WORLD PEACE AND CONFLICT UNDER GLOBALIZATION. What is "globalization" and why should anyone care about it? There are a lot of different answers to this question, depending on whom you ask. The sceptics would say:
What is "globalization" and why should anyone care about it? There are a lot of different answers to this question, depending on whom you ask.
The sceptics would say:
Globalization can be better described as internationalization in the form of growing links between discrete national economies or societies?
Simply an ideological construction – a convenient myth that helps justify and legitimize the neoliberal global project, i.e. the creation of a global free market and the consolidation of Anglo-American capitalism
The globalists reject the assertion that globalization as a purely ideological or social construction or a synonym for Western imperialism.
They argue that globalization is an inevitable, technologically driven process that gives rise to real structural changes to the relationships between people of different countries with multiple economic, political and social dimensions.
The 9.11 attacks involved the hijacking of four commercial airlines. With nearly 91m3 or 24,000 gallons of jet fuel aboard, the aircraft were turned into flying bombs.
Iraqi Shi'ite men shout anti-American slogans during a demonstration in Baghdad, August 13. Thousands of Shi'ites poured into the streets to denounce U.S. troops who they said had defiled a religious school by flying low in a helicopter, which struck its flag. On 8.29 the Occupation Command admitted the flag desecration was a deliberate act, not an “accident” as they had claimed before..(Faleh Kheiber/Reuters
The atrocious explosion in the Indonesian island of Bali not only confirms Samuel Huntington’s theory of "War of Civilzations", but also that this conflict has entered an active phase", according to a veteran Iranian political analyst Safa Haeri, referring to the renowned American political scientist’s "The Clash of Civilizations and the Remaking of World Order".
And the Rest?
Post-Cold War International Relations in the context of globalization
Francis versus Samuel
The End Clash of
of History Civilizations
The Clash of Globalizations?
What we may be witnessing in not just the end of the Cold War, or the passing of a particular period of post-war history, but the end of history as such: that is, the end point of mankind’s ideological evolution and the universalization of Western liberal democracy as the final form of of human government
…the victory of liberalism has occurred primarily in the realm of ideas or consciousness and is as yet incomplete in the real of material world. But there are powerful reasons for believing that it is the ideal that will govern the material world in the long run
Samuel P. Huntington
The Clash of Civilizations: Remaking of World Order
"Huntington has written a brilliant, riveting, and utterly original book, masterful in presentation and brimming with insight, its disturbing conclusions corroborated by an impressive array of data and well-chosen quotations. How Huntington makes his case is no less impressive than the argument itself. The author's style is precise, pithy, plainspoken, and coolly analytical." —A. J. Bacevich, director of the Center for International Relations at Boston University
The tragic events of September 11, 2001 have suddenly brought the Islamic civilization to the focus of the Western world’s attention —
in a way that fits into the kind of the enemy nmstereotype created by Samuel Huntington’s essay of 1993 on “The Clash of the Civilizations.”
After September 11Clash of Civilizations or Dialogue? Dr. Hans Koechler
The Harvard political scientist Samuel P. Samuel argued that in the wake of the Cold War, the main pattern of global conflict would probably be cultural, not economic or ideological. Civilizations, in Huntington’s thinking, are broad groupings organized around language, history, religion, and self-identification. “In the coming years, the local conflicts most likely to escalate into major wars will be those...along the fault lines between civilizations,” wrote Huntington, who listed eight “major civilizations”—Western, Confucian, Japanese, Islamic, Hindu, Slavic-Orthodox, Latin American, and African—that might clash with one another.
“It was hoped that the end of the Cold War would usher in an era of peace and stability but it did not. The disputes of Palestine and Kashmir were festering wounds…. The theory of clash of civilizations further complicated things, he said. "Like any religion," he emphasized, "Islam preaches moderation, justice and equality and does not preach extremism and militancy… The vast majority of the moderates remain out of the loop, and are seen by the West as extremists. Islam is seen through the eyes of extremists from both sides” –
Most Western foreign policy experts disagree. Al-Qaeda considers its terrorist campaign against the United States to be part of a war between the ummah — Arabic for the “Muslim community”— and the Christian and Jewish West. But al-Qaeda’s extremist, politicized form of Islam represents only one strain within a diverse religion — and a radical one that many Muslims reject as a grotesque distortion of their faith. Many Muslim-majority countries are members of the U.S.-led coalition fighting al-Qaeda. Moreover, al-Qaeda also targets Muslim governments, such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia, that it sees as godless. Many experts therefore say the September 11 attacks cannot be reduced to a “clash of civilizations.”
As Stanley Hoffman observed, far from spreading peace, it seemed to have fostered conflicts and resentments. The lowering of various barriers, especially the spread pf the global media, makes it possible for the most deprived or oppressed to compare their fate with that of the free and well-off.
The terrorist attack of September 11, 2001 showed that for all its accomplishments, globalization makes an awful form of violence easily accessible to hopeless fanatics.
As countess individuals and groups are becoming global actors along with states, insecurity and vulnerability are rising.
Clash of Globalizations -- Stanley Hoffman
Institutional barriers– reluctance of states to accept global directives that might constrain the market or further reduce their sovereignty
Identity – globalization has not profoundly challenged the enduring national nature of citizenship.
Violence – traditional state of war still persists. States prefer to try to preserve their security alone or through traditional alliances. –Stanley Hoffman
New Form of Global Governance
Role of Major Powers
Economic and Social Justice