Should the world be organized into sovereign territorial nation-states?

Sovereignty by definition according to The Nation-State and Global order by Opello and Rosow is interpreted to mean the power of absolute authority within a bounded geographical or territorial space. Or in other words, a state needs to be the primary authoritative power over its territory and the people who live within those boundaries. Sovereignty requires nation-states to address international and external issues. As stated above, a sovereign government has supreme authority over its territory internationally. Whereas externally, recognition of other nation-states states helps to certify those territorial boundaries to prevent conflict from arising over land disputes. Historically speaking, the world was not organized into sovereign territorial nation-states. The religious upheaval of Christianity known as the Reformation in the medieval period lead to the creation of the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 this helped spark an effect that established the rise of the modern states today. However, whereas the development of nation-states in Europe took several hundred years to establish, the remaining countries in the world should not be rushed to adopt this path of creating sovereign territorial nation-states in order to keep up with European countries. This type of pressure could possibly result in potential wars and revolutions. The gradual development of these states into organized sovereign territorial nation-states will occur naturally.

The Peace of Westphalia recognized the principle of state sovereignty and established the concept of secure and universally recognized state borders in law. (Opello and Rosow Pg. 79) Without the issue of spiritual authority, states were free to direct religion within their own territory. People around the world thus began to view the state as a dominant form of political change. The adoption of modern states was a slow process in Europe. With the gradual development of states organization began to come progressively easier.

The question of organizing the world into sovereign territorial nation-states should be adopted, but not at the immediate expense of damaging the economy, capital, or organization of other states. It could be debated that newer sovereign territorially nation-states often face significant challenges, such as establishing sovereignty over territories where a multitude of peoples, languages, religions. and cultures may coexist-problems that most European states solved only over the course of centuries and at the cost of many wars, revolutions, and lives. However, although Europe no longer remains as the prominent ruler over the world, the authority that individual nation-states had created left the world with a legacy of these state’s superiority.

The advantages of organizing the world into sovereign territorial nation-states include the creation of embassies and ambassadors to further establish relationships among states. (Opello and Rosow) Historically, a disadvantage to the organization of nation-states was the impact it has on “others” who were classified as non-christen people who were not governed by the same rules of the international society of Europe. Thus, to prevent such conflict the establishment of organized sovereign territorial nation-states is vital to maintain peace.

In conclusion, the development of sovereign territorial nation states created a perfected system of organization, communication, and power among the states of Europe. The answer to the question if the world should be organized into sovereign territorial nation-states is resounding yes because it is necessary for other nation-states and to function, communicate, and live peacefully in an organized fashion.