The aim of this study is to demonstrate how observing states from a social perspective as opposed to a political one can help with understanding state action. This is done by demonstrating that concepts such as sovereignty and legitimacy are contractual and that since acting a certain way is not what makes a state sovereign or legitimate, some states such as Monaco freely act outside of norms associated with state action, and this difference is due to culture and identity. Discourse analysis of why certain labels instead of others are applied to Monaco is carried out to demonstrate that some international interactions are performative and done for a state to be perceived positively. France and Monaco have a mutually beneficial relationship, and France does not necessarily disagree with Monaco’s lack of progress against money laundering, but has to pretend that it disagrees due to having an identity and reputation to uphold. This is linked to what will be called ‘State Identity Theory’ which is similar to the sociological theory of Identity Theory, except it is applied to states. Finally, the previous concepts of normative state action and how this impacts identity are used to discuss why France is supposedly jealous of Monaco, by critically questioning the intentions and republican result of the French revolution as juxtaposed to Monaco’s monarchy and its key part in the success of Monaco. It finds that Monaco’s monarchical success is a reminder to France of its own failures.
PLEASE NOTE: You must be a member of the University of Lincoln to be able to view this dissertation. Please log in here.