the development of a cultural hegemony.

  • This is especially prevalent in entertainment sectors; K-Pop is now a global cultural force which influences music, fashion, and language, far beyond the geographic jurisdiction of South Korea.

• Additionally, the spread of liberal ideology of homosexual rights - marriage - into traditionally conservative Asian countries: Nepal; Thailand, Taiwan.

  • This shows how cultural globalisation bypasses governments by directly influencing citizens: K-Pop fans operate transnationally which shapes youth behaviour globally.

  • Therefore, this weakens state authority over culture, showing how cultural globalisation has eroded sovereignty.

• This is persuasive as cultural change derived from external sources is extremely hard for states to regulate without infringing civil liberties.

  • This suggests that cultural globalisation poses a long-term threat to sovereignty

P2 - cultural globalisation has not eroded sovereignty since states can control culture

• It can be argued that cultural globalisation does not erode sovereignty as states can control the influence external sources have on their population

  • For example, China’s ‘great firewall’ restricts Western media and LGBTQ+ representation, as do Middle Eastern countries.

  • This suggests that states still possess coercive and legislative power over culture, thus showing that cultural globalisation has not eroded sovereignty.

• However, this is a weak argument as cultural control is often politicised by younger generations, and Chinese citizens can bypass the firewall by using a VPN

• Thus, suggesting that cultural globalisation has eroded sovereignty.

P3 - political globalisation has eroded sovereignty as institutions can impose legally binding obligations on states

• Political globalisation refers to the growth and proliferation of international organisation, treaties, and global governance structures.

• It can be argued that political globalisation erodes sovereignty as IGOs and non-state actors can impose binding, obligatory commitments to states.

  • For example, a core EU principle is supremacy of EU law over nations law, ECJ rulings binding on member states, and Qualified Majority Voting forcing states to accept decisions they opposed.

  • These examples clearly curtail autonomy and democratic control, reinforcing the idea that political globalisation has eroded sovereignty.

• Additionally, the fact states can be legally compelled to change domestic laws shows how globalisation is a direct catalyst for erosion of sovereignty.

• However, this is a weak argument as states voluntarily comply with these decisions and can leave at any time.

P3 - political globalisation has not eroded sovereignty as exertion of political sovereignty has been empirically evidenced

• However, it can be argued that political globalisation has not eroded sovereignty as there are empirical examples of states exuding their political sovereignty.

  • For example, sovereignty can be said to not be eroded through BREXIT, US withdrawing from WHO and Paris Agreement, and instead creating the Board of Peace, as well as states ignoring or selectively complying with UN resolutions.

• This shows that, in the Westphalian System, states remain ultimate decision makers in policy.

• For example, Israel has ignored repeated UNGA resolutions - 73/98, and ICJ rulings - South Africa v Israel in 2024 regarding illegal settlements in East Jerusalem.

  • This shows that political globalisation does not erode sovereignty, but rather pools it.

  • This is a strong argument as it can be said that political globalisation allows for more platforms where sovereignty can be extended, rather than erosion.