Discuss the roles of IGOs (Intergovernmental Organisations) and NGOs (Non-governmental organisations) in a globalised world. How does their presence impact state sovereignty? by Usic https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw Made with charisma en-us 2021-06-24 11:16:35 UTC 2021-06-24 12:22:20 UTC hello@padlet.com Group 1 https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623425671 1. The question ask us to  explain the role of IGO and NGO's role in state sovereignty from three perspectives(globalist, Internationalist, and transformationalist).

2. It could be focus on the positive and negative roles of IGOs and NGOs in a globalized world. It can not be ignored that there are three alternative futures that have emerged: fragmentation, stagnation, and transformation. We should answer this question in the light of the latest international situation and from three different perspectives.

3. 

4.  The question need to be considered in three aspects, globalist, Internationalist, and transformationalist and their opinion to IGO and NGO.
For the positive globalists, IGO and NGO could  break s the national boundaries and makes the problem of globalization to face and solve them together. For example, the Global World Health Organization, is now helping individual countries to address the New Coronation epidemic, assisting countries in making decisions and decisions in terms of national sovereignty. It is helping some developing countries to develop more rational and efficient solutions.
As for the negative globalist, they may ]]> 2021-06-24 11:19:33 UTC https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623425671 Group 2 zzou8 https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623427639 1.ask us to answer How does the presences of IGO and NGO impact state sovereignty  in  three perspectives (Globalist, Internationalist and Transformationalist) 

How negative globalists view NGOs: The responsibilities between rights and democracy do not match and cannot be combined well. They undermine the relationship between the state and its citizens and often undermine the sovereignty of political institutions.

How negative globalists view IGOs: They undermine the relationship between the state and its citizens and often undermine the sovereignty of political institutions (riddel 2014). By being irresponsible in leading state power, they can challenge state power in many ways.

How transformationalists view NGOs: Transnational non-governmental organizations such as Amnesty International, Greenpeace, and Médecins Sans Frontières challenge state activities and its legitimate role to uphold the 'rule of law' within its territory as part and parcel of its sovereignty; they criticize and often attempt to interfere in situations of torture, detainment without trial, nuclear testing, and refusal to grant access to those offering humanitarian aid.

How internationalists view NGOs and IGOs: IGOs and NGOs having freer access to territories of states.


2.the focus is looking into the 2 groups of questions from different perspectives 
3.
4.
]]> 2021-06-24 11:21:50 UTC https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623427639 Group 3 https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623438052 1.NGO （impact state sovereignty）Perhaps the main reason for this is that they undermine the relationship between state and citizen and frequently undermine the sovereignty of political institutions.
A further area in which NGOs are able to undermine state sovereignty, relates to the way in which NGOs are able to undermine the diplomatic positions of sovereign states by addressing problems or issues directly at source. For example, a nation state may invoke economic sanctions on a particular state in order to create diplomatic pressure but NGOs are able to bypass this to a certain extent by taking funds direct from citizens and using them in the way they best see fit. By remaining unaccountable to direct state power they are able to challenge the power of the state in numerous ways.
2.IGOs that are formed by treaties are more advantageous than a mere grouping of nations because they are subject to international law and have the ability to enter into enforceable agreements among themselves or with states.
3. IGOs Globlist: the  rights of nations are limited.for example ,EU as one of the largest intergovernmental organizations, however, Eu sets rules and policies that limit the power of national states.]]> 2021-06-24 11:33:56 UTC https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623438052 Group 4 https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623446569 The main challenges of NGOs affecting national sovereignty and foreign policy interventions. From the perspective of positive globalists, NGOs have a positive side and are a force that cannot be ignored in social development. Greenpeace, for example, aims to protect the safety and sustainability of the planet, the environment and living things.

Negative globalists believe that many NGOs have strong political interests and that some NGOs have illegal activities. For example, many countries have been Mired in prolonged wars in the wake of the Arab Spring, which was driven by non-governmental organizations.

IGO have strengthened the binding force of international law. The members of international organizations are mainly sovereign states. The expansion of the scope of activities of international organizations has restricted the exercise of national sovereignty to some extent. From the perspective of negative globalists, globalization makes the world more and more connected, and at the same time it brings conflicts and contradictions. For example, with the accession of many countries to the EU, the conflicts between countries are becoming more and more intense.

Internationalist
follows hegemony
IGOs and NGOs both diminish state sovereignty.
 However, IGOs' worldwide influence has lowered the quality of life in developing countries while NGOs' influence has had an positive effect on the quality of life in developing countries.

Transformationalist
IGOs not only bring about opportunities for their member states but also exert influence and impose limits on members’ policies and the way in which those policies are made. By setting international agendas, and thus influencing domestic ones, governments are compelled to take positions on issues. Moreover, in democratic societies, norms and principles created or supported by IGOs can be used by domestic groups to push for change in national policies. ]]> 2021-06-24 11:42:51 UTC https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623446569 Sovereignty usictech https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623457021 source https://www.politicalsciencenotes.com/essay/sovereignty-meaning-and-characteristics-of-sovereignty/254
Meaning:

The term “Sovereignty” has been derived from the Latin word “Superanus” which means supreme or paramount. Although the term “Sovereignty” is modern yet the idea of “Sovereignty” goes back to Aristotle who spoke of the “supreme power of the state”. Throughout the middle Ages the Roman jurists and the civilians kept this idea in their mind and frequently employed the terms “Summa” potestas and “Plenitudo potestatis” to designate the supreme power of the state.

The terms “Sovereign” and “Sovereignty” were first used by the French jurists in the fifteenth century and later they found their way into English, Italian and German political literature. The use of the term “Sovereignty” in Political Science dates back to the publication of Bodin’s “The Republic” in 1576.

“The word sovereign”, says J.S. Roucek and others, “entered the vocabulary of political theory from the feudal order, wherein it designated a relationship between persons. The term sovereign had been applicable to any feudal overlord with authority over subjects in his own dominions”.

Two Aspects of Sovereignty:

There are two aspects of sovereignty: internal sovereignty and external sovereignty. Internal Sovereignty means some persons, assembly of group of persons in every independent state have the final legal authority to command and enforce obedience.

This sovereignty exercises its absolute authority over all individuals or associations of the individuals within the state. Professor Harold Laski has very aptly remarked in this connection: “It issues orders to all men and all associations within that area; it receives orders from none of them. It will is subject to no legal limitation of any kind. What it proposes is right by mere announcement of intention”.

We mean, by External Sovereignty, that the State is subject to no other authority and is independent of any compulsion on the part of other States. Every independent state reserves the authority to renounce trade treaties and to enter into military agreements. Each estate is independent of other states.

Every independent State is at liberty to determine its foreign policy and to join any bloc of power it likes. Any other state does not reserve any right to interfere with the external matter of an independent state. Thus, by external sovereignty we mean that every state is independent of other states.

In other words, External Sovereignty means national freedom. Professor Laski has very correctly observed in this regard, “The modern state is a sovereign state. It is, therefore, independent in the face of other communities.

]]> 2021-06-24 11:53:35 UTC https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623457021 yzhao177 https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623457655 2021-06-24 11:54:16 UTC https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623457655 Globalist : usictech https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623467421 a. States' power is declining and global agents (NGO/IGO/ are gaining more power.  For example, the UN has expanded its influence in all aspects including economic, cultural and juristic, countries have to follow the UN on a large sphere  to avoid sanctions.  Positive:  This will benefit all countries around the world. NGO/IGO have progressive agenda and this will create a better world etc. Globalised world is a better place to live.  Negative: They refer to conflicts and chaos that is created as a result of conflicting powers. NGOs may contribute to social and political instability etc. 

Internationalist: Nation states have supreme power and they are in full control over their affairs. They would allow or ban NGOs to work within their territories and also  it is their decision to join IGOs or withdraw. (what about the sanctions by the UN if you do not follow their policies?) Countries  are obliged to follow the UN requirements on climate change and if you do not follow, there will be consequences. NGO/IGO s have very insignificant power and nation states have the supreme power.

Transformationalist view:  Although nation states have power, or maintained their power, but their power is being constrained or challenged by IGOs/NGOs.  For example being a member of EU,  member countries will loose their entitlement to control borders or limit the free  movement of goods/services and human labour.  However, being a member will provide them with economic, political and military advantages.  For example an NGO such as Amnesty International puts lots of pressures on nation states regarding their human rights practices, however, nation states have the authority to expel  Amnesty International from their countries if  they wish so. 











]]> 2021-06-24 12:04:42 UTC https://padlet.com/usictech/y1omurnkt8sihjyw/wish/1623467421