Transcript Lecture 5.1 - Midlands State University

Lecture 5.1
ACTORS IN THE INTERNATIONAL SYSTEM.
An international actor can be defined as relatively
autonomous and that it exercises influence on the
behaviour of other autonomous actors.
STATES
Until very recently states were assured to be only
actors in international system.
Lecture 5.2
• Reasons:
1. in its evolution the state has produced a set of rules and
patterns of which are immensely influential in the
world politics.
2. the states function and organise characteristics
distinguishing it from other international actors.
3. Its shear capacity and strength placed in unique
position on international stage. Strictly speaking states
depict four fundamental characteristics a) a defined
territory, b)effective government, c)defined population,
d) recognised by other states.
•
Lecture 5.3
• The state exercises universal jurisdiction within
territorial boundaries.
• It has been argued that the concept of state is
ambiguous and hence has lost its usefulness as a
base for analysing international politics. Some
entities which are called states have been
identified to lack the very basic of states.
• Recent developments in the fields of
communication, technology, commerce and
industry render the state penetrable by other states.
Lecture 5.4
• The state has been accused in some instances of failing to uphold
human security and welfare as a result there has been rise in the
activities of non state entities in this area such entities cannot be
dependent or subsidiary to the state. This has resulted in the
fractionalisation of human loyalty to the state in other words
nationalisation is at the decline and there so is the state.
• It has also been argued that by focusing on the state there is
tendency to forget human beings for whom through which states
plays a game of international politics/relations. By humanising the
state we tend to dehumanise international relations because we
would be accorded in its own interest, primacy over those of
human individuals.
Lecture 5.5
• There is a argument that non state actors such trading
companies, churches, etc play an important role in
politics before modern states. It has thus been argued
that there is need to regard as actors individuals,
groups and other non state entities which enter into
relationship that are political and are of international
scope.
• EXAMPLE.
• MNCs/TNCs
• They are oligopolistic- ownership,management and
state activities extend over several jurisdictions.
Lecture 5.6
• Growth more pronounced with the end of the 19
century. US dominated the scene in 1950s and 60s
• Their importance lie in that:
• -have more economic muscle than a number of states
• -changed in terms of their diversity and focus
• - act as linkages globally
• -bring technology,capital,employment and revenue to
government
• -facilitates interdependence
Lecture 5.7
• -They have been seen to constitute a threat to
world economic equilibrium because of their
careless behaviour.
• It remains within the jurisdiction of the state to
effectively determine the context within which the
MNCs must operate.
• On the other hand MNCs are better able than
states to overcome political fragmentation of the
world for which after all the state itself is largely
responsible.