Close
Are some states more equal than others?
Western interventionism since the 1990s is often linked to shifting conceptions of legitimate statehood. This paper argues that such actions stem from the rise of liberal solidarism.
14 February 2025
By Hannah Kroker (MSc Global Governance and Ethics Alumni)
Since the 1990s, some Western governments have increasingly engaged in activities like humanitarian interventions, regime change, and democracy promotion in the Global South – even though this implied that they occasionally had to disregard the sovereignty of legally equal states. It may be tempting to fully attribute this development to the changing political conception of legitimate statehood, which has continuously diverged from its stable legal meaning. Yet, the paper argues that this was merely an enabling factor which allowed governments to expand their foreign political toolkit by more intrusive action. Instead, it is concluded that both the new political understanding of rightful membership in the international community and the occasional disregard for states’ sovereignty are consequences of the rise of liberal solidarism after the end of the Cold War. The latter promoted liberal homogeneity and led to the growth of complex global governance structures, which a) extended the criteria for legitimate statehood, b) raised the normative desirability of advancing liberalism, and c) placed increased strain on states through ever-expanding responsibilities. These phenomena made it seem necessary for Western states to apply more interventionist foreign policy methods – even if this required them to, at times, set the sovereignty of formally equal states aside.
To access the full working paper:
