The Paradigms Review

The state and its sovereignty are the face of new poles of power. In the realm of theory, revision of interpretive studies of the international scene has led to such divergent responses ranging from the conservative behaviorists to postmodern iconoclasts.

In response to the tangle of theories arises as Mendoza thesis that the specific optical (of theoretical and conceptual approaches) should be operational, depending on the purpose intended, the means used, the historical moment and even the social phenomenon under study.

The power struggle was not allowed to interpret the paradigm that, according to some authors, the reality of the processes and national problems, or those pertaining to the international arena.

For 45 years academics and political debates on security has concerning the assumptions, perceptions and interests of officials and academics immersed in the theories realists of power and concerned about the rivalry between the U.S. and the Soviet Union devoted much attention to the central concerns of the majority impoverished south: reducing hunger and poverty, equitable distribution of benefits from economic growth, improvements in health, education and social security, defense of human rights; consolidation of democracy, control of environmental degradation, and respect for the principles of self determination, no intervention and national sovereignty. It is natural then the discredit of the security studies from those in the developing world intellectuals concerned about the welfare of their society. It is also logical rejection and suspicion when it comes to security.

Structural trends change and international social transformation caused, by the collapse of the Berlin Wall and the centrally planned economies, the single polarity in the military political sphere, the economical poles , the emergence of centers of power than the government. International society was very different from that prevailing for almost 40 years and, consequently, political realism began to lose favor in academic circles and power.

New issues on the international agenda and did not permit a linear interpretation of the facts as offered by the era of bipolarity, which allowed to explain, through optical West East conflicts in the second half of the century. The paradoxes of the contemporary world are grounded in real contradictions: the contradictions between democratic aspirations and constraints most elitist of the main actors of the market, the divorce of the symbols of cultural equality address the social economic assumptions, the inequities of power that transforms free trade in major regional social economic inequalities.

The struggle between capitalism and socialism apparently disappear with the fall of oriental bear. The Helsinki agreements on disarmament and U.S. support for the government of Boris Yeltsin to leave it to Russia on nuclear arms control installed in the former Soviet republics, only came to ratify the trends of economic and political polarization were present from the early seventies, when the bipolar scheme began to move toward a polarity system.

Moreover, the weight of transnational corporations on domestic economies and their influence on the international economic, social theories pushed for a debate on the political role of the state in development. The power component of these axes showed the increasing influence of cheap ingredients, to the detriment of the military component.

As a result of the new profile of power and the emergence of centers of influence and power at international not government structures, the role of nation states began to be severely challenged from several angles. The attachment to political sovereignty encountered serious difficulties in the exercise of economic sovereignty. The result was the start of an intense series of challenges to the state role in development.

This criticism began to appear in the field of economic ideology and spread rapidly to the field of political geometry. Trends monetarist Chicago school found good reception in the conservative and the role of the state protect itself in a huge financial crisis started to reverse the role assumed for decades to the impetus of Keynesian theories.

The crisis in the financial and monetary system, the new national entities and the relaxation of the harsh discipline of the power blocs in the political military, are challenging the dominance of the state.

The new layering technology and production of large sectors of the economy was linked to the accelerated development of new financial and production centers and created the conditions necessary for the upgrading of economic theory will take place at the expense of political theories. Globalization has rapidly become the new government ideology. The formation of regional blocs and integration into new trends in the global economy became targets of government.

The school of realism entered in a process of transformation. The regional economic processes quickly and clearly showed that the predominant production and financial flows within, and their links with the external dynamics, involving theoretical and practical challenges that they could not be easily assimilated through the traditional application of the concepts and unbridled militarism of national power.

According to new external requirements and constraints prevailing abroad, the concepts of globalization, interdependence, sovereignty and inter sovereignty came to occupy the center of interpretive studies of national societies and international relations.

Since no country could exercise sovereignty under the autarchic vision that predominates throughout the modern history of the state. Now every country in the world is interdependent, whether in the light of the economic vision of globalization or interdependence of power schemes.

In defining its policy lines and strategies to the outside, the American state justifies and legitimizes the imposition of its perspective on the sovereignty of other nations, thereby endorsing the use of the full range of instruments that have and can deploy its power . Since the U.S. vision responds to its historical and cultural formation and clearly expresses his proclivity to act unilaterally by imposing their perspective, vision and capabilities.

The transnational development of social conflicts, (economic and political) in the world gives the challenges of national security and sovereignty new profiles. The same sense of threat has been regularly reviewed in this decade.

The classical concept of sovereignty is facing several challenges. From above, which concern over the nation state, such as drug trafficking, pollution and terrorism; same must be resolved together, not isolated, in full respect with the sovereignty of a State. Especially with those who do not respect or recognize the role of nation states, such as religious movements, ethnic and social entities that seek to establish themselves sub national, local .

Issues like drug trafficking and organized crime, environment and human rights, emerged in international forums because of his immense influence with the national and international, regardless of frontiers, determining the exercise of sovereignty in its traditional sense . This influenced the revision of the paradigms of security.