IB DP Global Politics – Core topic – Sovereignty in global politics Practice Questions

These are original questions written for Marlbridge, for revision and practice on this content. They are not reproduced past-paper questions, and they do not replicate the exam’s exact structure, question count or mark tariffs – the IB holds copyright in its own papers. Use these alongside the official past papers available through your school or the IB store.

This practice set covers the core prescribed topic “Sovereignty in global politics” for IB Diploma Programme Global Politics. It follows the IB Diploma Programme Global politics guide (first assessment 2026, published February 2024), the course examined from the May 2026 session onwards. Questions 1–9 suit SL and HL; question 10 is HL only.

Learn the content in the study guide and revision notes first. Norland, Varra and every organisation in the sources are fictional.

Questions

Sources for questions 1–6:

Source A – original text written for Marlbridge For most of the modern era, a sovereign state controlled its territory by force, answered to no higher authority and was accepted as an equal by other states. That picture is now harder to sustain. Governments share decisions in trade blocs, accept rulings from international courts and are told that sovereignty carries a duty to protect citizens. Yet states still draw their authority from the people who vote for them, and no international body can collect taxes or raise an army of its own.

Source B – original data written for Marlbridge (fictional state of Norland)

	2016	2019	2022	2025
Territory under effective central-government control (%)	96	88	71	74
States formally recognising the self-declared “Republic of East Norland”	0	2	9	12
Turnout in national elections (%)	68	61	44	52
Share of export earnings from Trelmont Minerals, a foreign-owned company (%)	22	31	38	41

Source C – original text written for Marlbridge: statement by the Kaweri Council, a fictional Indigenous body in Norland Our authority over the river valleys did not begin with the Norland constitution and does not depend on it. It comes from our people’s relationship with this land over many generations. We do not seek a separate state or a seat at the United Nations. We seek the right to decide how our lands and waters are used, and to have that right respected by the capital and by the companies it invites in.

Source D – original text written for Marlbridge In 2023 Norland cancelled Trelmont Minerals’ mining licence after protests over river pollution in the Kaweri valleys. Trelmont began a claim before an international investment tribunal under a treaty between Norland and the company’s home state. Ministers warned that losing could cost more than a year of health spending. Several governments with similar treaties have since reviewed them.

1. (Paper 1 style – source-based) Identify three sources of sovereignty referred to in Source A. [3]

2. (Paper 1 style – source-based) Using Source B, describe two changes in Norland’s sovereignty between 2016 and 2025. Support each with figures. [4]

3. (Paper 1 style – source-based) Explain the claim in Source C that the Council’s authority does not depend on the Norland constitution. [4]

4. (Paper 1 style – source-based) With reference to Source D, explain how a transnational company can limit a state’s sovereignty. [4]

5. (Paper 1 style – source-based) Compare and contrast the views of sovereignty in Source A and Source C. [6]

6. (Paper 1 style – source-based) Using all four sources and your own knowledge, evaluate the claim that Norland’s sovereignty is being weakened more from within than from outside. [12]

7. (Paper 1 style – core knowledge) Distinguish between internal and external sovereignty. [2]

8. (Paper 1 style – core knowledge) With reference to one real example, explain how recognition by other states can depend on economics or the balance of power. [4]

9. (Paper 2 style – essay) “Supranational integration strengthens rather than weakens state sovereignty.” Discuss, with reference to at least one thematic study. [15]

10. (Paper 3 style, HL)

Source E – original text written for Marlbridge A peaceful movement in Varra, a fictional island region, wins most regional seats on a promise of independence. The national government says the constitution does not allow any region to leave.

Recommend a course of action the national government could take, drawing on case studies you have researched. [6]

Answers

In the real exam, questions like 6, 9 and 10 are marked holistically against the IB markbands, not point by point. The [1] points show what a strong answer contains.

1. Any three: control of territory by force [1]; acceptance as an equal by other states (recognition) [1]; consent of the people who vote [1]. Also accept rulings of international courts (international law). Examiner insight: “Identify” is AO1, so each mark comes from lifting an element from the source; own-knowledge sources not in Source A earn nothing here.

2. Territory under central control fell from 96% to 74%, a drop of 22 percentage points (low of 71% in 2022) [1], so internal, de facto sovereignty weakened [1]. States recognising East Norland rose from 0 to 12 [1], a growing external challenge to territorial integrity [1]. Also accept turnout 68% to 52% (weaker consent) or Trelmont’s share rising from 22% to 41% (dependence). Examiner insight: each change needs a figure and a link to sovereignty; writing “fell by 22%” instead of “22 percentage points” is a common slip that can cost the accuracy point.

3. The Council places its authority in a source older than the state: its people’s relationship with the land [1]. This is an alternative notion of sovereignty that rejects the state as the only source of authority [1]. It is not a claim to external sovereignty, since the Council seeks no state or UN seat [1]. It claims self-government over land and water inside Norland, challenging internal sovereignty, as affirmed in UNDRIP (2007) [1]. Examiner insight: “explain” is AO2; quoting the source without saying what kind of sovereignty claim it makes stays at description.

4. The company used an investment treaty to bring an international claim against the state [1]. The threat of costs larger than a year of health spending pressures the government [1], which may deter future regulation, limiting its internal authority to protect its environment [1]. Other governments reviewing treaties shows wider impact, though Norland signed the treaty itself, so the limit flows from its own sovereign choice [1]. Examiner insight: the fourth mark rewards a qualification; answers that treat the TNC as simply more powerful than the state miss it.

5. Similar: both treat state authority as less than absolute [1] and both tie authority to people (A: voters; C: a people’s link to land) [1]. Different: A sees sovereignty as held by states and shared upwards with international bodies [1], while C places it in a people below and before the state [1]. A counts recognition by other states as a source; C does not seek it [1]. A says states keep final powers (tax, army); C asks the state to share control of land [1]. Examiner insight: the top marks need a running comparison, point by point, not a paragraph on A followed by a paragraph on C.

6. Model plan:

• Define “within” (internal, de facto) and “outside” (external) [1].
• Within: control fell to 74%, leaving about a quarter of territory outside government control (B) [1].
• Within: turnout fell from 68% to 52%, weakening consent of the governed (B) [1].
• Within: the Kaweri claim disputes the state’s sole authority over land (C) [1].
• Own knowledge: armed groups breaking a monopoly of force, e.g. Haiti’s gangs or al-Shabaab in Somalia [1].
• Outside: 12 states recognise East Norland, undermining territorial integrity (B) [1].
• Outside: Trelmont’s share rose to 41% and its tribunal claim constrains policy (B, D) [1].
• Own knowledge: Uruguay won against Philip Morris in 2016, so TNC pressure can be resisted [1].
• Evaluate B: data shows trends, not causes; control recovered 3 points after 2022 [1].
• Evaluate C: one stakeholder’s view, seeking self-government rather than secession [1].
• Link: outside recognition may encourage the secessionists; TNC dependence grew from state choices [1].
• Judgement: mainly from within, with outside pressure amplifying it; depends on the notion used [1].

Examiner insight: the 10–12 band requires sources evaluated and synthesised with own knowledge; summarising each source in turn caps the answer lower.

7. Internal: supreme authority over people and territory within the borders [1]. External: independence from outside control and recognition as an equal by other states [1]. Examiner insight: “distinguish” needs the difference stated for both terms; defining only one scores one mark at most.

8. Recognition gives a state diplomatic standing and access to treaties [1]. Honduras switched recognition from Taipei to Beijing in 2023 [1], a move widely linked to China’s far larger weight in trade and investment [1]. Taiwan’s control on the ground did not change, so recognition here followed economic power, not facts on the ground [1]. Examiner insight: a named case with a date earns the example mark only when you explain why it shows economics or power at work.

9. Model plan:

• Introduction: define supranationality and pooled sovereignty; the answer depends on the notion [1].
• For: pooling gives bargaining power, e.g. the EU negotiates trade as one bloc [1].
• For: smaller states gain a voice they lack alone [1].
• For: shared rules regain control over cross-border problems states cannot solve alone [1].
• For: membership is chosen and reversible; the UK left in 2020, keeping legal sovereignty [1].
• For (peace and conflict): AU members accepted Article 4(h) of the Constitutive Act (2000), allowing intervention in grave cases – sovereignty as responsibility [1].
• Against: EU law takes priority over national law (Costa v ENEL, 1964) [1].
• Against: qualified majority voting can override a single state [1].
• Against: eurozone members hand monetary policy to the European Central Bank [1].
• Against (development and sustainability): Greece’s bailouts from 2010 carried creditor conditions that limited budget choices [1].
• Against: sovereignty was a central argument in the UK’s 2016 referendum [1].
• Evaluate: under the traditional notion it weakens; under pooled sovereignty it can strengthen [1].
• Evaluate: effects differ for large and small states [1].
• Evaluate: exit is legally possible but costly, so the choice is limited in practice [1].
• Conclusion: a clear judgement that answers “strengthens rather than weakens” [1].

Examiner insight: the 13–15 band requires diverse perspectives explored and evaluated; one-sided answers, however detailed, cannot reach it.

10. Model plan:

• Recommend negotiating a legal route to an agreed referendum, as the UK and Scottish governments did before the 2014 vote [1].
• Justify: an open test of consent gives whichever result follows more legitimacy [1].
• Evidence: in Catalonia (2017) refusal and direct rule under Article 155 were followed by prosecutions and a long political crisis [1].
• Offer more devolution first, so Varra can choose self-government short of independence [1].
• Challenges: a precedent for other regions, a possible constitutional amendment, and possible loss of territory [1].
• Reduce risk: agree the question, threshold and minority protections in advance [1].

Examiner insight: for a recommendation, the 5–6 band requires challenges or unintended consequences to be considered; a recommendation with no downsides stays lower.

Where marks are usually lost

• Writing “sovereignty” without naming the notion or dimension (internal, external, de jure, de facto).
• Describing sources one after another on the compare-and-contrast question.
• Quoting Source B figures without saying what they show, or confusing percentage change with percentage-point change.
• Treating the Indigenous claim in Source C as secession when it asks for self-government.
• Naming real cases (Libya, Brexit, Honduras) without explaining how they support the point.
• Leaving out a judgement on “evaluate”, “discuss” or “recommend” questions.

Next steps

• Revise with the sovereignty revision notes.
• Re-read weak areas in the sovereignty study guide.
• See the IB DP Global Politics course hub and printable checklist.
• More practice: Rights and justice and Peace and conflict.
• Take one of our all free 10-minute diagnostics.
• Book a free trial class.

Official syllabus

International Baccalaureate Organization, Diploma Programme Global politics guide, first assessment 2026 (published February 2024) – core topics, prescribed topic “Sovereignty in global politics”.