Now, diplomats are compelled to collaborate and negotiate with a variety of non-governmental agents, such as TNCs and civil society organizations. Additionally, due to the disruption of the division between the national and the global, and the increasing influence of public opinion, they must necessarily deal with domestic and foreign publics. In this regard, L. Richard argues that a new diplomatic function has arisen, that is, the role as integrator. As we have seen, globalization has given contemporary diplomacy a multiplayer character. However, as the number of player augments, the number of possible inconsistencies and disagreements also increase.
It is accurate to say that the Commonwealth Caribbean finds itself in a precarious position as it attempts to balance sovereignty and legitimacy in the global political arena. An arena where sovereignty is being blurred due to a recent stride towards internationalism termed globalisation. Such strides have significant implications for the states and their ability to implement policies and laws without intervention by foreign entities. Such intervention is further encouraged by the concept of globalization; both contested and supported it encompasses “…all those processes by which the peoples of the world are incorporated into a single world society.” These processes are encouraged by international trade, investment and information technology and result in the integration and interaction among people, governments, cultures and economies. Such interdependence and interconnectedness creates complications for sovereign states who in their rightful capacity are entitled to act independently and autonomously on the world stage.
Introduction In today's political and social system, we have been living in the power age for countless centuries. It has been regarded as inevitable that those pursuits of power and lead the world into a power politics’ generation. Power politics is a form of international relations in which sovereign states protect their own interests by threatening one another with military, economic or political aggression (J.Morgenthau, 1946).Although it is the regrettable realities of the international politics, the fear and insecurity, the pursuit of power, the use of force, and the ever-present possibility of war are often presented as inevitable. Somehow it is also a way of understanding the world’s international relations that nations compete for
“Sovereignty is now best conceptualized not as freedom from interference but as ‘status’, which in turn depends critically on participation in international regimes. This connection to the rest of the world and the political ability to be an actor in it are more important than any tangible benefits in explaining compliance with international regulatory agreement.” (Chayes & Chayes, 1995, p. 27) There are some states in international institutions that likely to assume more power than others. Supposing that, we still cannot remove the idea of having a Hobbesian environment in the international arena. Human nature still prevails. Since then, the international law has been developing throughout the years.
One might say that there is no right theory to use but the mixture of them which makes the process easier. Theories and models provide tools to plan the internationalization process of firms. There are numerous factors that shape and influence the internationalization process of SMEs. From the U-model, psychic distance and market knowledge are still able to explain some behaviors expressed by the process of internationalization of SMEs, while almost all firms tend to construct their foreign endeavor on networking, for gathering market knowledge and information in particular; SMEs depend intensely on network relationships. Firm’s and management’s chance searching for behavior is another impetus for foreign expansion with a fundamental component of these activities originating from past international experience of owners or managers or entrepreneurs.
Capitalism, Media, and Power Capitalism, media, and power have an important role in influencing each other and shaping our society. In international politics, these aspects have shaped a hegemony in which the U.S. had become a dominant power in international affairs. This writing will start with an analysis of how the history of international communication shapes our knowledge, perceptions, and opinions of the role of media. Then, it will briefly discuss several historical phenomena such as conquest and growth of industrial revolution in relation to capitalism and communication. With the information provided by these phenomena, this writing will reflect on some drawbacks of the relationship between capitalism, media, and power in the U.S. as shown by the flaws of the U.S. foreign policy.
Where the transnational corporations are enterprises that deal with productivity and other activities outside mother land, lead by an international management team and follow an international strategy with the goal of defending stockholders interests rather than national interests. Transnational companies are the most met on an international scale using three major strategies : • Point strategy • Simple integration • Complexe integration Globalization doesn’t only manifest on an economic level, it affects culture, social life, political life as well as technology development since intergration made direct contact and exchange between countries, societies and economies. Where the population is the key influence upon national economy, it is the population who demands the level of production and its quality and at the same time it is the key factor for market development. Globalizing markets offerd population a larger variety of products as well as better quality than national products, example: • Textiles • Sports shoes • Electronics • Vehicles • Construction equipment • Financial services • Airlines •
power and competitive advantage over others. International relations have used globalization to reach its goal: This assertion is backed by the view of Joseph (2000). They are of the views that since force, violent and threats thereof, areat core of this interplay, the struggle for power, whether, as an end or necessary means, is the distinguishing mark of politics amongst
To what extent the globalisation challenges the state sovereignty? The conditions and situations that have existed in the international relations, such as trade, cooperation, confrontation and alliances have always played a huge role in the determination of the state’s politics and behavior. However, due to the technological and financial development performing from the end of the World War II, the declaration of independence of the former colonies and the end of the confrontation with the end of the Cold War the affect of the interrelations among states on their domestic politics have become more dynamic over the past decades. Consequently, there have been emerged an idea that the interdependence and connections among states has a tendency to become larger in the scale, deeper and faster. The idea of emerging a these processes, which has lead to the formation of the new theories and approaches regarding the relations among world states and its impacts on the domestic level, is understood as the globalization.
These factors are responsible for a greater interdependence between states, increasing the influence of both multinational corporations and international economic institutions (In Defense of Globalisation). On the other hand, Political Globalisation refers to the growth and direction of the ideological and governmental relations in the world. As far as I am concerned, Political globalisation is intimately related to all other types of globalisation, such that what has been happening around the world regarding economic globalisation will influence broadly the way the first is performed and implemented. In this regard, although not completely (or ‘inevitably’), I strongly believe that, up to some limits, political globalisation will follow the steps of economic globalisation. Evidently, all rules have exceptions and the expansion of a more homogeneous worldwide policy will not prevent more nationalist states from not being a part of these