The Contemporary World GEED 10043 PDF

GEED 10043: THE CONTEMPORARY WORLD MR. LEMUEL “DONG” N. DAMOLE Course Title : The Contemporary World Course Code : GEED 10043 Course Credit : 3 units Course Description : This course introduces students to the contemporary world by examining the multifaceted phenomenon of globalization. Using the various disciplines of the social sciences, it examines the economic, social, political, technological, and other transformations that have created an increasing awareness of the interconnectedness of peoples and places around the globe. To this end, the course provides an overview of the various debates in global governance, development, and sustainability. Beyond exposing the student to the world outside the Philippines, it seeks to inculcate a sense of global citizenship and global ethical responsibility Course Outcomes 1. Distinguish different interpretations of and approaches to globalization 2. Describe the emergence of global economic, political, social, and cultural systems 3. Differentiate the various contemporary drivers of globalization 4. Examine the issues confronting the nation-state 5. Assess the effects of globalization on different social units and their responses The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 2 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Course Contents Unit 1: The Structures of Globalization Lesson 1: What is globalization? 6 - Global Experiences - Some Description - Globalization: A Working Definition - Conclusion: Globalization from the Ground Up Lesson 2: The globalization of world economics 12 - International Trading System - The Bretton Woods System - Neoliberalism and Its Discontents - The Global Financial Crisis and the Challenge to Neoliberalism - Economic Globalization Today - Conclusion Lesson 3: A History of Global Politics: Creating an international order 20 - The Attributes of Today’s Global System - The Interstate System - Internationalism - Conclusion Lesson 4: The United Nations and contemporary global governance 28 - What is an International Organization? - The United Nations - Challenges of the United Nations - Conclusion Lesson 5: A World of Regions 33 - Countries, Regions, and Globalization - Non-State Regionalism - Contemporary Challenges to Regionalism - Conclusion The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 3 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Unit 2: A World of Ideas: Cultures of Globalization Lesson 6: The Globalization of Religion 39 - Realities - Religion for and against Globalization - Conclusion Lesson 7: Media and Globalization 45 - Media and Its Function - The Global Village and Cultural Imperialism - Critiques of Cultural Imperialism - Social Media and the Creation of Cyber Ghettoes - Conclusion Lesson 8: The Global City 52 - Why Study Global Cities? - Defining the Global City - Indicators for Globality - Conclusion Unit 3: Movement and Sustainability Lesson 9: Global Demography 59 - The “Perils” of Overpopulation - It’s the Economy, Not the Babies! - Women and the Reproductive Rights - The Feminist Perspective - Population Growth and Food Security - Conclusion Lesson 10: Global Migration 67 - What is Migration? - Benefits and Detriments for the Sending Countries - The Problem of Human Trafficking - Integration Lesson 11: Environmental Crisis and Sustainable Development 73 - The World’s Leading Environmental Problems - Man-made Pollution - “Catching Up” - Climate Change - Combating Global Warming - Conclusion Reference: The Contemporary World by Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abinales The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 4 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students COURSE GRADING SYSTEM Class Standing 70%  Quizzes  Video output  Research  Projects/Assignments  Reaction Paper Midterm / Final Examinations 30% 100% Midterm Grade + Final Term Grade = FINAL GRADE 2 The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 5 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Lesson 1: What is Globalization? The Structures of Globalization This unit will introduce you to the various drivers of the globalization process, with specific focus on economics and politics. Although it emphasized that you experience globalization on an “everyday” level, you must also realize that there are big institutions that create large-scale changes. This unit will first trace the emergence of these institutions historically. It will then move on to explain how they affect the countries and people today. The major learning outcomes of this unit are to:  Analyze the various contemporary drivers of globalization; and  Describe the emergence of global economic and political systems. Learning Outcomes At the end of this lesson, you should be able to: 1. Agree on a working definition of globalization for the course; 2. Differentiate the competing conceptions of globalizations; and 3. Narrate a personal experience of Globalization A Story: Gio, Latif, and the Laksa When Gio was a second-year international affairs student in a university in Cebu City, he obtained funding to join the school team participating in an international Model UN competition in Sydney, Australia. At the height of the competition, Gio made plenty of new friends and became particularly close to Latif from Malaysian team. The two first started talking when Latif asked Gio where he was from. Upon discovering that the Gio was from the Philippines, Latif lit up and declared that he was a big fan of Filipino Actors Jericho Rosales and Kristine Hermosa. Gio was pleasantly surprised to learn that Latif had seen every episode of the ABS-CBN telenovela Pangako sa ‘Yo (“The Promise”). The show has on Malaysian TV a few years back, and its two stars had developed a modest following. Ashamed that he did not know as much about Malaysia as Latif knew about the Philippines, Gio asked Latif what his country was like. Latif, he discovered, was from a Muslim university in Kuala Lumpur. Gio asked him what he liked best about living in “KL,” and Latif immediately mentioned the food. Latif explained that in Kuala Lumpur, one can find Chinese, Indian, and Malay cuisines. He told Gio that this assortment of foodways was the result of how the British reorganized Malaysian society during the colonial times. The British did little to change The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 6 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students the way of life of the Malays who were the original residents, but brought in Chinese laborers to work in the rubber plantations and tin mines, and Indians to help manage the bureaucracy and serve as the initial professional core of a potential middle class. One of the ways that these ethnic groups were identified was through their foodways. According to Latif, Malaysia eventually became famous for these cuisines which can be found in the various “hawker centers” across the nation’s cities and towns. These food stands are located in outdoor food parks where locals and tourists taste the best of Malaysia, from nasi lemak to laksa. Gio interrupted Latif and asked, “What is laksa?” He felt more ashamed at his knowledge. “Ahh…let me show you what it is and how it is prepared!” replied Latif. The next day, Latif took Gio to a Malaysian restaurant afew blocks away from the university. Gio was surprised to discover that Malaysian food was readily available in Sydney. Having noticed this, Latif explained to his Filipino friend that, over the years, as more and more Malaysian students moved to Sydney to study, Malaysian restaurants followed suit. Soon after, they were catering not only to these students, but to Australian- born “Sydneysiders” as well, whose culinary tastes were becoming more and more diverse. Gio finally had his first taste of laksa—a rice noodle soup in a spicy coconut curry sauce. He found the flavors intense since, like most Filipinos, he was not used to spicy food. However, in deference to his friend, he persisted and eventually found himself enjoying hot dish. After the meal, Gio and Latif went to a nearby café and ordered “flat whites”—an expresso drink similar to latte, which is usually served in cafes in Australia and New Zealand. Both knew what flat whites were since there were Australian-inspired cafes in both Kuala Lumpur and Cebu. The new friends promised to stay in touch after the competition, and added each other on Facebook and Instagram. Over the next two years, they exchanged e-mails and posts, congratulated each other for their achievements, and commented on and liked each other’s photos. Latif sent his mother’s recipe to Gio and the latter began cooking Malaysian food in his home. A few years after graduation, Gio moved to Singapore, joining many other overseas Filipino workers (OFWs) in the city-state. The culture was new to him, but one thing was familiar: the food served in Singapore was no different from the Malaysian food he had discovered through Latif. He would later learn from Singaporean colleagues that the island country was once part of the British colony of Malay and the postwar independent Federation of Malaysia. Singapore, however, separated from the Federation in August 1965 and became a nation-state. Today, they may be two distinct countries in this part of the world, but Singapore and Malaysia still share the same cuisine. After he settled down in his apartment, Gio sought out and found a favorite laksa stall in Newton Hawker Center. He would spend his weekends there with friends eating laksa and other The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 7 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students dishes. One Saturday, while Gio was checking his Facebook feed along the very busy Orchard Road—Singapore’s main commercial road—he noticed that Latif had just posted something 5 minutes earlier. It was a picture from Orchard Road. Surprised but also excited, Gio sent Latif a private message. Latif replied immediately saying that he too had moved to Singapore and was, at that moment, standing in front a department store just a few blocks away from where Gio was. The two friends met up, and after a long hug and quick questions as to what each was up to, they ducked into café and renewed their international friendship…by ordering a pair of flat whites. Global Experiences Gio and Latif’s story is fictional but very plausible since it is, in fact,based on the real-life experience of one of the authors. It was through such friendships that one was able to appreciate the meaning and impact of globalization. We begin our definition of globalization with this narrative to illustrate how concrete the phenomenon is. The story shows how globalization operates at multiple, intersecting levels. The spread of Filipino TV into Malaysia suggest how fast this popular culture has proliferated and criss-crossed all over Asia. The Model UN activity that Gio and Latif participated in is an international competition about international politics. Gio met Latif (a Malaysian involved in the model UN) in Sydney, a global city that derives its wealth and influence from the global capital that flows through it. Sydney is also a metropolis of families of international immigrants or foreigners working in the industries that also sell their products abroad. After the two had gone back to their home countries, Gio and Latif kept in touch through Facebook, a global social networking site that provides instantaneous communication across countries and continents. They preserved their friendship online and the rekindled this face-to-face in Singapore, another hub for global commerce, with 40 percent of the population being classified as “foreign talents.” What other hints of globalization did you find in the story? Some Description Our discussion should begin with this intuitive sense that something is happening, and it is not affecting everyone in the same way. Gios’s story is a very privileged way of experiencing global flows, but for other people, the shrinking of the world may not be as exciting and edifying. For example, it is very common for young women in developing countries to be recruited in the internet as “mail-order brides” for foreign men living in other countries. After being promised a good life once married to a kind husband in a rich city, they end up becoming sexual and domestic servants in foreign lands. Some were even sold off by their “husbands” to gangs which run prostitute rings in these cities. Like Gio, they too have experienced the shrinking of the world, albeit negatively. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 8 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Governments that decide to welcome the foreign investments on the belief that they provide jobs and capital for the country offer public lands as factory or industrial sites. In the process, poor people living in these lands, also called “urban poor communities,” are being evicted by the government. The irony is that these people forcibly removed from their “slums” are also the labor force sought by foreign companies. They had to be kicked out of their homes, and then told that they could take an hour or two of bus travel from their relocated communities back to the “old home” for minimum-wage work. Because different people encounter globalization in a variety of ways, it is deemed useful to ask simple questions like: “Is globalization good or bad? Is it beneficial or detrimental?” The discussion begins with two premises. First, globalization is a complex phenomenon that occurs at multiple levels. Second, it is an uneven process that affects people differently. Globalization: A Working Definition Most accounts view globalization as primarily an economic process. When a newspaper reports that nationalists are resisting “globalization,” it usually refers to the integration of the national markets to a wider global market signified by the increased free trade. When activists refer to the “anti- globalization” movement of the 1990s, they mean resisting the trade deals among countries facilitated and promoted by global organizations like the World Trade Organization. Globalization scholars do not necessarily disagree with people who criticize unfair international trade deals or global economic organizations. In fact, many are sympathetic to the critique of economic globalization. Academics differ from journalists and political activists, however, because they see globalization in much broader terms. They view the process through various lenses that consider multiple theories and perspectives. Academics call this interdisciplinary approach, and it is this approach used by the general education (GE) courses that you will be taking alongside this one. The best scholarly description of globalization is provided by Manfred Steger who described the process as “the expansion and intensification of social relations and consciousness across world-time and across world-space.” Expansion refers to “both the creation of new social networks and the multiplication of existing connections that cut across traditional political, economic, cultural, and geographic boundaries.” These various connections occur at different levels. Social media, for example, establish new global connections between people, while international groups connect a more specific group – social workers and activists – from different corners of the globe. Intensification refers to the expansion, stretching, and acceleration of these networks. Not only are global connections multiplying, but they are also becoming more closely-knit and expanding their reach. For example, there has always been a strong financial market connecting London and New York. With the advent of electronic trading, however, the volume of that trade increases exponentially, since traders can now trade more at higher speeds. This connection is The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 9 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students thus accelerating. Apart from this acceleration, however, as the world becomes more financially integrated, the intensified trading network between London and New York may expand and stretch to cover more and more cities. After China committed itself to the global economy in the 1980s, for example, Shanghai steadily returned to its old role as a major trading post. It is not only in financial matters that you can find these connections. In 2012, when the monsoon rains flooded much of Bangkok, the Honda plant making some of the critical car parts temporarily ceased production. This had a strong negative effect on Honda-USA which relied heavily on the parts being imported from Thailand. Not only was it unable to reach the sales targets it laid out, but the ability of the service centers nationwide to assist Honda owners also suffered. As a result, the Japanese car company’s global profits also fell. The final attribute of this definition relates to the way people perceive time and space. Steger notes that globalization processes do not occur merely at an objective, material level but they also involve the subjective plane of human consciousness." In other words, people begin to feel that the world has become a smaller place and distance has collapsed from thousands of miles to just a mouse- click away. One can now e-mail a friend in another country and get a reply instantaneously, and as a result, begins to perceive their distance as less consequential. Cable TV and the internet has also exposed one to news from across the globe, so now, he/she has this greater sense of what is happening in other places. Steger posits that his definition of globalization must be differentiated with an ideology he calls globalism. If globalization represents the many processes that allow for the expansion and intensification of global connections, globalism is a widespread belief among powerful people that the global integration of economic markets is beneficial for everyone, since it spreads freedom and democracy across the world.6 It is a common belief forwarded in media and policy circles. In the next lesson, you will realize why it is problematic. For now, what is crucial to note is that when activists and journalists criticize "globalization," they are, more often than not, criticizing some manifestations of globalism. Often, these criticisms are warranted. Nevertheless, it is crucial to insist that "globalization" as a process refers to a larger phenomenon that cannot simply be reduced to the ways in which global markets have been integrated. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 10 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Conclusion: Globalization from the Ground Up All this talk of large, intersecting processes may be confusing. Indeed, it may be hard to assess globalization or comment on it because it is so diffuse and almost fleeting. Some scholars have, therefore, found it simpler to avoid talking about globalization as a whole. Instead, they want to discuss "multiple globalizations," instead of just one process. For anthropologist Arjun Appadurai, different kinds of globalization occur on multiple and intersecting dimensions of integration that he calls "scapes." An "ethnoscape,” for example refers to the global movement of people, while a "mediascape" is about the flow of culture. A "technoscape" refers to the circulation of mechanical goods and software; a "financescape” denotes the global circulation of money; and an "ideoscape" is the realm where political ideas move around. Although they intersect, these various scapes have differing logics. They are thus distinct windows into the broader phenomenon of globalization. Appadurai's argument is simple: there are multiple globalizations. Hence, even if one does not agree that globalization can be divided into the five "scapes," it is hard to deny Appadurai's central thrust of viewing globalization through various lenses. Depending on what is being globalized, a different dynamic (or dynamics) may emerge. So while it is important to ask "What is globalization?" it is likewise important to ask "What is/are being globalized?" Depending on what is being globalized, the vista and conclusions change. The structure of the lessons that follow will reflect this multidimensional understanding of globalization. Each of the lessons will focus on a particular kind of globalization. Every one of them will be about different networks and connections that are expanding and intensifying in the contemporary world. Treat each lesson not as an end in itself but as window to the broader phenomenon of globalization. Guide Questions (Handwritten in Yellow Pad wait for Further Instruction) 1. How have you experienced globalization? 2. Why is it crucial to emphasize that globalization is uneven? 3. What is the different between globalization and globalism? The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 11 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Lesson 2: The Globalization of World Economics Learning Outcomes At the end of this lesson, you should be able to: 1. Define economic globalization; 2. Identify the actors that facilitate economic globalization; 3. Narrate a short history of global market integration in the twentieth century; and 4. Articulate your stance on global economic integration. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) regards "economic globalization" as a historical process representing the result of human innovation and technological progress. It is characterized by the increasing integration of economies around the world through the movement of goods, services, and capital across borders. These changes are the products of people, organizations, institutions, and technologies. As with all other processes of globalization, there is a qualitative and subjective element to this definition. How does one define "increasing integration"? When is it considered that trade has increased? Is there a particular threshold? Even while the IMF and ordinary people grapple with the difficulty of arriving at precise definitions of globalization, they usually agree that a drastic economic change is occurring throughout the world. According to the IMF, the value of trade (goods and services) as a percentage of world GDP increased from 42.1 percent in 1980 to 62.1 percent in 2007. Increased trade also means that investments are moving all over the world at faster speeds. According to the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the amount of foreign direct investments flowing across the world was US$ 57 billion in 1982. By 2015, that number was $1.76 trillion. These figures represent a dramatic increase in global trade in the span of just a few decades. It has happened not even after one human lifespan! Apart from the sheer magnitude of commerce, we should also note the increased speed and frequency of trading. These days, supercomputers can execute millions of stock purchases and sales between different cities in a matter of seconds through a process called high-frequency trading. Even the items being sold and traded are changing drastically. Ten years ago, buying books or music indicates acquiring physical items. Today, however, a "book" can be digitally downloaded to be read with an e- reader, and a music "album" refers to the 15 songs on mp3 format you can purchase and download from iTunes. This lesson aims to trace how economic globalization came about. It will also assess this globalization system, and examine who benefits from it and who is left out. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 12 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students International Trading Systems International trading systems are not new. The oldest known international trade route was the Silk Road—a network of pathways in the ancient world that spanned from China to what is now the Middle East and to Europe. It was called as such because one of the most profitable products traded through this network was silk, which was highly prized especially in the area that is now the Middle East as well as in the West (today's Europe). Traders used the Silk Road regularly from 130 BCE when the Chinese Han dynasty opened trade to the West until 1453 BCE when the Ottoman Empire closed it. However, while the Silk Road was international, it was not truly "global" because it had no ocean routes that could reach the American continent. So when did full economic globalization begin? According to historians Dennis O. Flynn and Arturo Giraldez, the age of globalization began when "all important populated continents began to exchange products continuously— both with each other directly and indirectly via other continents— and in values sufficient to generate crucial impacts on trading partners." Flynn and Giraldez trace this back to 1571 with the establishment of the galleon trade that connected Manila in the Philippines and Acapulco in Mexico." This was the first time that the Americas were directly connected to Asian trading routes. For Filipinos, it is crucial to note that economic globalization began on the country's shores. The galleon trade was part of the age of mercantilism. From the 16th century to the 18th century, countries, primarily in Europe, competed with one another to sell more goods as a means to boost their country's income (called monetary reserves later on). To defend their products from competitors who sold goods more cheaply, these regimes (mainly monarchies) imposed high tariffs, forbade colonies to trade with other nations, restricted trade routes, and subsidized its exports. Mercantilism was thus also a system of global trade with multiple restrictions. A more open trade system emerged in 1867 when, following the lead of the United Kingdom, the United States and other European nations adopted the gold standard at an international monetary conference in Paris. Broadly, its goal was to create a common system that would allow for more efficient trade and prevent the isolationism of the mercantilist era. The countries thus established a common basis for currency prices and a fixed exchange rate system—all based on the value of gold. Despite facilitating simpler trade, the gold standard was still a very restrictive system, as it compelled countries to back their currencies with fixed gold reserves. During World War I, when countries depleted their gold reserves to fund their armies, many were forced to abandon the gold standard. Since European countries had low gold reserves, they adopted floating currencies that were no longer redeemable in gold. Returning to a pure standard became more difficult as the global economic crisis called the Great Depression started during the 1920s and extended up to the 1930s, further emptying government coffers. This depression was the worst and longest recession ever experienced by the Western world. Some economists argued that it was largely caused by the gold standard, since it limited the amount of circulating money and, therefore, reduced demand and The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 13 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students consumption. If governments could only spend money that was equivalent to gold, its capacity to print money and increase the money supply was severely curtailed. Economic historian Barry Eichengreen argues that the recovery of the United States really began when, having abandoned the gold standard, the US government was able to free up money to spend on reviving the economy. At the height of World War Il, other major industrialized countries followed suit. Though more indirect versions of the gold standard were used until as late as the 1970s, the world never returned to the gold standard of the early 20th century. Today, the world economy operates based on what are called fiat currencies—currencies that are not backed by precious metals and whose value is determined by their cost relative to other currencies. This system allows governments to freely and actively manage their economies by increasing or decreasing the amount of money in circulation as they see fit. The Bretton Woods System After the two world wars, world leaders sought to create a global economic system that would ensure a longer-lasting global peace. They believed that one of the ways to achieve this goal was to set up a network of global financial institutions that would promote economic interdependence and prosperity. The Bretton Woods system was inaugurated in 1944 during the United Nations Monetary and Financial Conference to prevent the catastrophes of the early decades of the century from reoccurring and affecting international ties. The Bretton Woods system was largely influenced by the ideas of British economist John Maynard Keynes who believed that economic crises occur not when a country does not have enough money, but when money is not being spent and, thereby, not moving. When economies slow down, according to Keynes, governments have to reinvigorate markets with infusions of capital. This active role of governments in managing spending served as the anchor for what would be called a system of global Keynesianism. Delegates at Bretton Woods agreed to create two financial institutions. The first was the International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD, or World Bank) to be responsible for funding postwar reconstruction projects. It was a critical institution at a time when many of the world's cities had been destroyed by the war. The second institution was the International Monetary Fund (IMF), which was to be the global lender of last resort to prevent individual countries from spiraling into credit crises. If economic growth in a country slowed down because there was not enough money to stimulate the economy, the IMF would step in. To this day, both institutions remain key players in economic globalization. Shortly after Bretton Woods, various countries also committed themselves to further global economic integration through the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in 1947. GATT's main purpose was to reduce tariffs and other hindrances to free trade. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 14 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Neoliberalism and Its Discontents The high point of global Keynesianism came in the mid- 1940s to the early 1970s. During this period, governments poured money into their economies, allowing people to purchase more goods and, in the process, increase demand for these products. As demand increased, so did the prices of these goods. Western and some Asian economies like Japan accepted this rise in prices because it was accompanied by general economic growth and reduced unemployment. The theory went that, as prices increased, companies would earn more, and would have more money to hire workers. Keynesian economists believed that all this was a necessary trade-off for economic development. In the early 1970s, however, the prices of oil rose sharply as a result of the Organization of Arab Petroleum Exporting Countries' (OAPEC, the Arab member-countries of the Organization of Petroleum Exporting Countries or OPEC) imposition of an embargo in response to the decision of the United States and other countries to resupply the Israeli military with the needed arms during the Yom Kippur War. Arab countries also used the embargo to stabilize their economies and growth. The "oil embargo" affected the Western economies that were reliant on oil, to make matters worse, the stock markets crashed in 1973-1974 after the United States stopped linking the dollar to gold, effectively ending the Bretton Woods system. The result was a phenomenon that Keynesian economics could not have predicted—a phenomenon called stagflation, in which a decline in economic growth and employment (stagnation) takes place alongside a sharp increase in prices (inflation). Around this time, a new form of economic thinking was beginning to challenge the Keynesian orthodoxy. Economists such as Friedrich Hayek and Milton Friedman argued that the governments' practice of pouring money into their economies had caused inflation by increasing demand for goods without necessarily increasing supply. More profoundly, they argued that government intervention in economies distort the proper functioning of the market. Economists like Friedman used the economic turmoil to challenge the consensus around Keynes's ideas. What emerged was a new form of economic thinking that critics labeled neoliberalism. From the 1980s onward, neoliberalism became the codified strategy of the United States Treasury Department, the World Bank the IMF, and eventually the World Trade Organization (WTO)—a new organization founded in 1995 to continue the tariff reduction under the GATT. The policies they forwarded came to be called the Washington Consensus. The Washington Consensus dominated global economic policies from the 1980s until the early 2000s. Its advocates pushed for minimal government spending to reduce government debt. They also called for the privatization of government-controlled services like water, power, communications, and transport, believing that the free market can produce the best results. Finally, they pressured governments, particularly in the developing world, to reduce tariffs and open up their economies, arguing that it is the quickest way to progress. Advocates of the Washington Consensus conceded that, along the way, certain industries would be affected and die, but they considered this "shock therapy" necessary for long-term economic growth. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 15 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students The appeal of neoliberalism was in its simplicity. Its advocates like US President Ronald Reagan and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher justified their reduction in government spending by comparing national economies to households. Thatcher, in particular, promoted an image of herself as a mother, who reined in overspending to reduce the national debt. The problem with the household analogy is that governments are not households. For one, governments can print money, while households cannot. Moreover, the constant taxation systems of governments provide them a steady flow of income that allows them to pay and refinance debts steadily. Despite the initial success of neoliberal politicians like Thatcher and Reagan, the defects of the Washington Consensus became immediately palpable. A good early example is that of post- communist Russia. After Communism had collapsed in the 1990s, the IMF called for the immediate privatization of all government industries. The IMF assumed that such a move would free these industries from corrupt bureaucrats and pass them on to the more dynamic and independent private investors. What happened, however, was that only individuals and groups who had accumulated wealth under the previous communist order had the money to purchase these industries. In some cases, the economic elites relied on easy access to government funds to take over the industries. This practice has entrenched an oligarchy that still dominates the Russian economy to this very day. The Global Financial Crisis and the Challenge to Neoliberalism Russia's case was just one example of how the "shock therapy of neoliberalism did not lead to the ideal outcomes predicted by economists who believed in perfectly free markets. The greatest recent repudiation of this thinking was the recent global financial crisis of 2008-2009. Neoliberalism came under significant strain during the global financial crisis of 2007— 2008 when the world experienced the greatest economic downturn since the Great Depression. The crisis can be traced back to the 1980s when the United States systematically removed various banking and investment restrictions. The scaling back of regulations continued until the 2000s, paving the way for a brewing crisis. In their attempt to promote the free market, government authorities failed to regulate bad investments occurring in the US housing market. Taking advantage of "cheap housing loans," Americans began building houses that were beyond their financial capacities. To mitigate the risk of these loans, banks that were lending houseowners' money pooled these mortgage payments and sold them as "mortgage-backed securities" (MBSs). One MBS would be a combination of multiple mortgages that they assumed would pay a steady rate. Since there was so much surplus money circulating, the demand for MBSs increased as investors clamored for more investment opportunities. In their haste to issue these loans, however, the banks became less discriminating. They began extending loans to families and individuals with dubious credit records—people who were unlikely to pay their loans back. These high-risk mortgages became known as sub-prime mortgages. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 16 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Financial experts wrongly assumed that, even if many of the borrowers were individuals and families who would struggle to pay, a majority would not default. Moreover, banks thought that since there were so many mortgages in just one MBS, a few failures would not ruin the entirety of the investment. Banks also assumed that housing prices would continue to increase. Therefore, even if homeowners defaulted on their loans these banks could simply reacquire the homes and sell them at a higher price, turning a profit. Sometime in 2007, however, home prices stopped increasing as supply caught up with demand. Moreover, it slowly became apparent that families could not pay off their loans. This realization triggered the rapid reselling of MBSs, as banks and investors tried to get rid of their bad investments. This dangerous cycle reached a tipping point in September 2008, when major investment banks like Lehman Brothers collapsed, thereby depleting major investments. The crisis spread beyond the United States since many investors were foreign governments, corporations, and individuals. The loss of their money spread like wildfire back to their countries. These series of interconnections allowed for a global multiplier effect that sent ripples across the world. For example, Iceland's banks heavily depended on foreign capital, so when the crisis hit them, they failed to refinance their loans. As a result of this credit crunch, three of Iceland's top commercial banks defaulted. From 2007 to 2008, Iceland's debt increased more than seven-fold. Until now, countries like Spain and Greece are heavily indebted (almost like Third World countries), and debt relief has come at a high price. Greece, in particular, has been forced by Germany and the IMF to cut back on its social and public spending. Affecting services like pensions, health care, and various forms of social security, these cuts have been felt most acutely by the poor. Moreover, the reduction in government spending has slowed down growth and ensured high levels of unemployment. The United States recovered relatively quickly thanks to a large Keynesian-style stimulus package that President Barack Obama pushed for in his first months in office. The same cannot be said for many other countries. In Europe, the continuing economic crisis has sparked a political upheaval. Recently, far-right parties like Marine Le Pen's Front National in France have risen to prominence by unfairly blaming immigrants for their woes, claiming that they steal jobs and leech off welfare. These movements blend popular resentment with utter hatred and racism, we will discuss their rise further in the final lesson. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 17 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Economic Globalization Today The global financial crisis will take decades to resolve. The solutions proposed by certain nationalist and leftist groups of closing national economies to world trade, however, will no longer work. The world has become too integrated. Whatever one's opinion about the Washington Consensus is, it is undeniable that some form of international trade remains essential for countries to develop in the contemporary world. Exports, not just the local selling of goods and services, make national economies grow at present. In the past, those that benefited the most from free trade were the advanced nations that were producing and selling industrial and agricultural goods. The United States, Japan, and the member- countries of the European Union were responsible for 65 percent of global exports, while the developing countries only accounted for 29 percent. When more countries opened up their economies to take advantage of increased free trade, the shares of the percentage began to change. By 2011, developing countries like the Philippines, India, China, Argentina, and Brazil accounted for 51 percent of global exports while the share of advanced nations— including the United States—had gone down to 45 percent. The WTO-led reduction of trade barriers, known as trade liberalization, has profoundly altered the dynamics of the global economy. In the recent decades, partly as a result of these increased exports, economic globalization has ushered in an unprecedented spike in global growth rates. According to the IMF, the global per capita GDP rose over five-fold in the second half of the 20th century. It was this growth that created the large Asian economies like Japan, China, Korea, Hong Kong, and Singapore. And yet, economic globalization remains an uneven process, with some countries, corporations, and individuals benefiting a lot more than others. The series of trade talks under the WTO have led to unprecedented reductions in tariffs and other trade barriers, but these processes have often been unfair. First, developed countries are often protectionists, as they repeatedly refuse to lift policies that safeguard their primary products that could otherwise be overwhelmed by imports from the developing world. The best example of this double standard is Japan's determined refusal to allow rice imports into the country to protect its farming sector. Japan's justification is that rice is "sacred." Ultimately, it is its economic muscle as the third largest economy that allows it to resist pressures to open its agricultural sector. The United States likewise fiercely protects its sugar industry, forcing consumers and sugar- dependent businesses to pay higher prices instead of getting cheaper sugar from plantations of Central America. Faced with these blatantly protectionist measures from powerful countries and blocs, poorer countries can do very little to make economic globalization more just. Trade imbalances, therefore, characterize economic relations between developed and developing countries. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 18 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students The beneficiaries of global commerce have been mainly transnational corporations (TNCs) and not governments. And like any other business, these TNCs are concerned more with profits than with assisting the social programs of the governments hosting them. Host countries, in turn, loosen tax laws, which prevents wages from rising, while sacrificing social and environmental programs that protect the underprivileged members of their societies. The term "race to the bottom" refers to countries' lowering their labor standards, including the protection of workers' interests, to lure in foreign investors seeking high profit margins at the lowest cost possible. Governments weaken environmental laws to attract investors, creating fatal consequences on their ecological balance and depleting them of their finite resources (like oil, coal, and minerals). Conclusion International economic integration is a central tenet of globalization. In fact, it is so crucial to the process that many writers and commentators confuse this integration for the entirety of globalization. As a reminder, economics is just one window into the phenomenon of globalization; it is not the entire thing. Nevertheless, much of globalization is anchored on changes in the economy. Global culture, for example, is facilitated by trade. Filipinos would not be as aware of American culture if not for the trade that allows locals to watch American movies, listen to American music, and consume American products. The globalization of politics is likewise largely contingent on trade relations. These days, many events of foreign affairs are conducted to cement trading relations between and among states. Given the stakes involved in economic globalization, it is perennially important to ask how this system can be made more just. Although some elements of global free trade can be scaled back, policies cannot do away with it as a whole. International policymakers, therefore, should strive to think of ways to make trading deals fairer. Governments must also continue to devise ways of cushioning the most damaging effects of economic globalization, while ensuring that its benefits accrue for everyone. Guide Questions: (Handwritten in Yellow Pad wait for Further Instruction) 1. How do economic forces facilitate the deepening of globalization? 2. How is the Philippines central to the history of economic globalization? 3. Compare and contrast the assumptions of the original Bretton Woods system with those of the Washington Consensus. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 19 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Lesson 3: A History of Global Politics: Creating an International Order Learning Outcomes At the end of this lesson, you should be able to: 1. Identify key events in the development of international relations; 2. Differentiate internationalization from globalization; 3. Define the state and the nation; 4. Distinguish between the competing conceptions of internationalism; and 5. Discuss the historical evolution of international politics. The world is composed of many countries or states, all of them having different forms of government. Some scholars of politics are interested in individual states and examine the internal politics of these countries. For example, a scholar studying the politics of Japan may write about the history of its bureaucracy. Other scholars are more interested in the interactions between states rather than their internal politics. These scholars look at trade deals between states. They also study political, military, and other diplomatic engagements between two or more countries. These scholars are studying international relations. Moreover, when they explore the deepening of interactions between states, they refer to the phenomenon of internationalization. Internationalization does not equal globalization, although it is a major part of globalization. As we explained in Lesson I, globalization encompasses a multitude of connections and interactions that cannot be reduced to the ties between governments. Nevertheless, it is important to study international relations as a facet of globalization, because states/governments are key drivers of global processes. In this lesson, we will examine internationalization as one window to view the globalization of politics. Although this course is about the contemporary world, we cannot avoid history. What international relations are today is largely defined by events that occurred as far back as 400 years ago. Don't worry; we will eventually discuss contemporary world politics. But to do that, we need first to work backward. This lesson will begin with identifying the major attributes of contemporary global politics and then proceed to ask: How did this system emerge? In doing so, you will have a solid foundation to understand the major issues of global governance in the next lesson. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 20 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students The Attributes of Today's Global System World politics today has four key attributes. First, there are countries or states that are independent and govern themselves. Second, these countries interact with each other through diplomacy. Third, there are international organizations, like the United Nations (UN), that facilitate these interactions. Fourth, beyond simply facilitating meetings between states, international organizations also take on lives of their own. The UN, for example, apart from being a meeting ground for presidents and other heads of state, also has task-specific agencies like the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labor Organization (ILO). What are the origins of this system? A good start is by unpacking what one means when he/she says a "country," or what academics also call the nation-state. This concept is not as simple as it seems. The nation-state is a relatively modern phenomenon in human history, and people did not always organize themselves as countries. At different parts in the history of humanity, people in various regions of the world have identified exclusively with units as small as their village or their tribe, and at other times, they see themselves as members of larger political categories like "Christendom" (the entire Christian world). The nation-state is composed of two non-interchangeable terms. Not all states are nations and not all nations are states. The nation of Scotland, for example, has its own flag and national culture, but still belongs to a state called the United Kingdom. Closer to home, many commentators believe that the Bangsamoro is a separate nation existing within the Philippines but, through their elites, recognizes the authority of the Philippine state. Meanwhile, if there are states with multiple nations, there are also single nations with multiple states. The nation of Korea is divided into North and South Korea, whereas the "Chinese nation" may refer to both the People's Republic of China (the mainland) and Taiwan. What then is the difference between nation and state? In layman's terms, state refers to a country and its government, i.e., the government of the Philippines. A state has four attributes. First, it exercises authority over a specific population, called its citizens. Second, it governs a specific territory. Third, a state has a structure of government that crafts various rules that people (society) follow. Fourth and the most crucial, the state has sovereignty over its territory. Sovereignty here refers to internal and external authority. Internally, no individuals or groups can operate in a given national territory by ignoring the state. This means that groups like churches, civil society organizations, corporations, and other entities have to follow the laws of the state where they establish their parishes, offices, or headquarters. Externally, sovereignty means that a state's policies and procedures are independent of the interventions of other states. Russia or China, for example, cannot pass laws for the Philippines and vice versa. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 21 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students On the other hand, the nation, according to Benedict Anderson. is an "imagined community." It is limited because it does not go beyond a given "official boundary," and because rights and responsibilities are mainly the privilege and concern of the citizens of that nation. Being limited means that the nation has its boundaries. This characteristic is in stark contrast to many religious imagined communities. Anyone, for example, can become a Catholic if one chooses to. In fact, Catholics want more people to join their community; they refer to it as the call to discipleship. But not everyone can simply become a Filipino. An American cannot simply go to the Philippine Embassy and "convert" into a Philippine citizen. Nations often limit themselves to people who have imbibed a particular culture, speak a common language, and live in a specific territory. Calling it "imagined" does not mean that the nation is made- up. Rather, the nation allows one to feel a connection with a community of people even if he/she will never meet all of them in his/her lifetime. When you cheer for a Filipino athlete in the Olympics, for example, it is not because you personally know that athlete. Rather, you imagine your connection as both members of the same Filipino community. In a given national territory like the Philippine archipelago, you rest in the comfort that the majority of people living in it are also Filipinos. Finally, most nations strive to become states. Nation-builders can only feel a sense of fulfillment when that national ideal assumes an organizational form whose authority and power are recognized and accepted by "the people." Moreover, if there are communities that are not states, they often seek some form of autonomy within their "mother states." This is why, for example, the nation of Quebec, though belonging to the state of Canada, has different laws about language (they are French- speaking and require French language competencies for their citizens). It is also for this reason that Scotland, though part of the United Kingdom, has a strong independence movement led by the Scottish Nationalist Party. Nation and state are closely related because it is nationalism that facilitates state formation. In the modern and contemporary era, it has been the nationalist movements that have allowed for the creation of nation-states. States become independent and sovereign because of nationalist sentiment that clamors for this Sovereignty is, thus, one of the fundamental principles of modern state politics. Understanding how this became the case emails ping back as far as 400 years ago. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 22 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students The Interstate System The origins of the present-day concept of sovereignty can be traced back to the Treaty of Westphalia, which was a set of agreements signed in 1648 to end the Thirty Years' War between the major continental powers of Europe. After a brutal religious war between Catholics and Protestants, the Holy Roman Empire, Spain, France, Sweden, and the Dutch Republic designed a system that would avert wars in the future by recognizing that the treaty signers exercise complete control over their domestic affairs and swear not to meddle in each other's affairs. The Westphalian system provided stability for the nations of Europe, until it faced its first major challenge by Napoleon Bonaparte. Bonaparte believed in spreading the principles of the French Revolution—liberty, equality, and fraternity—to the rest of Europe and thus challenged the power of kings, nobility, and religion in Europe. The Napoleonic Wars lasted from 1803—1815 with Napoleon and his armies marching all over much of Europe. In every country they conquered, the French implemented the Napoleonic Code that forbade birth privileges, encouraged freedom or religion, and promoted meritocracy in government service. This system shocked the monarchies and the hereditary elites (dukes, duchesses, etc.) of Europe, and they mustered their armies to push back against the French emperor. Anglo and Prussian armies finally defeated Napoleon in the Battle of Waterloo in 1815, ending the latter's mission to spread his liberal code across Europe. To prevent another war and to keep their systems of privilege, the royal powers created a new system that, in effect, restored the Westphalian system. The Concert of Europe was an alliance of "great powers"— the United Kingdom, Austria, Russia, and Prussia—that sought to restore the world of monarchical, hereditary, and religious privileges of the time before the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. More importantly, it was an alliance that sought to restore the sovereignty of states. Under this Metternich system (named after the Austrian diplomat, Klemens von Metternich, who was the system's main architect), the Concert's power and authority lasted from 1815 to 1914, at the dawn of World War I. Despite the challenge of Napoleon to the Westphalian system and the eventual collapse of the Concert of Europe after World War I, present-day international system still has traces of this history. Until now, states are considered sovereign, and Napoleonic attempts to violently impose systems of government in other countries are frowned upon. Moreover, like the Concert system, "great powers" still hold significant influence over world politics. For example, the most powerful grouping in the UN, the Security Council, has a core of five permanent members, all having veto powers over the council's decision-making process. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 23 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Internationalism The Westphalian and Concert systems divided the world into separate, sovereign entities. Since the existence of this interstate system, there have been attempts to transcend it. Some, like Bonaparte, directly challenged the system by infringing on other states' sovereignty, while others sought to imagine other systems of governance that go beyond, but do not necessarily challenge, sovereignty. Still, others imagine a system of heightened interaction between various sovereign states, particularly the desire for greater cooperation and unity among states and peoples. This desire is called internationalism. Internationalism comes in different forms, but the principle may be divided into two broad categories: liberal internationalism and socialist internationalism. The first major thinker of liberal internationalism was the late 18th century German philosopher Immanuel Kant. Kant likened states in a global system to people living in a given territory. If people living together require a government to prevent lawlessness, shouldn’t that same principle be applied to states? Without a form of world government, he argued, the international system would be chaotic. Therefore, states, like citizens of countries, must give up some freedoms and "establish a continuously growing state consisting of various nations which will ultimately include the nations of the world." In short, Kant imagined a form of global government. Writing in the late 18th century as well, British philosopher Jeremy Bentham (who coined the word "international" in 1780), advocated the creation of "international law" that would govern the inter-state relations. Bentham believed that objective global legislators should aim to propose legislation that would create "the greatest happiness of all nations taken together." To many, these proposals for global government and international law seemed to represent challenges to states. Would a world government, in effect, become supreme? And would its laws overwhelm the sovereignty of individual states? The first thinker to reconcile nationalism with liberal internationalism was the 19th century Italian patriot Giuseppe Mazzini. Mazzini was both an advocate of the unification of the Italian- speaking mini-states and a major critic of the Metternich system. He believed in a Republican government (without kings, queens, and hereditary succession) and proposed a system of free nations that cooperated with each other to create an international system. For Mazzini, free, independent states would be the basis of an equally free, cooperative international system. He argued that if the various Italian mini-states could unify, one could scale up the system to create, for example, a United States of Europe. Mazzini was a nationalist internationalist, who believes that free, unified nation-states should be the basis of global cooperation. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 24 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Mazzini influenced the thinking of United States president (1913—1921) Woodrow Wilson, who became one of the 20th century's most prominent internationalist. Like Mazzini, Wilson saw nationalism as a prerequisite for internationalism. Because of his faith in nationalism, he forwarded the principle of self- determination—the belief that the world's nations had a right to a free, and sovereign government. He hoped that these free nations would become democracies, because only by being such would they be able to build a free system of international relations based on international law and cooperation. Wilson, in short, became the most notable advocate for the creation of the League of Nations. At the end of World War I in 1918, he pushed to transform the League into a venue for conciliation and arbitration to prevent another war. For his efforts, Wilson was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1919. The League came into being that same year. Ironically and unfortunately for Wilson, the United States was not able to join the organization due to strong opposition from the Senate. The League was also unable to hinder another war from breaking out. It was practically helpless to prevent the onset and intensification of World War Il. On one side of the war were the Axis Powers— Hitler's Germany, Mussolini's Italy, and Hirohito's Japan— who were ultra-nationalists that had an instinctive disdain for internationalism and preferred to violently impose their dominance over other nations. It was in the midst of this war between the Axis Powers and the Allied Powers (composed of the United States, United Kingdom, France, Holland, and Belgium) that internationalism would be eclipsed. Despite its failure, the League gave birth to some of the more task-specific international organizations that are still around until today, the most popular of which are the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labor Organization (ILO). More importantly, it would serve as the blueprint for future forms of international cooperation. In this respect, despite its organizational dissolution, the League of Nations' principles survived World War Il. The League was the concretization of the concepts of liberal internationalism. From Kant, it emphasized the need to form common international principles. From Mazzini, it enshrined the principles of cooperation and respect among nation-states. From Wilson, it called for democracy and self- determination. These ideas would re-assert themselves in the creation of the United Nations in 1946 (see next lesson). One of Mazzini's biggest critics was German socialist philosopher Karl Marx who was also an internationalist, but who differed from the former because he did not believe in nationalism. He believed that any true form of internationalism should deliberately reject nationalism, which rooted people in domestic concerns instead of global ones. Instead, Marx placed a premium on economic equality; he did not divide the world into countries, but into classes. The capitalist class referred to the owners of factories, companies, and other "means of production." In contrast, the proletariat class included those who did not own the means of production, but instead, worked for the capitalists. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 25 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Marx and his co-author, Friedrich Engels, believed that in a socialist revolution seeking to overthrow the state and alter the economy, the proletariat "had no nation." Hence, their now- famous battle cry, "Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your chains." They opposed nationalism because they believed it prevented the unification of the world's workers. Instead of identifying with other workers, nationalism could make workers in individual countries identify with the capitalists of their countries. Marx died in 1883, but his followers soon sought to make his vision concrete by establishing their international organization. The Socialist International (SI) was a union of European socialist and labor parties established in Paris in 1889. Although short- lived, the Sl's achievements included the declaration of May I as Labor Day and the creation of an International Women's Day. Most importantly, it initiated the successful campaign for an 8-hour workday. The SI collapsed during World War I as the member parties refused or were unable to join the internationalist efforts to fight for the war. Many of these sister parties even ended up fighting each other. It was a confirmation of Marx's warning: when workers and their organizations take the side of their countries instead of each other, their long-term interests are compromised. As the SI collapsed, a more radical version emerged. In the so-called Russian Revolution of 1917, Czar Nicholas Il was overthrown and replaced by a revolutionary government led by the Bolshevik Party and its leader, Vladimir Lenin. This new state was called the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics, or USSR. Unlike the majority of the member parties of the SI, the Bolsheviks did not believe in obtaining power for the working class through elections. Rather, they exhorted the revolutionary "vanguard" parties to lead the revolutions across the world, using methods of terror if necessary. Today, parties like this are referred to as Communist parties. To encourage these socialist revolutions across the world, Lenin established the Communist International (Comintern) in 1919. The Comintern served as the central body for directing Communist parties all over the world. This International was not only more radical than the Socialist International, it was also less democratic because it followed closely the top-down governance of the Bolsheviks. Many of the world's states feared the Comintern, believing that it was working in secret to stir up revolutions in their countries (which was true). A problem arose during World War Il when the Soviet Union joined the Allied Powers in 1941. The United States and the United Kingdom would, of course, not trust the Soviet Union in their fight against Hitler's Germany. These countries wondered if the Soviet Union was trying to promote revolutions in their backyards. To appease his allies, Lenin's successor, Joseph Stalin, dissolved the Comintern in 1943. After the war, however, Stalin re-established the Comintern as the Communist Information Bureau (Cominform). The Soviet Union took over the countries in Eastern Europe when the United States, the Soviet Union, and Great Britain divided the war-torn Europe into their respective spheres of influence. The Cominform, like the Comintern before it, helped direct the various communist parties that had taken power in Eastern Europe. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 26 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students With the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, whatever existing thoughts about communist internationalism also practically disappeared. The SI managed to re-establish itself in 1951, but its influence remained primarily confined to Europe, and has never been considered a major player in international relations to this very day. For the postwar period, however, liberal internationalism would once again be ascendant. And the best evidence of this is the rise of the United Nations as the center of global governance. Conclusion This lesson examined the roots of the international system. In tracing these roots, a short history of internationalism was provided. Moreover, internationalism is but one window into the broader phenomenon of globalization. Nevertheless, it is a very crucial aspect of globalization since global interactions are heightened by the increased interdependence of states. This increased interdependence manifests itself not just through state-to-state relations. Increasingly, international relations are also facilitated by international organizations that promote global norms and policies. The most prominent example of this organization, of course, is the United Nations. Guide Questions (Handwritten in Yellow Pad wait for Further Instruction) 1. What remnants of the Westphalia System can still be felt at this day and age? In what sense has the world gone beyond the Westphalian system? 2. What are the differences between liberal and socialist internationalism? What are their strengths and weaknesses? 3. Do you think internationalization erodes the sovereignty of states? The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 27 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Lesson 4: The United Nations and Contemporary Global Governance Learning Outcomes At the end of this lesson, you should be able to: 1. Define global governance; 2. Identify the roles and functions of the United Nations; and 3. Determine the challenges of global governance in the twenty-first century. Although many internationalists like Bentham and Kant imagined the possibility of a global government, nothing of the sort exists today. There is no one organization that various states are accountable to. Moreover, no organization can militarily compel a state to obey predetermined global rules. There is, however, some regularity in the general behavior of states. For example, they more or less follow global navigation routes and, more often than not, respect each other's territorial boundaries. Moreover, when they do not—like when Russia invaded Crimea in 2014— it becomes a cause for global concern and debate. The fact that states in an international order continue to adhere to certain global norms means that there is a semblance of world order despite the lack of a single world government. Global governance refers to the various intersecting processes that create this order. There are many sources of global governance. States sign treaties and form organizations, in the process legislating public international law (international rules that govern interactions between states as opposed to, say, private companies). International MD- governmental organizations (NGOs), though not having formal state power, can lobby individual states to behave in a certain way (for example, an international animal protection NGO can pressure governments to pass animal cruelty laws). Powerful transnational corporations can likewise have tremendous effects on global labor laws, environmental legislation, trade policy, etc. Even ideas such as the need for "global democracy" or the clamor for "good governance" can influence the ways international actors. One lesson will not be able to cover the various ways global governance occurs. As such, this lesson will only examine how global governance is articulated by intergovernmental organizations. It will focus primarily on the United Nations (UN) as the most prominent intergovernmental organization today. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 28 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students What is an International Organization? When scholars refer to groups like the UN or institutions like the IMF and the World Bank (see Lesson 2), they usually call them international organizations (IOS). Although international NGOs are sometimes considered as IOS, the term is commonly used to refer to international intergovernmental organizations or groups that are primarily made up of member-states. One major fallacy about international organizations is that they are merely amalgamations of various state interests. In the 1960s and 1970s, many scholars believed that IOS were just venues where the contradicting, but sometimes intersecting, agendas of countries were discussed—no more than talk shops. What has become more evident in recent years, however, is that IOS can take on lives of their own. For example, as seen in Lesson 2, the IMF was able to promote a particular form of economic orthodoxy that stemmed mainly from the beliefs of its professional economists. IOS can thus become influential as independent organizations. International relations scholars Michael N. Barnett and Martha Finnemore listed the following powers of IOS. First, IOS have the power of classification. Because IOS can invent and apply categories, they create powerful global standards. For example, it is the UN High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) that defines what a refugee is (see Lesson 10 for more). And since states are required to accept refugees entering their borders, this power to establish identity has concrete effects. Second, IOS have the power to fix meanings. This is a broader function related to the first. Various terms like "security" or "development" need to be well-defined. States, organizations, and individuals view IOS as legitimate sources of information. As such, the meanings they create have effects on various policies. For example, recently, the United Nations has started to define security as not just safety from military violence, but also safety from environmental harm. Finally, IOS have the power to diffuse norms. Norms are accepted codes of conduct that may not be strict law, but nevertheless produce regularity in behavior. IOS do not only classify and fix meanings; they also spread their ideas across the world. thereby establishing global standards. Their members are, as Barnett and Finnemore emphasized, the "missionaries" time. Their power to diffuse norms stems from the fact that IOS are staffed with independent bureaucracies, who are considered experts in various fields. For example, World Bank economists come to be regarded as experts in development and thus carry some form of authority. They can, therefore, create norms regarding the implementation and conceptualization of developmental projects. Because of these immense powers, IOs can be sources of great good and great harm. They can promote relevant norms like environmental protection and human rights. But, like other entrenched bureaucracies, they can become sealed-off communities that fail to challenge their beliefs. For example, the Noble Prize-winning economist Joseph Stiglitz famously criticized the IMF for using a “one-size-fits- all” approach when its economists made recommendations to developing countries. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 29 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students The United Nations Having examined the powers, limitations, and weaknesses of IOs, the spotlight will now fall on the most prominent 10 in the contemporary world, the United Nations (UN). After the collapse of the League of Nations at the end of World War Il, countries that worried about another global war began to push for the formation of a more lasting international league. The result was the creation of the UN. Although the organization is far from perfect, it should be emphasized that it has so far achieved its primary goal of averting another global war. For this reason alone, the UN should be considered a success. The UN is divided into five active organs. The General Assembly (GA) is UN's "main deliberative policymaking and representative organ." According to the UN charter. "Decisions on important questions, such as those on peace and security, admission of new members, and budgetary matters, require a two-thirds majority of the General Assembly. Decisions on other questions are done by simple majority. Annually, the General Assembly elects a GA President to serve a one-year term of office "All member states (currently at 193) have seats in the GA. The Philippines played a prominent role in the GA's early years when Filipino diplomat Carlos P. Romulo was elected GA president from 1949—1950. Although the GA is the most representative organization in the UN, many commentators consider the Security Council (SC) to be the most powerful. According to the UN, this body consists of 15 member states. The GA elects ten of these 15 to two-year terms. The other five— sometimes referred to as the Permanent 5 (P5)—are China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United States. These states have been permanent members since the founding of the UN, and cannot be replaced through election. The SC takes the lead in determining the existence of a threat to the peace or an act of aggression. It calls upon the parties to a dispute to settle the act by peaceful means and recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement. In some cases, it can resort to imposing sanctions or even authorizing the use of force to maintain or restore international peace and security. Because of these powers, states that seek to intervene militarily in another state need to obtain the approval of the SC. With the SC's approval, a military intervention may be deemed legal. This is an immense. Much attention has been placed on the SC's P5 due to their permanent seats and because each country holds veto power over the council's decisions. It only takes one veto vote from a P5 member to stop an SC action dead in its tracks. In this sense, the SC is heir to the tradition of "great power" diplomacy that began with the Metternich/Concert of Europe system (see the previous lesson). It is especially telling that the P5 consists of the major Allied Powers that won World War II. The Security Council will be further discussed in the next section. The third UN organ is the Economic and Social Council (ECOSOC), which is "the principal body for coordination, policy review, policy dialogue, and recommendations on social and environmental issues, as well as the implementation of internationally agreed development The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 30 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students goals." It has 54 members elected for three-year terms. Currently, it is the UN's central platform for discussions on sustainable development. The fourth is the International Court of Justice whose task "is to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by states and to give advisory opinions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies." The major cases of the court consist of disputes between states that voluntarily submit themselves to the court for arbitration. The court, as such, cannot try individuals (international criminal cases are heard by the International Criminal Court, which is independent of the UN), and its decisions are only binding when states have explicitly agreed to place themselves before the court's authority. The SC may enforce the rulings of the ICJ, but this remains subject to the P5's veto power. Finally, the secretariat consists of the "Secretary-General and tens of thousands of international UN staff members who carry out the day-to-day work of the UN as mandated by the General Assembly and the organization's other principal organs." As such, it is the bureaucracy of the UN, serving as a kind of international civil service. Members of the secretariat serve in their capacity as UN employees and not as state representatives. Challenges of the United Nations Given the scope of the UN's activities, it naturally faces numerous challenges. Chief among these are the limits placed upon its various organs and programs by the need to respect state sovereignty. The UN is not a world government, and it functions primarily because of voluntary cooperation from states. If states refuse to cooperate, the influence of the UN can be severely circumscribed. For example, the UN Council on Human Rights can send special rapporteurs to countries where alleged human rights violations are occurring. If a country does not invite the rapporteur or places conditions on his/her activities, however, this information- gathering mechanism usually fails to achieve its goals. However, perhaps the biggest challenge of the United Nations is related to issues of security. As mentioned, the UN Security Council is tasked with authorizing international acts of military intervention. Because of the P5's veto power, it is tough for the council to release a formal resolution, much more implement it. This became an issue, for example, in the late 1990s when the United States sought to intervene in the Kosovo war. Serbian leader Slobodan was committing acts of ethnic cleansing against ethnic Muslim Albanians in the province of Kosovo. Hundreds and thousands of Albanians were victims of massacres, mass deportations, and internal displacement. Amid this systematic terror, members Of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO, see Lesson 5), led by the United States, sought SC authorization to intervene in the Kosovo war on humanitarian grounds. China and Russia, however, threatened to veto any action, rendering the UN incapable of addressing the crisis. In response, NATO decided to intervene on its own. Though the NATO intervention was largely a success, it, nevertheless. left the UN ineffectual. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 31 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Today, a similar dynamic is evident in Syria, which is undergoing a civil war. Russia has threatened to veto any SC resolution against Syria; thus, the UN has done very little to stop state- sanctioned violence against opponents of the government. Since Syrian President Bashar al- Assad is an ally of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin, the latter has shied away from any policy that could weaken the legitimacy of the former. As a result, the UN is again ineffectual amid a conflict that has led to over 220,000 people dead and Il million displaced. Despite these problems, it remains important for the SC to place a high bar on military intervention. The UN Security Council has been wrong on issues of intervention, but it has also made right decisions. When the United States sought to invade Iraq in 2001, it claimed that Iraq's Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction (WMD) that threatened the world. However, UN members Russia, China, and France were unconvinced and vetoed the UN resolution for intervention, forcing the United States to lead a small "coalition of the willing" with its allies. It has since been discovered that there were no weapons of mass destruction, and the invasion of Iraq has caused problems for the country and the region that last until today. Conclusion Global governance is such a complex issue that one can actually teach an entire course in itself. This lesson has focused on the IOS and the United Nations in particular. International organizations are highlighted because they are the most visible symbols of global governance. The UN, in particular, is the closest to a world government. What is important to remember is that international institutions like the UN are always in a precarious position. On the one hand, they are groups of sovereign states. On the other, they are organizations with their own rationalities and agendas. It is this tension that will continue to inform the evolution of these organizations. However, note that there are many institutions, groups, and ideas that hold international and global politics together. In your own time, you may want to explore these topics on your own. Guide Questions (Handwritten in Yellow Pad wait for Further Instruction) 1. Why is global governance multi-faceted? 2. How do international organizations take on "lives of their own?" 3. What are the challenges faced by the United Nations in maintaining global security? The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 32 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students LESSON 5: A World of Regions Learning Outcomes At the end of this lesson, you should be able to: 1. Differentiate between regionalization and globalization; 2. Explain how regions are formed and kept together; 3. Discuss the advantages and disadvantages of regionalism; and 4. Identify the factors leading to a greater integration of the Asian region. Governments, associations, societies, and groups form regional organizations and/or networks as a way of coping with the challenges of globalization. Globalization has made people aware of the world in general, but it has also made Filipinos more cognizant of specific areas such as Southeast Asia. How, for instance, did the Philippines come to identify itself with the Southeast Asian region? Why is it part of a regional grouping known as the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN)? While regionalism is often seen as a political and economic phenomenon, the term actually encompasses a broader area. It can be examined in relation to identities, ethics, religion, ecological sustainability, and health. Regionalism is also a process, and must be treated as an "emergent, socially constituted phenomenon." It means that regions are not natural or given; rather, they are constructed and defined by policymakers, economic actors, and even social movements. This lesson will look at regions as political entities and examine what brings them together as they interlock with globalization. The other facets of regionalism will then be explored, especially those that pertain to identities, ethics, religion, ecological sustainability, and health. The lesson will conclude by asking where all these regionalisms are bringing us as members of a nation and as citizens of the world. Countries, Regions, and Globalization Edward D. Mansfield and Helen V. Milner state that economic and political definitions of regions vary, but there are certain basic features that everyone can agree on. First, regions are "a group of countries located in the same geographically specified area" or are "an amalgamation of two regions [or] a combination of more than two regions" organized to regulate and "oversee flows and policy choices." Second, the words regionalization and regionalism should not be interchanged, as the former refers to the regional concentration of economic flows" while the latter is "a political process characterized by economic policy cooperation and coordination among countries." The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 33 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students Countries respond economically and politically to globalization in various ways. Some are large enough and have a lot of resources to dictate how they participate in processes of global integration. China, for example, offers its cheap and huge workforce to attract foreign businesses and expand trade with countries it once considered its enemies but now sees as markets for its goods (e.g., the United States and Japan). Other countries make up for their small size by taking advantage of their strategic location. Singapore and Switzerland compensate for their lack of resources by turning themselves into financial and banking hubs. Singapore developed its harbor facilities and made them a first- class transit port for ships carrying different commodities from Africa, Europe, the Middle East, and mainland Southeast Asia to countries in the Asia-Pacific. In most cases, however, countries form a regional alliance for-as the saying goes- there is strength in numbers. Countries form regional associations for several reasons. One is for military defense. The most widely known defense grouping is the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) formed during the Cold War when several Western European countries plus the United States agreed to protect Europe against the threat Soviet Union. The Soviet Union responded by creating its regional alliance, the Warsaw Pact, consisting of the Eastern European countries under Soviet domination. The Soviet Union imploded in December 1991, but NATO remains in place. Countries also form regional organizations to pool their resources, get better returns for their exports, as well as expand their leverage against trading partners. The Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was established in 1960 by Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela to regulate the production and sale of oil. This regional alliance flexed its muscles in the 1970s when its member countries took over domestic production and dictated crude oil prices in the world market. In a world highly dependent on oil, this integration became a source of immense power. OPEC's success convinced nine other oil- producing countries to join it. Soldiers from NATO Countries hold their flags Moreover, there are countries that form regional blocs to protect their independence from the pressures of politics. The presidents of Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, and Yugoslavia created the Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) in 1961 to pursue world peace and international cooperation, human rights, national sovereignty, racial and national equality, non- intervention, The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 34 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students and peaceful conflict resolution. It called itself non- aligned because the association refused to side with either the First World capitalist democracies in Western Europe and North America or the communist states in Eastern Europe. At its peak, the NAM had 120 member countries. The movement, however, was never formalized and continues to exist up to the present, although it lacks the same fervor that it had in the past. Finally, economic crisis compels countries to come together. The Thai economy collapsed in 1996 after foreign currency speculators and troubled international banks demanded that the Thai government pay back its loans. A rapid withdrawal of foreign Investments bankrupted the economy. This crisis began to spread to other Asian countries as their currencies were also devalued and foreign investments left in a hurry. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) tried to reverse the crisis, but it was only after the ASEAN countries along with China, Japan, and South Korea agreed to establish an emergency fund to anticipate a crisis that the Asian economies stabilized. The crisis made ASEAN more "unified and coordinated." The Association has come a long way since it was formed as a coalition of countries which were pro- American and supportive of the United States intervention in Vietnam. After the Vietnam War, ASEAN continued to act as a military alliance to isolate Vietnam after it invaded Cambodia, but there were also the beginnings of economic cooperation. Non-State Regionalism It is not only states that agree to work together in the name of a single cause (or causes). Communities also engage in regional organizing. This "new regionalism" varies in form; they can be tiny associations that include no more than a few actors and focus on a single issue, or huge continental unions that address a multitude of common problems from territorial defense to food security. Organizations representing this "new regionalism" likewise rely on the power of individuals, non- governmental organizations (NGOS), and associations to link up with one another in pursuit of a particular goal (or goals). Finally, "new regionalism" is identified with reformists who share the same "values, norms, institutions, and system that exist outside of the traditional, established mainstream institutions and systems." Their strategies and tactics likewise vary. Some organizations partner with governments to initiate social change. Those who work with governments ("legitimizers") participate in "institutional mechanisms that afford some civil society groups voice and influence [in] technocratic policy-making processes." For example, the ASEAN issued its Human Rights Declaration in 2009, but the regional body left it to member countries to apply the declaration's principles as they see fit. Aware that democratic rights are limited in many ASEAN countries, "new regionalism" organizations used this official declaration to pressure these governments to pass laws and regulations that protect and promote human rights. The Contemporary World: Lisandro E. Claudio and Patricio N. Abiles 35 Exclusive for PUP San Juan students In South America, left-wing governments support the Hemispheric Social Alliance's opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), while members of the Mesa de Articulación de Asociaciones Nacionales y Redes de ONGS de América Latina y El Caribe (Roundtable of National Associations and Networks and NGOs in Latin America and the Caribbean) participate in "forums, summits, and dialogues with presidents and ministers." Likewise, a group called the Citizen Diplomacy Forum tries to influence the policies and programs of the Organization of American States.In Southeast Asia, the organization of an ASEAN Parliamentarians for Human Rights was in part the result of non-government organizations and civil society groups pushing to "prevent discrimination, uphold political freedom, and promote democracy and human rights throughout the region." Other regional organizations dedicate themselves to specialized causes. Activists across Central and South America established the Rainforest Foundation to protect indigenous peoples and the rainforests in Brazil, Guyana, Panama, and Peru. Young Christians across Asia, Africa, the Middle East, the Americas, and the Caribbean formed Regional Interfaith Youth Networks to promote "conflict prevention, resolution, peace education, and sustainable development. ”The Migrant Forum in Asia is another regional network of NGOS and trade unions "committed to protecting and promoting the rights and welfare of migrant workers." These organizations' primary power lies in their moral standing and their ability to combine lobbying with pressure politics. Unfortunately, most of them are poorly financed, which places them at a disadvantage when dealing with their official counterparts who have large state funds. Their impact in global politics is, therefore, limited. New regionalism differs significantly from traditional state- to-state regionalism when it comes to identifying problems. For example, states treat poverty or environmental degradation as technical or economic issues that can be resolved by refining existing programs of state agencies, making minor changes in economic policies, and creating new offices that address these issues. However, new regionalism advocates such as the NGO Global Forum see these issues as reflections of flawed economic development and environmental models. By "flawed," they mean economic development plans that are market-based, profit-driven, and hardly concerned with social welfare, especially among the poor. Another challenge for new regionalists is the discord that may emerge among them. For example, disagreements surface over issues like gender and religion, with pro-choice NGOS breaking from religious civil society groups that side with the Church, Muslim imams, or governments opposed to reproductive rights and other pro-women policies.46 Moreover, whi

The Contemporary World GEED 10043 PDF

Document Details

Tags

Related

Summary

Full Transcript

Upgrade to continue