< Back - Article List - Next >

2.1. POLITICAL GLOBALISATION – the relationship between international institutions and international law in a global context.
<http://members.lycos.co.uk/sille288gto/Politics/politglb.htm>

3:1 - Global Institutions & International Law:
Within recent decades the independence of the nation state has been subjected to increasing pressures imposed upon it by the extraordinary expansion of global institutions. Along with these developments have gone the additional effects of an increasingly integrated system of international law. The effects of institutions such as the United Nations (UN), North Atlantic Treaty Organisation (NATO), World Bank, International Monetary Fund (IMF), and European Union (EU), have seen an intensification of the decision making process over and above the level of the nation state. Not only have the numbers of these international organisations increased rapidly, but their very nature has changed also. 'Politics is becoming more polycentric, with states as merely one level in a complex system of overlapping\par and often competing agencies of governance' (49)

Within the present day governments are increasingly engaging with supranational organisations such as the UN and EU who expect compliance from national governments with many of the decisions and laws they formulate. States have forfeited a degree of their powers upwards to these supranational organisations. In addition NGOs such as Greenpeace and Amnesty International apply additional pressures to ensure nation states comply with international agreements. The twentieth century has seen a rapid growth in the numbers of these organisations. 'From a total of 37 IGOs and 176 INGOs in 1909, by 1989 this figure had risen to nearly 300 IGOs and 4624 INGOs' (50) (APPENDIX 6) This rise in numbers has been matched by similar increases in activity levels. 'In the middle of the nineteenth century there were on average two or three international meetings arranged by IGOs each year; by 1993 this had risen to almost 4000 annual events' (51)

It is a present day reality that the management and co-ordination of international dialogue and co-operation is handled by full-time bureaucracies such as those of the UN and EU. Acting in their capacity as international mediators, these organisations reinforce interdependence between nation states through the imposition of formal agreements and the application of international law. This combination of events has impacted radically upon the lives of millions and has witnessed a gradual shift from the principle that state sovereignty must be safeguarded irrespective of its consequences for individuals, groups and organisations. 'Respect for the autonomy of the subject['s] ... human rights ...can delimit\par and curtail the principle of state sovereignty itself' (52)

The power of the individual nation state is being displaced as the central focus of international relations, the focus now shifting to the level of global insitutions. This is impacting upon the ability of governments to secure the fate of their citizens; in effect globalisation is undermining democracy at the level of the nation state. A further concern for national governments has been that of ensuring the security of its citizens and territories. The ability of the state to maintain an effective independent military capability is dependent upon its position within the global power hierarchy. The Cold War conflict between the USA and USSR was 'a system dominated by two great powers, ... the scope for states to initiate an 'independent' foreign and defence policy was considerably limited' (53)

State autonomy and sovereignty has been checked by the conduct of NATO through the integration of national defence bureaucracies into international defence organisations. This has had the effect of creating transgovernmental decision making systems, effectively escaping the control of any single nation state. In the post Cold War world of the 1990s the internationalisation of security has re-emerged as a dominant issue through the instabilities that have arisen in Europe. The emergence to prominence of institutions such as the Western European Union (WEU) and the Conference on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE) 'is witnessing the emergence of new structures of collective security - a new 'Concert of Europe' (54)

3:2 - The New Political Paradigm
The acceleration of the globalisation process since the mid 1970s has been paralleled by a transformation of the political paradigm. The demise of post war Keynesian economic management in favour of the supply-led model, went hand in hand with the rise to prominence of New Right neo-liberalism. The decline of social democracy in the latter part of the 1970s saw the adoption in both the UK and USA of a 'new globalist rhetoric based on an anti-political liberalism' (55) The role of the media has been crucial in this transformation, their ability to transform and distort language has seen 'popular concepts like 'democracy', 'freedom', 'choice' and 'reform' emptied of their dictionary meanings ... Global cultural manipulation is sustained by this corruption' (56)

The global embrace of economic and political liberalism, spearheaded by the Reagan-Thatcher New Right 'axis', was a significant contibuting factor in the 'abrupt repudiation of communism in Moscow and Eastern Europe [and] China's embrace of a free market economy' (57) That these events were to have a world wide effect on parties of the left is undeniable, with 'capitalism's triumph over communism, a phase of history 'ended' (58)

Social democracy has been radically undermined by events in the East. The resulting emegence of a truly globalised economy has seen the decline of welfarist liberalism, with its objectives of full employment and sustained growth, and the rise of its market based variant. National economies are now subjected to the volatility of international markets. The enforced adoption of flexible methods of production, along with the radical curtailment of organised labour, is alleged to have made 'reformist strategies obsolete [reducing] the centrality of national political processes, whether competitive or co-operative' (59)

The vulnerability of western liberal democracies to the effects of global economic challenges has seen a turn to 'the 'protection' of elite centralism ...and the reification of strong leadership' (60) Nowhere was this more clearly illustrated than in the UK under the Prime Ministerial leadership of Margaret Thatcher. The election of a Conservative government in 1979 heralded the implementation of a radical neo-liberal agenda. The application of free-market policies by a reformed, regulatory, non-interventionist state irrevocably changed the political landscape of the UK.

The advances in information technology over the past two decades have seen a phenomenal increase in the speed of written and electronic broadcasting. The effect upon the political process has been the imposition of 'an organisational and ideological straitjacket of media presentation and image - the politics of soundbite and spin doctor' (61) The demands and dictates of the communications industry have contributed to a move towards a 'presidential-style presentation of the political agenda' (62) The rise of the New Labour Party under the leadership of Tony Blair is a telling example of this phenomenon. Blair's 'modernisation' agenda took forward the programme of changes instigated by Neil Kinnock after the 1987 General Election defeat. The objective of Kinnock's policy review was to remove policy making control from the NEC and Party Conference; what was at stake 'was how far the party should go in accepting the legacy of Thatcherism' (63)

The unremitting villification of the Labour Party by a partisan right-wing press led to the establishment of the Shadow Communications Agency (SCA), under the leadership of Peter Mandelson. 'Mandelson took the power of the media as a given and devoted himself to getting the party to present itself in\par ways that the media would report positively' (64) The effects of the SCA accelerated the process of change within the Party, electors were transformed into 'consumers', and editorial opinion became the mediator of acceptable policy. As 'the role assigned to 'communications' expanded, the role of the party members was symbolically downgraded' (65)

On attaining the party leadership in 1994 it rapidly became clear that Blair had detached himself completely from the 'ideology' of the old Labour Party. His overhaul of the 'Clause 4' declaration was a fundamental break with the past. The 'endorsement of the enterprise of the market and the rigour of competition', was a calculated attempt to win over a predominantly hostile media' (66) The whole ethos of the Blair regime is based upon the fundamental acceptance of global capitalism as a permanent and irremovable fact of life. The effects of this process have resulted in 'an unprecedented concentration of power in the hands of the party leader' (67) New Labour, like the Conservatives under Margaret Thatcher, has substituted 'elite centralism for democracy within the party'; today Blair is free to determine policy without consultation with either Trades Unions or party activists. (68)

New Labour has conducted a concerted campaign to get the Murdoch media regime 'on-side'. To this end 'Blair travelled to a Murdoch meeting in Australia in 1995 to assure the mogul of his moderation and express hopes of friendlier electoral treatment' (69) In the run up to the 1997 General Election this relationship took a further step forward when Blair, ghosted by his press secretary Alistair Campbell, wrote frequently for the Sun and the News of The World. 'A common theme in these articles has been Blair's intention to carry on the Thatcher legacy' (70) The subsequent 'pro-Blair' stance from the Murdoch Sun contributed to the New Labour landslide victory in May 1997.

However, recent events suggest this had little to do with the transformation of Murdoch's politics but a great deal more to do with the belief that 'he is motivated 99 per cent by commercial considerations' (71) The relationship that Murdoch has allowed to develop between himself and Prime Minister Blair acknowledges that the new government's policies pose little threat to his expansionist ambitions. On the contrary, it is the extent of these relations that have come under increasing scrutiny after the revelation 'that the Prime Minister had intervened with Romano Prodi, his centre-left counterpart in Rome, to help Mr Murdoch's bid for the Berlusconi media-empire' (72) Despite angry denials of any impropriety from Downing Street, 'two days later the media mogul himself confirmed that Prime Minister Blair had intervened on his behalf over his bid for 50.6% of Mediaset, the Milan based Berlusconi TV holding company' (73) Confirmation of the 'amazing access' (74) Murdoch has to Prime Minister Blair has incr eased backbench concerns, already infuriated by his lukewarm support for the anti-Murdoch, predatory pricing amendment to the Competition Bill. Revelations such as this do much to support the view that 'Tony Blair's New Labour is in many respects a creation of the Murdoch press' (75)

Since New Labour's landslide election victory their policy implementation has lived up to its prior description as 'a synthesis between the Thatcherite reforms of the early 1980s and communitarian politics' (76) New Labour's reliance upon the neo-liberalist rhetoric of 'flexibility', 'dynamism', 'enterprise' and 'competitiveness' has supported political theorist David Marquand's opinion that 'New Labour and the New Right are one' (77) The transformation of the British Labour Party into 'a sophisticated media-led model of limited but potentially authoritarian democracy' (78) has been a radical illustration of the effects of globalisation upon the political process. Evidence suggests that democracy has been eroded by the creation of a new right-wing political paradigm underpinned by the dictates of global capitalism, the evolution of New Labour has paralleled this process.

References:
49) Paul Hirst&Grahame Thompson, 'Globalization and the future of the nation state', 1995, p422.
50) David Held, Democracy and the Global Order From the Modern State to Cosmopolitan Governance, 1995, p108.
51) Ibid, p108
52) Ibid, p103.
53) Held&McGrew, 1993, p266.
54) Ibid, p267.
55) Hirst&Thompson, 1995, p414.
56) Pilger,1998, p490
57) Kegley&Wittkopf, 1995, p562.
58) Francis Fukuyama referred to in Kegley&Wittkopf, 1995, p442
59) Hirst&Thompson, 1995, p415.
60) Bretherton&Ponton, 1995, p226
61) Ibid, p226
62) Ibid, p227.
63) Colin Leys, The British Labour Party's Transition From Socialism To Capitalism, 1996, p11.
64) Ibid, p12.
65) Ibid, p13.
66) Ibid, p8.
67) Leys, 1996, p7.
68) Ibid, p26.
69) Herman&McChesney, 1997, p169.
70) Pilger, 1998, p468.
71) Linton, Guardian, 30-10-95.
72) White, Guardian, 24-3-98.
73) White, Guardian, 28-3-98.
74) Ibid.
75) Pilger, 1998, p468.
76) Eric Porter, Guardian, 17-7-95.
77) David Marquand, Guardian, 5-5-95.
78) Bretherton&Ponton, 1996, p227

< Back - Article List - Next >