1997, p.1). Many professionals ranging from commentators to journalists, from politicians to scholars across all disciplines, have tried to describe and analyze this phenomenon and tend to agree that "globalization," along with the halt of the Cold War, has radically changed the basic "rules of the game" for a variety of key factors, particularly states (Smith et al. 1997, p.1).
With the onset of this "globalization" and transnational companies, there have been long debates about the relationship of so-called sovereign states to each other (Wallerstein 1999, p.20). Wallerstein (1999) states that views range from those who emphasize the effective sovereignty of the various states to those who are cynical about the ability of so-called weak states to resist the pressures (and blandishments) of so-called strong states. Krasner (1999, p.34), on the other hand, reports that some analysts argue to the point that the world is entering into a new era, one in which the existing institutional structures, especially the sovereign state (by which they often mean several different things) is being undermined weakened, marginalized, or transmuted, by globalization.
According to Krasner (1999, p.34-35), globalization can mean some mix of developments that might include the legitimization of human rights, the digitalization of transactions, the speed of communication, the density of global non-governmental organization (NGO) networks, the transmission of diseases, the growth of international capital markets, the surge of manufacturing in geographically dispersed areas, the universal availability of MTV, the increase in illegal migration, legal migration, and the like. Most analyses that emphasize the growing importance of globalization point to the transformatory nature of modern technology e.g. costs of communication and transportation have plummeted.
Kelleher and Klein (1999, p.146) defines sovereignty in that "states accept no political authority as superseding their own." According to the principle, no international institution has the right to determine the laws and policies that apply to people within the borders of any sovereign state. Sovereignty, then, has the effect of designating government as the sole representative of the population of a state (Kelleher and Klein 1999, p.146). Krasner (1999, p.35) also provided that the term sovereignty has been commonly used in at least four different ways:
1. Interdependence sovereignty has referred to the ability of a government to actually control activities within and across its borders (including the movement of goods, capital, ideas, and disease vectors).
2. Domestic sovereignty has referred to the organization of authority within a given polity.
3. Westphalian sovereignty has referred to the exclusion of external authority; the right of a government to be independent of external authority structures.
4. International legal sovereignty has referred to the recognition of one state by another; some entities have been recognized by other states; others have not. Recognition has been associated with diplomatic immunity and the right to sign treaties and join international organizations.
Globalization: A Threat to Sovereignty
According to Krasner (1999, p.36), many observers have suggested that the increase in globalization is a threat to sovereignty. He asserts that