Sovereignty: Organized Hypocrisy by Stephen D. Krasner

The key point of Krasner’s book is that, although the concept of sovereignty has dominated political theory for over 200 years, neither its proponents nor its skeptics have accurately described it. He reasons that there is no final solution to the sovereignty debate because irreconcilable logical contradictions are inherent in the international system, i.e. nonintervention vs. democracy promotion. Furthermore, the lack of international authority and the uneven distribution of power between nations guarantee that the principle of sovereignty will be unequally adhered to across the globe. In other words, sovereignty is not a static principle that can be proved or discarded. It is instead a nuanced concept that will vary from nation to nation and moment to moment. Krasner divides the subject of sovereignty into four distinct realms:

1. International legal sovereignty - the practices associated with mutual recognition between territories that have formal juridicial independence.
2. Westphalian legal sovereignty - political organization based on the exclusion of external actors.
3. Domestic sovereignty - the formal organization of political authority within the state and the ability of public authorities to exercise effective control within its borders.
4. Interdependence sovereignty - the ability of public authorities to regulate the flow of information, ideas, goods, pollutants, or capital across their borders.

States do not neccesarily posses each type of sovereignty, nor do states exercise their types of sovereignty equally.

Krasner also questions the novelty of some aspects of globalization, pointing out that by some measures international capital markets were more open before the first World War than they are today (Obstfeld and Taylor 1997). I haven’t looked into Obstfeld and Taylor’s work as of yet, but it sounds like it might provide an interesting rebuttal to the “Globalization = No national sovereignty” crowd.

According to Krasner, almost all states (and a few non-state entities) have been internationally recognized; however, few have maintained Westphalian Sovereignty. Many states, such as the post-WWI remnants of the Ottoman Empire, have been forced to tolerate the intervention of external actors in their domestic affairs. To receive international recognition, the former Ottoman nations were compelled to incorporate minority rights into their constitutions. At the other end of the spectrum is the EU, in which countries have voluntarily sacrificed some of their Westphalian sovereignty in trade for other benefits.

This book has been the richest goldmine I have struck thus far in my research. Krasner takes the sovereignty issue to a greater depth and breadth than any other writer I have come across. If I get the time I would like to follow this up with another of his books, Problematic Sovereignty. If anyone has read it and has an opinion about it (or anything else on this blog) post in the comments.

Dr. Stephen D. Krasner is currently serving as the Director of Policy Planning in the US Department of State. You can find this book here.