# data[].attributes.body
In contrast to source A, source B argues that sovereignty is gradually becoming less relevant. The source states that this is due to the rise of non-state actors. Non-state actors like MNCs are increasingly becoming more powerful, and some are wealthier and hold more power than many state actors. The main point in source B is that the idea of sovereignty is deteriorating because MNCs, IGOs and Terrorists Organizations actors impose on national sovereignty regularly. And, in the case of IGO’s, states very willingly give up their supreme authority for the benefits of interdependence. The source gives the example of the UN, specifically the “Responsibility to Protect doctrine". UN members willingly sign a doctrine that essentially legalizes invasion, and can be activated by other states. Nongovernmental systems now have the power to defy the notion of sovereignty should they feel that a state needs aid for the sake of the citizens living within the territory. While source A argues that sovereignty is and will remain relevant, source B counters this view in claiming that the rise in non-state actors is leading to the decline of sovereign states.

# data[].attributes.body
Source A argues that despite the rise of non-state actors and regional bodies, national sovereignty still prevails. This source criticizes the generalization that the existence of certain failed/fragile states is evidence that “the state” in itself is withering away because, at the same time, extremely successful states still exist. Although non-state actors are increasingly playing a larger role internationally, state actors still depend on their own governments securing their state and dealing with interstate grievances. In the text, the example of the EU is used in order to show the value that is still placed on the idea of national sovereignty. The source argues that the EU's euro-crisis and overall failure has caused states to question whether they should remain in the intergovernmental body because it compromises their national sovereignty. Source A claims that territorial sovereignty and nationalism still prevail today.

# data[].attributes.body
Sovereignty is the supreme authority that a state government holds over its territory and citizens.

# data[].attributes.body
Source A and B show two contrasting views on the relevance of national sovereignty.

# data[].attributes.body
As such, these multi-national corporations have so many resources, that they are, at times, in possession of more resources than many of the world’s nations and nation-states. Therefore, they have an immense amount of power and control over a state, and they use these means to influence governments to do as they please. Nonetheless, if the governments do not comply with the MNC’s requests or demands, they can use their wealth and power to devastate the country, causing significant harm to the nation and its citizens.

# data[].attributes.body
Kinzer gives us an example of global organisations over looking the sovereignty of national states that is still fairly recent in history: The conception of the UN. The United Nations was created with the intention to connect and protect the international web of countries from future war and conflict though in this, the UN has the power to disregard national sovereignty through the power of international law. International law threatens the national sovereignty, IGOs such as the UN, NATO and AU have strong influence over states and have the power to intervene.

# data[].attributes.body
Another reason for which state powers have been weakened is due to the role of mercenary armies. Kinzer points to the United States as being a state in which the mercenary army has been leading to “[contracting] out more war-fighting to private corporations” meaning that due to the United States having the biggest army in the world, disputes with private corporations have died down substantially with their influence in power. With the importance of mercenary armies, institutions and global charities “routinely hire security contractors” to protect their enclaves, and other countries such as Germany and Nigeria have hired mercenaries to fight for them in troubled situations such as in Ukraine, and against Boko Haram.

# data[].attributes.body
Non-governmental organizations, private groups of individuals, also puts pressure on sovereignty today. They pressurize governmental views and standpoints because they think they "know better than local leaders", about how the country should be run, and pushes for their own policies and views.

# data[].attributes.body
Another more recent development which Kinzer highlights is the establishment and efforts of the United Nations. The UN is the closest thing to and acts fairly close to a form of global governance. Since national sovereignty is defined by supreme independent authority with no actor of higher jurisdiction, the existence of global government would add a higher jurisdiction and therefore directly dismantle national sovereignty.

# data[].attributes.body
The growing power of mercenary armies is considered to be the most striking proof of the of the rejection of nation-states. A mercenary is a person who takes part in an armed conflict privately, without any governmental affiliation to any nation-state. Mercenaries are privatized armies. The US reportedly hires private corporations to aid in war-fighting. So called “security contractors” are also hired to protect their control by charities such as World Vision and Save the Children. German mercenaries are helping pro-Russian separatists in Ukraine. South African mercenaries were even hired by Nigeria to fight the terrorist organization Boko Haram. The utilization of mercenaries by state actors not only proves and reaffirms the fact that the power of the state is being weakened, but that non-state actors, even terrorist organizations are gaining power and are essentially on the rise.

# data[].attributes.body
The last and most prominent sign of the decline of power of states is the burgeoning of mercenary armies. Nowadays, sovereign nations, especially the US, rely on private corporations to provide manpower to help them during conflict. NGOs such as global charities hire “security contractors” to help provide protections to their assets. Some examples of foreign mercenaries fighting in modern day conflicts include German mercenaries fighting with Russian against Ukraine and the use of South African mercenaries in the fight against Boko Haram. Private armies are slowly overtaking national defense forces.

# data[].attributes.body
Nongovernmental organizations (NGOs) such as Oxfam and Greenpeace have also become more prominent on the global stage. Kinzer mentions how many NGOs “consider themselves defenders of the oppressed”, meaning that they standing up against governments that may discriminate and judge unfairly against groups of people such as women, religious minorities, LGBTQ, children, the disabled, etc... Along with challenging local governments, these NGOs are also challenging the very idea of national sovereignty. By publicly challenging this idea, NGOs are attracting more people who agree with their views and beliefs, thus increasing their own power and taking away from that of the states.

# data[].attributes.headline
NGOs like international corporations, mercenary armies, and international organizations are rapidly gaining power.

# data[].attributes.subject
NGOs like international corporations, mercenary armies, and international organizations are rapidly gaining power.

# data[].attributes.body
A final reason for which the power of the state being weakened is mercenary armies. Mercenary armies are slowly becoming the source of state’s hard power. Since states can now outsource their armies (like the US and the private military company Academi), they have a smaller army of their own and therefore less hard power. NGOs and charities also contract armies, so they have procured military power without being a state.

# data[].attributes.body
Additionally, another aspect of today’s world that poses a threat to national sovereignty is the United Nations and its concept of “International Law”. The idea that there are “laws” that are put into place by the international community, that can affect those living in a sovereign state, undermines the purpose of having a sovereign state in the first place - which is that the state will have supreme INDEPENDENT authority over their territory.

# data[].attributes.body
The reaction and war on global terrorism is a strong example of how sovereignty becoming less significant. With globally widespread issues like terrorism, the idea of sovereignty becomes less valued because much of the world operates under the same universal set of values, meaning human rights, which trump respecting a country's sovereignty.

# data[].attributes.body
According to Stephen Kinzer the idea of ultimate state sovereignty is slowly being eroded by a variety of factors.

# data[].attributes.body
Sovereignty is having complete control of a defined territory and the people inside of it without the interference of outside powers.

# data[].attributes.body
The concept of an international law goes against the idea of a sovereign state. International law places boundaries on a states affairs, even if it has been international recognized as a sovereign state. This results in states not having complete control over their territory, due to international interference.

# data[].attributes.body
Kinzer's claim means that gradually, sovereignty is losing its power. State's powers of coercion, influence and smart power are gradually weakening.

# data[].attributes.body
Sovereignty is the definition of having supreme authority over a specific area and population, with recognition from other states

# data[].attributes.body
Sovereignty is an outdated concept that no longer coincides with the world we live in today. Sovereignty is eroding and states don't have the power they once had.

# data[].attributes.body
This article states that power is shifting from state to non-state actors. He's saying that large companies and terrorist groups nowadays have massive influential power over the government, and at times, they can simply ask them or convince them do something that they want.