Evaluate the view that globalisation has had a positive impact on the global contemporary
issues. [30]
Although globalisation has, in some ways, failed to have a positive impact on the global contemporary issues
of human rights and the environment due to the lack of enforceability of standards and agreements, the
stronger argument is that globalisation has had a positive impact. This is due to the growth of a global human
rights culture and the increased importance of IGOs in tackling environmental issues.
Globalisation has had a negative impact on the global contemporary issue of human rights due to the lack of
enforceability of standards and failures undermining interventions. Political globalisation has played a key role
in establishing the global institutions of the ICC and documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR), this is due to the increased connectivity of political ideologies and particularly the rising
emphasis on western democratic ideals of human rights protection. However, these advancements are
undermined as the UDHR only possesses soft power influence and the institutions of the ECtHR and ICC rely
on the cooperation of nation states in order to find success in protecting human rights. This is unreliable, as
nation states become increasingly unwilling to accept the authority of the ICC, seeing Russia withdraw from
the Rome Statute in 2016 when it was accused of illegally annexing Crimea. This is significant as it indicates
the continual centrality of the nation state in the global world order, proving the realist view of states as acting
only in their own national interests in a quest to become the global hegemon true. This trend is likely to
accelerate in the future as states such as China, India and Brazil see their economic and therefore hard power
influence established further by economic globalisation, allowing them to become more defiant of global
institutions as they possess diplomatic influence to be unharmed by political backlash and instead prioritise
national interest. This too is a problem for the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) as Article 15 states
that members may derogate during national emergencies, almost encouraging nation-states to pursue power
and national interest over protecting the rights of the global population. In this way, globalisation has had a
negative impact on human rights as it entrenaches the centrality of nation states now, and in the future as
developing states usurp greater hard power influence.
However, the stronger argument is that globalisation has had a positive impact on human rights as it
establishes states as moral arbiters to ensure the continual prominence of an international human rights based
culture. This culture of protecting human rights accelerated after the Cold War as the international community
resolved it was more important than ever for a universal standard of human rights to be established. This is
shown as by 2021, 123 states had ratified the Rome Statute to see themselves placed under the jurisdiction of
the ICC and in its first 18 years the court made 8 convictions and 4 acquittals. This influence is aided by other
forms of globalisation such as social and technological as they are able to facilitate advancements in social
media and technology allowing a culture of human rights protection to rapidly diffuse across borders. Not only
are international courts and institutions able to hold states accountable for human rights abuses, but the rise of
social media also aids in this. This was illustrated in 2010 as the Arab Spring saw Facebook and Twitter used
to organise and amplify demonstrations against oppressive regimes, seeing the movement spread into over 15
countries in Northern Africa and surrounding states. This clearly shows the wide ranging impact of social
media as well as being bolstered by the online presence of pressure groups such as Human Rights Watch and
Amnesty International. This movement is sure to develop at a fast pace as technological globalisation spreads
ideas around the world, seeing technology advance and the world become increasingly interconnected. In an
era of social media, soft power arguably becomes more important than hard power in some instances as
states cannot use economic prominence to fight condemnation in the global community. Instead, increasingly it
is imperative that states respond to critiques from the international community to avoid sanctions, boycotts and
international bad faith and allow them to continue to claim soft power influence and advance in the global world
order. This impact is more significant as it is set to advance into the future and eventually impact a much wider
range of people as mass media expands and technology becomes more readily available showing how
globalisation has had a positive and long lasting impact on protecting human rights.
Globalisation could, however, be argued to have had a negative impact on the environment due to the impact
of widespread industrialisation and the continued importance of the nation state at odds with global
issues. [30]
Although globalisation has, in some ways, failed to have a positive impact on the global contemporary issues
of human rights and the environment due to the lack of enforceability of standards and agreements, the
stronger argument is that globalisation has had a positive impact. This is due to the growth of a global human
rights culture and the increased importance of IGOs in tackling environmental issues.
Globalisation has had a negative impact on the global contemporary issue of human rights due to the lack of
enforceability of standards and failures undermining interventions. Political globalisation has played a key role
in establishing the global institutions of the ICC and documents such as the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights (UDHR), this is due to the increased connectivity of political ideologies and particularly the rising
emphasis on western democratic ideals of human rights protection. However, these advancements are
undermined as the UDHR only possesses soft power influence and the institutions of the ECtHR and ICC rely
on the cooperation of nation states in order to find success in protecting human rights. This is unreliable, as
nation states become increasingly unwilling to accept the authority of the ICC, seeing Russia withdraw from
the Rome Statute in 2016 when it was accused of illegally annexing Crimea. This is significant as it indicates
the continual centrality of the nation state in the global world order, proving the realist view of states as acting
only in their own national interests in a quest to become the global hegemon true. This trend is likely to
accelerate in the future as states such as China, India and Brazil see their economic and therefore hard power
influence established further by economic globalisation, allowing them to become more defiant of global
institutions as they possess diplomatic influence to be unharmed by political backlash and instead prioritise
national interest. This too is a problem for the European Court of Human Rights (ECtHR) as Article 15 states
that members may derogate during national emergencies, almost encouraging nation-states to pursue power
and national interest over protecting the rights of the global population. In this way, globalisation has had a
negative impact on human rights as it entrenaches the centrality of nation states now, and in the future as
developing states usurp greater hard power influence.
However, the stronger argument is that globalisation has had a positive impact on human rights as it
establishes states as moral arbiters to ensure the continual prominence of an international human rights based
culture. This culture of protecting human rights accelerated after the Cold War as the international community
resolved it was more important than ever for a universal standard of human rights to be established. This is
shown as by 2021, 123 states had ratified the Rome Statute to see themselves placed under the jurisdiction of
the ICC and in its first 18 years the court made 8 convictions and 4 acquittals. This influence is aided by other
forms of globalisation such as social and technological as they are able to facilitate advancements in social
media and technology allowing a culture of human rights protection to rapidly diffuse across borders. Not only
are international courts and institutions able to hold states accountable for human rights abuses, but the rise of
social media also aids in this. This was illustrated in 2010 as the Arab Spring saw Facebook and Twitter used
to organise and amplify demonstrations against oppressive regimes, seeing the movement spread into over 15
countries in Northern Africa and surrounding states. This clearly shows the wide ranging impact of social
media as well as being bolstered by the online presence of pressure groups such as Human Rights Watch and
Amnesty International. This movement is sure to develop at a fast pace as technological globalisation spreads
ideas around the world, seeing technology advance and the world become increasingly interconnected. In an
era of social media, soft power arguably becomes more important than hard power in some instances as
states cannot use economic prominence to fight condemnation in the global community. Instead, increasingly it
is imperative that states respond to critiques from the international community to avoid sanctions, boycotts and
international bad faith and allow them to continue to claim soft power influence and advance in the global world
order. This impact is more significant as it is set to advance into the future and eventually impact a much wider
range of people as mass media expands and technology becomes more readily available showing how
globalisation has had a positive and long lasting impact on protecting human rights.
Globalisation could, however, be argued to have had a negative impact on the environment due to the impact
of widespread industrialisation and the continued importance of the nation state at odds with global
