The human world is one unit, one world. That is a world based on humanoid unity.
Importantly, the political and geographical divisions between different states and countries were never immutable, nor are they now. They were, and still are, political divisions.
Notwithstanding, political philosophers used to think of various political entities as static and morphed them into this or that concept.
That may be due to their specific circumstances under which they were philosophizing.
And the one reason for that anomaly is the difference between the logical and the real or the practical.
The most misleading one among these concepts is the concept of sovereignty.
Here I want to bring out a major consequence of this concept.
All kinds of governments have used this concept to perpetuate their power not only within their respective geographical boundaries but beyond them also. That is, to establish illegitimate rule over their people and other people as well.
In the current situation, it is easier to see and understand certain concepts of political philosophy floating freely. Especially the concept of sovereignty, that is, supreme political authority.
On the sides, it is also worth noting that a new type of globalization is emerging.
In my view, sovereignty is not an absolute concept. It is relative. That is, it is bound by the limits and restrictions of temporal and spatial considerations! It can take different forms in different circumstances.
Just as the human world is interdependent, no country, region, or nation is self-contained or self-sufficient. This one thing alters the absolute nature of the concept of sovereignty.
Another issue that requires examination is this: Should almost half of the population of Afghanistan, that is, women, be left on their own? Including the people who do not agree with the Taliban’s notion of religion?
Similarly, should the people of Iran also be left at the mercy of an unrepresentative government there?
Or should the people of Ukraine be left at the mercy of Russia?
All these questions require serious thought and critical examination based on argument and evidence.
But most important is the need to reexamine and redefine the concept of sovereignty.
This issue is also related to another problem of political philosophy:
Under what circumstances is rebellion against a government permissible? Or under what circumstances can it be allowed?
Another issue can be added to it:
Under what circumstances is intervention in a country by another country permissible and justifiable?
PS. To understand and appreciate the pivotal concepts of political philosophy in a historical context, a larger perspective is important, but the same is always missing in most of the analyses and points of view emerging from the developing world/South. And, eventually, a short-term perspective or an isolated perspective happens to give rise to different types of conflicts and constantly triggers a flagration now here and now there.
5 March, 2026