The survival of sovereignty

Troper, Michel

doi:10.1017/cbo9780511675928.008

Cited by 30 publications

(5 citation statements)

References 0 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Later, Krasner (2004) speaks of sharing sovereignty with other states, and along similar lines, Matanock (2014) speaks of joint rather than complete authority. Finally, understandings of sovereignty as a spectrum can also be found in international-level analyses that reflect on how sovereignty is compromised, pooled or shared because of international law (Troper, 2010), interdependence (Gilpin, 1975), international bodies (Philpott, 2001) or multinational corporations (Strange, 1996; see also Skinner, 2010). All these accounts share a view of the non-absolute nature of sovereignty as manifested in the sharing of state authority between different actors, rather than variation manifested in partial sovereignty and changes in its extent or quality over time which seems to be the case with the phenomenon of statehood claimants without general recognition which is an important part of this study.…”

Section: Sovereignty and Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

State recognition and dynamic sovereignty

Kyris

2022

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This study reflects on sovereignty as dynamic, whereby associated conditions, like recognition, fluctuate in quality and quantity within a unit and over time, and adds to existing discussions that concentrate on changes in the meaning of (rather than associated conditions with) sovereignty or more static approaches to partial sovereignty relative to other actors in international relations (e.g. in the context of hierarchical relations). I do so by reflecting on different degrees of recognition, as associated with external sovereignty, such as extensive but not general recognition (e.g. Kosovo); different types of recognition, such as recognition of a right to (as opposed to the presence of) statehood (e.g. Palestine); as well as change in recognition over time, such as with those witnessing significant fluctuations in their recognition (e.g. Taiwan, Sahrawi Arab Democratic Republic). Towards explaining these changes and theory development, I argue for historicising sovereignty, and by doing so, I contribute to a literature that has focused more on changes in the meaning of sovereignty across time rather than changes in its within-unit practical manifestations. I also offer some preliminary theoretical assumptions on how internal and external dimensions of sovereignty might interplay over time in processes of state emergence and on issues of agency, particularly on how recognisers define what we understand as sovereignty but also how some statehood claimants navigate or even embrace their lack of recognition to advance their sovereignty. With this range of conceptual and theoretical propositions presented, the study seeks to facilitate the development of further analysis of statehood, recognition and sovereignty.

show abstract

Section: Sovereignty and Recognitionmentioning

confidence: 99%

State recognition and dynamic sovereignty

Kyris

2022

European Journal of International Relations

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Third, several scholars view sovereignty as a strictly legal concept, to be distinguished from questions of empirical reality (see e.g. James, 1986, Troper, 2010. As a consequence, sovereignty would be a binary concept: A political entity would either be sovereign, or not at all.…”

Section: Several Comments On This Definition Are In Ordermentioning

confidence: 99%

Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky

March

Schieferdecker

2021

SSRN Journal

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…Sovereignty so defined has typically been associated with a sovereign state possessing the following four features: it forms a territorially defined polity, with its own system of governance or regime ; its own ruler comprising the agent(s) or agency(ies) forming the highest and decisive organ within the regime and its own people (the demos ) (Troper, 2010: 137–139). These four features interact in a variety of ways, with sovereignty being the product of that interaction.…”

Section: Defining Sovereigntymentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The upward delegation and devolution of power to the supranational level works in this respect in a parallel fashion to its downward counterparts at the domestic level. In both cases, the sovereign authority of the people remains in the last analysis final, supreme and comprehensive with respect to themselves (Troper, 2010). Yet they obtain the facility – albeit mediated through their representatives – to cooperate with other peoples so as to support their mutual capacity for non-dominated rule.…”

Section: A European Republic Of Sovereign States? Sovereignty Delegatmentioning

confidence: 99%

A European Republic of Sovereign States: Sovereignty, republicanism and the European Union

Bellamy

2016

European Journal of Political Theory

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

This article defends state sovereignty as necessary for a form of popular sovereignty capable of realising the republican value of non-domination and argues it remains achievable and normatively warranted in an interconnected world. Many scholars, including certain republicans, contend that the external sovereignty of states can no longer be maintained or justified in such circumstances. Consequently, we must abandon the sovereignty of states and reconceive popular sovereignty on a different basis. Some argue sovereignty must be displaced upwards to a more global state, while others advocate it be vertically and horizontally dispersed to units below, across and above the state. Each group offers a related vision of the European Union to illustrate their proposals. Both these arguments are criticised as more likely to produce than reduce domination because neither can sustain a form of popular sovereignty capable of instantiating relations of non-domination. This article proposes the alternative of a republican association of sovereign states that allows sovereign states and their peoples to mutually regulate their external sovereignty in non-dominating ways. This alternative proposal provides a more plausible and defensible means for sustaining the requisite kind of popular sovereignty in contemporary conditions and a more appropriate vision of the European Union.The issue of state sovereignty lies at the heart of many debates about the democratic legitimacy of European integration. On the one hand, critics of the European Union (EU) frequently complain it erodes state sovereignty and thereby weakens the capacity of domestic electorates to control and influence how they are governed

show abstract

The survival of sovereignty

Cited by 30 publications

References 0 publications

State recognition and dynamic sovereignty

State recognition and dynamic sovereignty

Technological Sovereignty as Ability, Not Autarky

A European Republic of Sovereign States: Sovereignty, republicanism and the European Union

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About