Still a far cry

Sovereignty the basic element when the word state is heard, sovereignty refers to the absolute power of the state to govern itself without the intervention of any external elements, but are states really sovereign?

Sovereignty is the defining part of a state, IR thinkers often ought to relate sovereignty to the existence of a state, as according to the realist perspective state is a sovereign body and a primary actor in the international system. It is needless to say that actors have to be independent to perform effectively in any system, if an actor is influenced in any way it cannot make rational decisions. Thus the analysts of IR always keep in view sovereignty while analysing any situation or phenomenon. One reality is also that anarchy exists in the international system, so no phenomenon is practiced, as it should be. Idealistically utopia has no place in the international system, but it does peek through doors paving its way in the field.

A decline of sovereignty has been witnessed, especially after the Second World War, when the basis of UN was laid under the concept of Liberal Institutionalism, which suggests that cooperation in the world is possible under the umbrella of such an institution that governs the world. However the charter of the UN is a controversy in itself. The principles of the organizations set some rules for the signatory states which they are obliged to follow for the membership of the UN. The UN has given the P-5 veto powers to the five powerful states of the world. They have the power to accept or reject any resolution that is submitted in the UN. This is a phenomenon that compromises the sovereignty of states at large, because most of the times the states are being governed by the major powers under the masks of the local government. A prominent example of this phenomenon is the organisation of IMF that gives loans to states in need, but with the loan comes a long list of the requirements that a state must fulfil to be granted a loan. These restrictions get so particular to the internal affairs of the state that it is a question mark whether the state is governed by IMF or the government itself. Continuing this a prime example is the NPT and the CTBT, the history behind these treaties is that the US after creating nuclear weapons wanted to keep its monopoly on the world, it was also scared that it would be threatened if the rest of the states create weapons, the example of Hiroshima Nagasaki and the Cuban missile crisis was in front of the world. As a result, the NPT was introduced to bar states from creating nuclear weapons. Once again the states were deprived of the right to take steps for their internal and external security.

There are countless examples out there that depict how states are influenced to make decisions by other states.