This dissertation investigated the question "how do Global International Regimes (GIRs) and Regional International Regimes (RIRs) perceive power dynamics during international negotiations that influence the autonomy of local governments to regulate higher education in Southern Africa?" Six respondents representing GIRs (e.g., the WTO) and four representing RIRs (e.g., the AAU) were interviewed. Data was coded using NVIVO and the following categories of power were developed: hermeneutical, informational, manipulative, monetary, and regulatory power. These categories were used to capture respondents' perceptions in terms of the level of regard for individual categories. Based on the NVIVO outcome, the Wilcoxon-Mann-Whitney test was run on SPSS to capture the extent to which each group of respondents regarded individual categories of power dynamics and to assess whether the differences in perception were significant. The assessment was done using two scales with attributes ranging from very low to very high regard: a qualitative scale with ranks ranging from first to fifth in coverage; and, a quantitative scale with values ranging from 1 to 5. Overall, the data show that Regulatory Power is perceived to play the most important role in the dynamics of power during negotiations--both groups of respondents, i.e., RIR and GIR respondents, had very high regard for Regulatory Power. The goal was to contribute to the theoretical and substantive body of knowledge in comparative and international education and to enhance the understanding of policy makers and policy implementers of the intricate nature and effect of the dynamics of power between regimes and the consequence of such on the autonomy of local governments in the area of higher education.