Multinational corporations (MNCs), also known as transnational corporations (TNCs), are companies that operate in more than one country. These corporations have become increasingly important and powerful in the global economy. Many of them have huge resources that are greater than some countries’ gross national income, making them more powerful than some nation-states. By their very nature, multinational corporations have a significant impact on the global economy, which raises several issues and concerns. 

<h6 class="textbox" font-size:14px>Companies like Google, Microsoft, Amazon, Walmart, Apple or Shell are examples of MNCs with significant resources. As an example, had it been a country, Walmart's revenue would rank 23rd in terms of GDP in 2023, ahead of wealthy countries such as Sweden.</h6>

Characteristics of Multinational Corporations

Operating in multiple countries, with subsidiaries and affiliates located around the world, MNCs have a global reach in terms of their production, marketing, and distribution activities. They are typically large, well-funded, and have significant resources at their disposal, which gives them a competitive advantage in the global marketplace.

Specifically, their global presence allows MNCs to access larger consumer markets, take advantage of lower production costs internationally, optimise their tax burdens across regions, achieve greater economies of scale, leverage their financial strength, and transfer knowledge easily across geographies. These factors combine to maximise revenue opportunities for MNCs while minimising costs, allowing them to outperform competitors.

The nature of MNCs is characterised by their ability to harness technology, capital, and expertise across borders to create value for their shareholders. They often have a decentralised organisational structure with subsidiaries in different countries, which allows them to adapt to local market conditions and regulatory environments. 

MNCs also invest heavily in research and development to create new products and services, and to improve their existing ones. Generally, the nature of MNCs is complex and multifaceted, with both positive and negative aspects to their operations and impact on society.

Impacts of Multinational Corporations

MNCs have been responsible for a significant amount of job creation, technological innovation, and economic growth. MNCs have also played a role in the globalisation of the world economy, helping to create a more interconnected and interdependent global system. Countries can benefit from specialisation and investment driven by the rise of MNCs. For example, China’s economy has benefited from MNC manufacturing facilities on its territory.

MNCs can also foster cultural exchange and the transfer of knowledge and skills across borders. As automotive manufacturers like Ford, GM, and Toyota have expanded globally, they have built factories, offices, and R&D centres around the world. This facilitates cultural exchange between employees from different countries who come together and collaborate at these facilities. For example, American car engineers might be stationed at a new plant in Mexico, learning from local workers while also sharing their expertise.

However, MNCs have also been criticised for their negative impact on the environment, workers’ rights, and the social and economic development of host countries.

This is particularly true of some MNCs’ activities in the Global South. An example is Shell’s operation in the petroleum and oil extraction sector in Nigeria, where critics have highlighted environmental, human rights and accountability issues for a number of years. Some critics argue that MNCs exploit labour in developing countries, engage in unfair trade practices, and avoid paying taxes by exploiting loopholes in international tax laws. MNCs are also held responsible for contributing to environmental degradation and climate change through their production and distribution activities.

One of the main issues raised about multinational corporations is their impact on the environment. Many MNCs have been accused of contributing to environmental damage and degradation, through activities such as deforestation, pollution, and the depletion of natural resources. Another issue is their impact on workers’ rights. MNCs have been accused of exploiting workers in developing countries by paying low wages, providing poor working conditions, and violating labour laws. By taking advantage of the weak institutions in low-income countries, many MNCs have been accused of discriminatory practices, treating their workers differently from other workers based in the Global North. MNCs are also often accused of contributing to the social and economic inequality of host countries, by exacerbating the gap between the rich and the poor.

<h6 class="textbox" font-size:14px>For example, Foxconn, which manufactures smartphones and other electronics in China for companies like Apple, has faced widespread criticism and media exposure over poor working conditions and labor abuses in its factories. These included long hours, low wages, stressful quotas, and the controversial use of student interns as labor. This reflects the broader issue with multinational corporations taking advantage of weak institutions in developing countries to employ exploitative practices that boost profits.</h6>

To conclude, MNCs are more than just large and economically powerful companies - they have become immense global forces in their own right. With resources, global supply chains, and influence exceeding that of many nation-states, multinational corporations have emerged as non-state actors that can rival countries on the world stage. Their decisions and actions can shape policies, societies, and lives in profound ways. This important power raises serious questions about the legitimacy and accountability of MNCs compared to democratic governments.

While they have had a significant impact on the global economy, they have also been criticised for their negative impact on the environment, workers’ rights, and the social and economic development of host countries. This has fueled ongoing debates around the appropriate role and regulation of MNCs, with some arguing for stronger accountability mechanisms and international frameworks to promote responsible corporate behaviour in line with human rights norms and sustainable development goals.

Politics is a complex set of activities that involves the interaction of various actors, including state and non-state actors. Non-state actors, such as sub-state actors, vigilantes, pressure groups and social movements have become increasingly important in shaping political outcomes. These actors can influence policy decisions at the highest level and mobilise wide support for their causes. The role of non-state actors in politics, particularly that of vigilantes, lobbyists, and pressure groups, is not without controversies.

Sub-state Actors

Subnational actors are governing entities within a country to which the national government has delegated some level of policy-making authority. They include different levels of government such as provinces, regions, districts or cities. They cannot be described as non-state actors, as their activities are largely dependent on the scope and form of the state’s delegation of power. But they also have their own agendas and interests outside of the state framework, thus making them unfit for the state actor category.

In recent decades, subnational actors have gained more prominence in policy areas traditionally controlled by national governments. This reflects a broader shift toward decentralisation and multi-level governance, especially in the Global North. Several factors are driving this.

Global issues like climate change are directly affecting cities, states, and regions, giving them stronger incentives to develop targeted policies. For example, many cities are autonomously creating climate action plans to mitigate heat risks and adapt infrastructure. Subnational bodies can sometimes enact such policies faster than national governments, spurring innovation and bottom-up pressure for national action. This is mostly due to the existence of local grassroots movements on issues like the environment. This public pressure can empower local politicians to lead their own policies.

Furthermore, national governments have increasingly used subnational jurisdictions to pilot policy experiments before wider implementation. Generally speaking, the sub-state level has been much more integrated into the political activity of most political centres in the world, with new transnational networks between cities, states, and regions helping to diffuse best practices globally. The C40 Cities Climate Leadership Group is an example of such a network. The European Union’s Committee of the Regions also shows the willingness of state actors and supranational organisations to institutionalise such subnational voices. 

Arguably, the empowerment of sub-state actors in politics can benefit states and make them more efficient in the pursuit of their goals. However, for state actors, it also raises the question of control: how much autonomy subnational actors should have before their agendas begin to conflict with national interests and undermine state control?

Interest groups

Lobbyists

Lobbyists are non-state actors who represent the interests of various interest groups, such as corporations, unions, and advocacy groups. Lobbyists seek to directly influence government policy decisions from the inside by providing information, resources, and other forms of support to policymakers to make laws that favour their cause or interest. 

Lobbyists may also engage in direct advocacy, by organising rallies, or indirect advocacy, through media campaigns for instance. Lobbying can be a powerful force in politics, particularly in countries where the political system is open to outside influence. It can provide a means for groups and corporations to actively advocate for their needs when they might otherwise be ignored.

However, unchecked lobbying has led to controversial situations in the past. Indeed, lobby interests have sometimes gone above the voices of citizens because of their important influence and spending. The National Rifle Association in the United States stands as a prime example. For years, advocates of stronger gun control in the US have criticised the outsized role of NRA lobbying in stagnating gun laws, despite public opinion favouring some new restrictions.

More direct cases of corruption have occurred and remain a risk for democratic politics. For instance, in 2022, the Qatargate scandal in the EU exposed illicit lobbying channels involving Qatar bribing members of the European Parliament to influence policies in favour of Qatar. This example goes to show the existence of loopholes in transparency frameworks in certain political institutions. 

‍

Pressure Groups and Social Movements

Social movements and pressure groups both fall under the general category of outsider-oriented interest groups, in contrast to insider lobby groups. They try to influence policy indirectly by swaying public opinion and mobilising grassroots actions like protests.

Pressure groups are structured non-state groups that seek to influence policy decisions from the outside, through advocacy and activism. They may represent a wide range of interests, such as environmental protection, human rights, or labour rights. Pressure groups seek to mobilise public support for their causes, using tactics such as protests, petitions, and social media campaigns. Pressure groups can be a powerful force in politics, particularly when they are able to mobilise large numbers of people and get public support on their side.

Social movements are a form of collective action that seeks to bring about social, political, or economic change. They tend to arise spontaneously and be driven by a sense of urgency and passion around an issue. They are, at least initially, less structured and operate outside of formal political systems. 

Social movements are characterised by their diversity, as they often involve individuals from different backgrounds, cultures, and ideologies. They are also characterised by their fluidity, as they can change and evolve over time in response to changing circumstances. They are often driven by a sense of injustice, inequality, or oppression and seek to address these issues through various means, such as protest, advocacy, and rallies. 

Social movements can be seen as a response to the failures of the political system to address the needs of some sections of society, especially marginalised groups. The impact of social movements on society is frequently seen as positive because they often bring about changes which otherwise would not happen through formal political channels alone - or not as fast.  

Historical Impact of Social Movements and Pressure Groups

Social movements and pressure groups have often overlapped in their goals over the course of their individual histories. Historically, many impactful social movements like civil rights, women's suffrage, and LGBTQ+ rights later gave rise to insider pressure groups lobbying for policy gains. Groups like Greenpeace also blend policy lobbying with social movement-style public mobilisation.

Multiple movements have shown their ability to spur change in local and even global politics, but they often encountered challenges or even repression, sometimes failing in their goals.

Social movements have played a crucial historical role in driving social change, especially for marginalised groups like women, minorities, and LGBTQ+ people. They have also been instrumental in challenging oppressive systems of power, such as colonialism, apartheid, and dictatorships. They have also helped to create more democratic and inclusive societies by promoting the values of equality, justice, and human rights.

Many social movements have been at the forefront of political activism against discrimination of all kinds and in the pursuit of human rights and equality. From the women's suffrage movements in the world to civil rights movements led by personalities such as Martin Luther King Jr, the struggle against oppressive systems of dictatorship and colonisation, examples are manyfold. 

While social movements can create change, mobilising the public into collective action comes with challenges. Authorities tend to respond to protests with force, and sometimes outright repression, as occurred in China's violent 1989 suppression of Tiananmen Square activists. Internal divisions may also weaken movements. This was the case over the course of the French Yellow Vests protests, with internal division gradually undermining the movement’s momentum.

Further, as social movements represent specific partisan agendas, they tend to draw criticism from ideological opponents. For instance, the German far-left militant group Red Army Faction, which grew out of the student protest movements of the 1960s, turned to increasingly extreme tactics like bombings and assassinations in the 1970s after their calls for revolutionary change went unheeded through peaceful protests alone and in the face of intense government repression of the student movements. Though capable of driving reform, social movements also carry risks of provoking unintended harm, whether from violent crackdowns, internal dysfunction, or controversial extremist tactics.

The Vigilante

The vigilante is a non-state actor that operates outside of the legal framework. Vigilantes are individuals or groups that take it upon themselves to enforce the law, often through violent means. Vigilantism is often associated with crime, terrorism, and political instability. Vigilantes may be motivated by a desire to protect their business, their communities or to challenge the authority of the state. When their activities involve the use of violence or intimidation, their actions are often seen as a threat to the rule of law and can lead to further violence and instability.

___

Non-state actors such as vigilantes, lobbyists, and pressure groups have become increasingly important in shaping political outcomes. Vigilantes, while often seen as a threat to the rule of law, can also be seen as a response to the failure of the state to provide security for their own people. Lobbyists, while often criticised for their influence on policy decisions, can also provide valuable information and resources to lawmakers. Pressure groups, while sometimes seen as a nuisance, can also be a powerful force for positive change in society. As such, it is important to understand the role of non-state stakeholders in politics and to ensure that their actions are in line with democratic values and respect for human rights.

Political Insurgents

Political insurgents are armed groups that use violence to oppose a government or regime in power. Their goal is usually to overthrow the existing government and take control themselves. 

Political insurgents often arise when a significant portion of the population feels marginalised or oppressed by the ruling government, as was the case in Colombia where the FARC rebels fought the government for decades, or in Afghanistan with the Taliban insurgency against the Afghan government. Prolonged insurgencies can destabilise entire regions, undermine legitimate governance, and inflict major economic costs.

Terrorists and Ideological Extremists

Terrorists and Ideological Extremists use violence to spread fear and advance an ideological or political agenda. They often target civilians and carry out dramatic attacks like bombings, shootings, hijackings etc. Widely known terrorist organisations are  Al Qaeda, which carried out the 9/11 attacks, and ISIS, which imposed its extremist vision of Islam through brutal violence in Iraq and Syria, and also carried out many terrorist attacks on Western soil. 

While Islamist terrorism has been extremely prominent in recent decades, terrorism can stem from other extremist ideologies as well, such as white supremacy. For example, the 2019 Christchurch mosque shootings in New Zealand were conducted by a white supremacist extremist, showing that terrorism threats can arise from a range of radical ideologies that fundamentally oppose existing societies.

Regardless of the ideological motivation, terrorists attempt to create chaos and amplify divisions by targeting civilians to advance their goals. Their extreme tactics and radical ideologies are supposed to contribute to divisions in society and inflame tensions between different groups, often on the basis of religion or ethnicity.

Warlords and Marauders

Ethnic Militias are armed groups organised along ethnic lines to defend their ethnic group's interests. They are common where ethnic tensions exist and there is a lack of trust in the state to defend their group. 

Ethnic militias form to protect their group interests but can also commit atrocities against other groups, becoming perpetrators of ethnic violence themselves. The presence of armed ethnic militias is an indicator of grave tensions between identity groups and a weak state unable to maintain security. Examples include the anti-Tutsi militias during the Rwandan genocide, and the anti-Muslim Bodu Bala Sena in Myanmar.

Transnational Criminal Organizations

Transnational Criminal Organizations use violence in the pursuit of profit through illicit activities. They traffic drugs, weapons, people etc across national borders. Examples are the Mexican drug cartels like Los Zetas and the Sinaloa Cartel, and mafia organisations like the Italian Cosa Nostra. Their activities undermine governance and the rule of law.

Transnational criminal groups exploit weak institutions and porous borders to establish their illicit networks globally. They engage in money laundering and corruption to protect their activities, infiltrating governments and security forces thanks to their reach. Transnational organised crime threatens development, public health and the legal economy, costing countries billions in lost revenue.

Private Security Companies

Private Security Companies, or PSCs, are legal commercial organisations that provide security services, either domestically or internationally. Examples include companies like Blackwater (now Academi) that provided security services during the Iraq war.

The key feature that distinguishes private security companies from other non-state armed groups is their legality: they are not criminal and are, supposedly, not politically motivated either. They are commercial companies which are usually appointed by governments or organisations for their expertise. Oftentimes, those who appoint them seek well-trained personnel whose services they can use to externalise costs and detach responsibility from the state (in the case of appointment by states). They provide defensive services to clients. However, as was reported in the case of the US PSC Blackwater in Iraq, there are risks of poor conduct, human rights abuses, and companies exceeding their mandated activities.

Private military contractors give states more flexibility in projecting force abroad, but lack accountability compared to national forces. The privatised nature of security<span class="span"><span id=hint class="box-source">raises</span><div class="popover">Source:<br><br><div>MacLeod, S. Private Security Companies and Shared Responsibility: The Turn to Multistakeholder Standard-Setting and Monitoring through Self-Regulation-‘Plus’. Netherlands International Law Review, 2015.</div></div></span>issues of transparency, oversight and adherence to international norms when operating in conflict zones.

Failing or failed states are a growing issue in the world today and pose a significant threat to global security and stability. A failed state is defined as a state that has lost the ability to provide basic services such as security, justice, and governance to its citizens. These states are characterised by weak or non-existent institutions, widespread corruption, and a lack of economic development. The challenges of reviving failing or failed states and the strategies that can be used to address these challenges are complex.

Challenges of Reviving Failing or Failed States

Reviving a failing or failed state is a complex and difficult task that requires long-term commitment and significant resources. One of the main challenges is the lack of functioning institutions that can provide basic services to the population. This often requires building or rebuilding institutions from scratch, which can be a slow and difficult process. 

Once a state fails and its institutions collapse because of war, conflict, a natural disaster, or any other reason, bringing the country back as a functioning state can be<span class="span"><span id=hint class="box-source">extremely challenging.</span><div class="popover">Source:<br><br><div>Rotberg, R. I. State Failure and State Weakness in a Time of Terror. Brookings Institution Press, 2003.</div></div></span>One major challenge is the lack of trust between the state and the population, which can make it difficult to implement reforms and build consensus around a common vision for the future.

Also, the presence of armed groups and other non-state actors can make it difficult to re-establish security and stability in the country, which is a necessary condition for rebuilding state institutions and promoting economic development.

Failed States

To revive failing or failed states, a comprehensive approach is required, which addresses the root causes of the problem. This approach must focus on building effective institutions, promoting economic development, and establishing security and stability in the country. The following strategies can be used to achieve these objectives:

• Building Effective Institutions: This requires establishing strong and accountable institutions that can provide basic services to the population, such as security, justice, and governance. This can be done through capacity-building programs, training, and technical assistance.

• Promoting Economic Development: Economic development is crucial for reviving failing or failed states. This requires creating an enabling environment for businesses to thrive, promoting trade and investment, and investing in infrastructure development.

• Establishing Security and Stability: This requires addressing the root causes of conflict and violence, such as poverty, inequality, and political exclusion. This can be done through conflict resolution efforts, peacebuilding programmes, and security sector reforms.

• Engaging Civil Society: Civil society plays a crucial role in promoting democracy, accountability, and transparency. Engaging civil society can help to rebuild trust between the state and the population and promote social cohesion.