‘Despite a number of trends to the contrary, the State has been and remains the primary actor in the global system. Elucidate the statement by analysing the factors which helped create State and the reasons for the primacy of States as actors in International Relations. (1992)
The modern sovereign territorial state emerged in early modern Europe and spread worldwide through colonialism and decolonisation. UN membership grew from 51 in 1945 to 193 today. Transnational corporations, international organisations and non-state networks are the “trends to the contrary”. The statement holds that the forces which created the state still sustain its primacy.
Factors that created the State
- War and the military revolution. Charles Tilly‘s formula (The Formation of National States in Western Europe, 1975), war made the state, and the state made war, links gunpowder, standing armies and costly fortifications to the need for taxation, bureaucracy and centralised command. Rulers who could extract resources survived. Hendrik Spruyt (The Sovereign State and Its Competitors, 1994) adds why city-leagues and city-states lost: sovereign territorial states could standardise coinage, weights and law for commerce, make credible commitments and speak with one voice.
- Decline of feudalism and the Church. The Reformation broke papal authority. The Peace of Westphalia (1648) confirmed rulers’ authority over their own realms and laid the basis of sovereign equality.
- The theory of sovereignty. Jean Bodin (Six Books of the Commonwealth, 1576) defined sovereignty as supreme, perpetual power; Thomas Hobbes (Leviathan, 1651) justified an undivided sovereign as the escape from the state of nature.
- Nationalism and popular sovereignty. The French Revolution joined the state to the nation, and nineteenth-century nationalism and twentieth-century self-determination made the nation-state the universal model.
- Colonialism and decolonisation. Empire carried the territorial state worldwide, and new states inherited colonial borders. Mohammed Ayoob (The Third World Security Predicament, 1995) shows them compressing centuries of European state-making into decades, which explains their insecurity and their fierce attachment to sovereignty.
Reasons for the primacy of States
- Monopoly of legitimate force. In Max Weber‘s definition, only the state’s coercion counts as authority rather than violence, and no other actor wages war at scale.
- Territory and jurisdiction. Every corporation, NGO and person must exist within some state’s jurisdiction, under its courts, taxes and permits.
- Legal personality. States are the primary subjects of international law, meeting the Montevideo Convention (1933) criteria and granting recognition. International organisations are created by treaties among states and act through their consent.
- Structural centrality. Kenneth N. Waltz (Theory of International Politics, 1979) argues that the international structure is defined by the major states; non-state actors operate within it.
- Loyalty. Citizens vote, pay taxes and fight as nationals; no transnational body commands comparable allegiance.
- Crisis response. In 2008 and during COVID-19, governments, not markets or NGOs, rescued banks and closed borders. In 2025 world military spending reached a record $2,887 billion (SIPRI).
The trends to the contrary
TNCs, regional integration, global civil society and terrorist networks are real. Susan Strange described a retreat of the state before world markets. Yet these actors depend on state-made rules: corporate personality, property and enforceable contracts are state products, and the EU’s pooled sovereignty rests on member-state treaties. India illustrates both sides: it integrated over 560 princely states into one sovereign authority after 1947 and now accepts global capital on terms it sets, such as FDI screening and data rules.
Conclusion
The state’s primacy is structural, not sentimental. The functions that created it, organised violence, territorial rule and law-making, remain functions no rival performs. Its exclusivity has eroded and its authority is now shared, but other actors still operate inside the framework that states create and enforce.