Current Affairs Bulletin April/May 1998

The major powers ofthe Western world have developed and maintain the processes ofglobalisation in order to sustain leading nation advantages. By defining the much used term globalisation precisely, and then assessing the competing transnational, state, individual, societal and cultural forces, we can identifY the outcome ofthe process. While reinforcing the supremacy ofnational power bases, Third World, non-Western cultures and identities are eroded or under threat. Globalisation is in addition a useful excuse for political leaders to explain away the failure ofparticular policies.

Globalisation has become one of the globalisation appears like a complex most commonly used terms in process which defies a clinical international relations debates, but its definition. For example, some Cartoon reproduced from the India and globalisation feature MNC meaning remains imprecise and its analysts have suggested that it is Masala- see Web links. effects on both domestic and basically a form ofWesternisation and international politics are still colonisation which can be traced within the political, technological, disputable. Shortly after the Australian back several centuries, while others economic, social and cultural Labor Party lost federal power in early have defmed it primarily in terms of domains. It is a label utilised to 1996, some former ministers blamed the movement of capital and other describe multi-layered and multi­ their shortcomings in domestic economic interactions, thereby dimensional processes and policies on what Gareth Evans equating it with economic phenomena, most of which are being described as 'the holocaust' of 1 interdependence. Globalisation is derived from Western, and especially globalising forces. In late 1997, sometimes viewed as the hidden force capitalist, values and practices. For several commentators tried to explain behind economic cooperation, free example, thanks to improvements in the devaluation ofthe Asian currencies trade rules, and occasional turmoil in information technology, globalisation in terms of globalisation. But what the international financial markets. refers to the processes through which specific implications does Could it be all these things, or is it a social, political and economic globalisation have for our daily lives? term without a meaning? Hirst and relations can be sometimes In what ways, if any, does it constrain Thompson have argued that some of instantaneous throughout the world or facilitate the choices of foreign the claims about globalisation such as and many of them may not be policy-makers? high capital mobility or the existence completely restricted by the states. of genuinely transnational Globalisation has also been equated 2 Before addressing these questions, it corporations, are just 'myths'. with homogeneity, harmonisation, is important first to explore the universalisation, and inter­ meaning of globalisation. Is it an In this article I regard globalisation connectedness.3 As Smith and Baylis economic, political, cultural or social as a term which describes the have observed, a 'globalised world is phenomenon? From the literature, intensity and breadth of interactions one in which political, economic, cultural and social events become 4 1 For a discussion of the Westemisation perspective, see, for example, T. H. Von Laue The World more and more interconnected'. Revolution a/Westernization: the Twentieth Century in global perspective New York, 1987, p.3. However, the emphasis is on the size, 2 Paul Hirst & Grahame Thompson Globalisation in Question Cambridge UK, Polity, 1996, depth and speed of interactions. pp.l-17.

3 See Andrew Hurrell and Ngaire Woods, 'Globalisation and Inequality' Millennium 24, 3, 1995, While some analysts have suggeste.d p.447. that globalisation has eclipse~, ?r .Is 4 Steve Smith and John Baylis (eds), 'Introduction' The Globalisation of World Politics Oxford, undermining, the state both Withm Its Oxford University Press, 1997, p.7. territory and internationally, ~ ar~e 5 For a discussion on the diminishing role of the state see Philip G. Cerny, 'Globalisation and the that to a large extent, g1obahsatton changing logic of collective action', International Organization 49, 4, Autumn 1995, pp.595- has 'been created and maintained by 25. the states.s As Ian Clark has 4!------~~------April/May 1998 Current Affairs Bulletin

observed, globalisation could be seen become a global village. For example, relativism, self-determination, as a symptom of 'wider political and in the lead-up to the United Nations heterogeneity, and identification with economic policies' and 'the product Framework Convention on Climate one's ethnic group. These defensive of specific state policy choices'. 6 Change Conference in Kyoto, Japan, reactions by non-Westerners to some This is not to deny that globalisation in December 1997, political leaders aspects of globalisation do not has had some effects on state repeatedly made references to the suggest that their identities and behaviour. The disparate elements 'shrinking planet'. However, if the interests never change. They mainly which are said to constitute earth is a global village, it is one where signal that the globalising processes glo balisation, especially rapid changes only some inhabitants retain their are enormous and too fast. Indeed, it in the technology of transport and values, traditions, cultures, is partly through the speed of its communications, have made it institutions, rituals and symbols. The challenge to diversity and identity that necessary for policy makers to devise so-called global village has been globalisation constitutes a threat to new ways of responding to both constructed by Western-derived security. domestic and international problems. forces, implying that the interests and Globalisation is a modernisation and Identity as security restructuring process which cannot There is no universally accepted be ignored by governments. «The UN Charter proclaims that definition of security. For example, there are controversies around the use In an effort to explore some of the the organisation is based on the of the terms 'national' 'international' effects of globalisation, I have principle of the sovereign equality and 'global' security.9 Some analysts divided this article into three sections. believe that in this era of globalisation, The first examines the tensions of all its members, and that its we should be talking of global between globalisation and identity, primary responsibility is the security, rather than national or arguing that the process of international security. Even among harmonisation, which is embedded in maintenance of international peace those who have adopted the term glo balisation, causes alienation, and security. . . . From this global security, there are differences negates self-identification, and over what should be emphasised. For constitutes a security threat. The perspective, the UN is a guarantor example, in some parts the Third second section explores the ot not a threat to, state World, the state elites argue that global relationship between globalisation, security is very often defined in terms regionalism and the state. It argues sovereignty. of the national interests of the that while glo balisation has facilitated powerful Western countries, without transnationalism and re-focussed taking into account the vital concerns attention on the evolving nature of values of non-Westerners are largely of the weak Third World states. state sovereignty and security, it has ignored in a globalising world. 8 not substantially altered the legitimate In this article, I define security as the role of the state in domestic or world It is no wonder then that as the forces preservation of society's norms, politics. The third section concludes for harmonisation and universalisation rules, institutions and values. This by suggesting that globalisation is grow, with the support of Western definition includes the preservation of bound to increase because it promotes governments and Western based non­ the society of states, as well as the the interests of the major powers. I government organisations (NGOs), structures, principles, values, norms argue that states will remain the most various non-Western societies and and institutions traditionally associated important actors in world politics and communities are striving to preserve with it. It also includes the protection that political leaders will often use their identities, symbols, and values. of people from military and non­ globalisation as a scapegoat for their Thus, localisation, nationalism, and military threats, and the guarantee of policy failures. ethnic and religious revivalism have basic needs and fundamental assumed significance partly because freedoms.1o Going by this definition Threatening identity of the threat which universalisation of security, it is clear that globalisation Globalisation is by definition a threat and harmonisation pose to different constitutes a threat to security, to ethnic, regional, national or ethnic cultures, institutions, standards, and because it implies universalisation and ~ I identities. This is largely because interests. Localisation also implies harmonisation, which ultimately mean I· globalisation is often equated with regionalism, separatism, cultural that the values, institutions, rules, universalisation and homogeneity, which cannot take place without altering the identities and interests of 6 Ian Clark Globalisation and Fragmentation Oxford, Oxford University Press, 1997, pp.l-15. individual units in the international 7 Jan Aart Scholte, 'The Globalisation of World Politics' in Smith and Baylis op.cit., p.14.

society. Moreover, as JanAart Scholte 8 I recognise that characterising globalisation in terms of Western values is simplistic, because has argued, globalisation also "refers some aspects of globalisation cause discomfort to many people in the West. However, to processes whereby social relations globalisation is largely driven by the Western corporate forces.

acquire relatively distanceless and 9 See Helga Haftendorn, 'The Security Puzzle: Theory-Building and Discipline-Building in borderless qualities" .7 Hence the International Security' International Studies Quarterly 35, 1, 1991, pp. 3-17.

common claim that the planet is 10 Samuel M. Makinda, 'Sovereignty and International Security: Challenges for the United

,_~ shrinking or that the earth has Nations' Global Governance 2, 2, 1996, p. 154.

5 I Current Affairs Bulletin April/May 1998 interests, and norms of some societies it has been argued elsewhere, military Even during the Cold War, the East­ have to be sacrificed. Indeed, to the capacity is one of the most important West nuclear competition was driven extent that globalisation implies the means by which states and the by the interests of the political promotion of Western corporate international society can protect their leaderships on both sides of the values and standards, it effectively values, norms and institutions, but it ideological divide to preserve their poses a threat to the survival and is not an end in itself; security is the political, economic and social systems security of non-Western societies and end. Military means are an instrument and identities. It was expressed most communities which are interested in through which security can be vividly in crude military competition retaining or reviving some of their achieved, but defining security solely between the USA and the Soviet traditions. In this sense, globalisation in military terms confuses means Union, but Western Sovietologists would appear to sow the seeds of with ends. believed that the primary objective of conflict. the Soviet national security policy was The attempt to define security as a to protect the Soviet homeland and As already indicated, security is non-military issue, or in terms of the gains of communism. 12 Similarly, concerned with the preservation of politics and identity, is not a post-Cold the US and Western leaders were the identities, interests and institutions War phenomenon, as some people primarily concerned with preserving - political, economic and social - of would argue. About two centuries their political, economic and social different groups, communities, and ago, Carl von Clausewitz argued that ways of life. Thus security was societies. This is the position which war was fought for political reasons, principally about the political, many liberal minded and critical and that 'the political object, as the ideological, economic and social security analysts have taken. Those original motive of war, will be the stability, as well as the identity of the who have faith in the work of liberal standard for determining both the aim two antagonistic systems. international institutions, for example, of the military force and ... the amount regard globalisation as a useful vehicle of effort to be made' .11 Going by As US Deputy Secretary of State, for international stability and Clausewitz's argument, security Strobe Talbott, has argued, the Cold governance. However, realists have should be regarded as the political War was a conflict "between different ideas on how globalisation objective in which identity features. competing concepts of how to has impacted on security. While there For example, the recent civil war in organise the political and economic are differences among realists, they the Balkans may have been influenced lives of individual human beings".13 generally define security in terms of by numerous factors, but by and The logic of this perspective can be war and peace, the survival of the large it was a war about the reconstructed and be applied to the state, self-help and the role of military preservation and promotion of certain international society in the era of force in settling international disputes. identities and interests. The civil war globalisation, namely that the purpose To them, globalisation has not in Sudan which has been going on of security is to preserve the removed international anarchy or the since the early 1980s is basically institutions, norms, rules, values, and need for self-help; it has merely about the clash between Muslim and symbols of the different groups and altered the way the states can address non-Muslim identities. The Iranian communities which constitute the the continuing problems of anarchy. revolution, which brought Ayatollah international society. It is partly for Realists acknowledge that Khomeini to power in 1979, was first this reason that globalisation, which globalisation has brought about and foremost about the preservation is a form of Westernisation, appears enormous changes, but they believe of a certain form of Iranian identity to constitute a source of instability. the role of the state has not and power structure, especially that diminished. To them, the state pertaining to the role of the clergy in Westernisation and alienation remains as important as ever, and society. Even in Rwanda and Burundi, The factors which underpin whether globalisation threatens the where the Tutsi and Hutu have killed globalisation, namely universalisation, identities and interests of some each other in cyclical violence over harmonisation and homogeneity, are societies or not, it has not altered the the years, identity has been an processes which are supported by the logic of power politics. important causal factor. Therefore, major Western powers and often identity is very important in any reflect hegemonic Western ideas and As I will argue later, the state remains security considerations, and the fact interests. As already indicated, the dominant actor in world politics, that globalisation constitutes a threat globalisation has been helped but a definition of security which is to some national, religious or cultural enormously by the rapid increase in based solely on the state-centric identities, makes it a destabilising economic interdependence and military logic cannot fully address the factor. improvements in the technology of problems posed by globalisation. As transport and communications, and the revolution in information technology. In one sense, globalisation 11 Carl von Clausewitz On war edited by Anatol Rapoport Hannondsworth UK, Penguin, 1985, appears to signifY the intensity and p.l09. depth of interactions among social 12 Michae~ McGuire Military Objectives in Soviet Foreign Policy Washington,DC, The Brookings movements, states, regional InstitutiOn, 1987. groupings and global org~satioJ?-s. 13 Strobe Talbott, 'The new geopolitics: defending democracy in the post-cold war era' The World However, it is also assoctated With Today 51, 1, 1995, p.7. the 'emergence' of the so-called April/May 1998 Current Affairs Bulletin global values, institutions, and norms, to work to the detriment of non­ globalisation and Westernisation. which include important issues such Western values and institutions. Some There is no consensus among the as liberal democracy, individual of these criticisms came out clearly people of Asia themselves as to what liberties, free markets and particular at the 1993 UN Congress on Human constitutes Asian values, but it is a forms of justice. Rights in Vienna, where China and label with which they seek to some developing countries described legitimise the retention of some of The 'glo hal' values which are the concept of the universalisation of their traditions and institutions in the trumpeted under the banner of human rights as a conspiracy by face of the Westernisation globalisation, were not arrived at Western governments to impose their juggernaut.17 The concept of Asian through reflection and consensus in values on non-Western societies. values has also been exploited by the international society. They are the They argued that the standardisation political regimes which seek to norms, rules, institutions, and of rights was a pretext through which maintain authoritarianism and contain standards which have been promoted the West sought to pressure non­ the opposition within their societies. by the powerful Western countries for Western states to change their Similarly, the Islamic resurgence can their own benefit. The promotion of political and economic systems and be explained in terms of efforts by these interests in the Third World has values. some Muslim societies to prevent the inadvertently been facilitated by non­ total erosion of their culture. state actors, and especially the NGOs, However, the Vienna Declaration concerned with numerous problems achieved a classic compromise by Occasionally, some radical groups such as human rights abuses, poverty, stating that 'human rights are have used the cover of this environmental degradation, and universal, indivisible and resurgence to engage in political weapons of mass destruction. interdependent and interrelated', while violence. For example, the International fmancial institutions like also recognising 'the significance of establishment of the Hezbollah (the the World Bank and the International national and regional particularities party of God) in Lebanon's Bekaa Monetary Fund have also played roles and various historical, cultural and Valley in the early 1980s by Iranian in broadcasting these 'cosmopolitan' religious backgrounds' .14 It also zealots, was partly based on the fact institutions. stressed the 'mutually reinforcing that the Shia Muslims in Lebanon interrelationship between were treated as second-class citizens The non-Western societies and development, democracy and human both economically and politically. The communities, as well as some groups rights' .15 result was more insecurity for in the West who have reservations foreigners in Lebanon and hostage about Hollywood and Wall Street type The 1993 Vienna Declaration seizures, which affected people from corporate values, view globalisation underlined the clash of two principles several Western countries. However, as a cause of alienation. I use the term of legitimacy, represented it is not only non-Western societies alienation here to describe the respectively by Western countries that fear the impact of globalisation situation in which some groups of which supported the universalist on their interests and values. French people, communities and societies feel perspective, and non-Western states government officials expressed apathetic, detached, socially which were relativist. Western serious coricerns about the dislocated, powerless and normless countries dominate the international relationship between free trade and in the face of globalisation. Alienation system politically, economically and culture, particularly with regard to results partly from the differences in militarily, and have the means to trade in audio-visual products. France power, opportunities and advantages, propagate their values more was among several countries which especially between the West and effectively than the non-Western criticised some aspects of the 1993 many of the non-Western states. As Samuel Huntington has General Agreement on Tariff and communities. These non-Western argued: 'The West in effect is using Trade (GATT) Uruguay Round communities feel apathetic because international institutions, military agreement, because of its potential they see themselves as outsiders in power and economic resources to run impact on the survival of their the global village. They feel they have the world in ways that will maintain cultures. been cast aside or defeated by the Western predominance, protect processes of harmonisation and Western interests and promote The State and globalisation homogeneity, and the global system Western political and economic The struggles between universalist and as a whole. An international society values'.l6 relativist values often involve state in which many groups feel powerless representatives. Yet, claims continue to and uninvolved is potentially unstable. Recent attempts to assert 'Asian be made that globalisation has eclipsed values' are partly a reaction to the state. The test of globalisation's Non-Western societies' criticisms of universalisation have also been directed at the United Nations, which 14 UN General Assembly, 'Vienna Declaration and Programme of Action', A/CONF.l57/23, 1993, has been a very prominent and p. 5. successful norm-setting organization. 15 Ibid., p.25. For example, sections of the Third 16 Samuel P. Huntington, 'The clash of civilizations?' Foreign Affairs 72, 3, 1993, p.40.

World believe that the UN has been 17 For discussions ofAsian values see Chris Patten, 'Asian Values and Asian Success'; Alan Dupont, manipulated by the West and tends 'Is There an "Asian Way"?' Survival38, 2, Summer 1996, pp.S-12 and 13-33.

7 Current Affairs Bulletin April/May 1998 impact on the international system as a by numerous factors - both from As a mechanism for enhancing whole can be gauged by the effect it within and from outside the state - in security, external sovereignty, also has on state behaviour. If globalisation the past few decades. But, there is known as juridical sovereignty, is has no significant effect on state nothing new in this. Even the claim based on the notion that the territorial behaviour, then its impact on the that sovereignty should apply to the integrity of every state is inviolate. international system may be only slight. people, rather than the government, External sovereignty, which is about However, if it makes the role of the of a state is not new. For example, as status rather than stature, highlights state anachronistic in some important early as 1917, Harold Laski argued the legal identity of the state in global public policy arena, or strongly that sovereignty belonged to the politics.2° This legal status is influences the policy choices of state people. In his own words: "The will underpinned by the principle of non­ officials, then its impact on international of the state obtains pre-eminence over intervention, which was designed to society is likely to be significant. the will of other groups exactly to the help enhance global security. Non­ point where it is interpreted with intervention emerged as a response Re-assessing sovereignty sufficient wisdom to obtain general to the fear and uncertainty in what is States have traditionally been the acceptance, and no further ... in such regarded as an anarchic society of dominant actors in world politics, and a view sovereignty means no more states. they still remain the primary influence than the ability to secure assent". 19 on global affairs. Despite claims to There are several ways of looking at the contrary, the states, and especially Sovereignty is often explained at two international anarchy in a globalising the great powers, still determine the levels - internal and external. Internal world. In one sense, it can be argued environment in which other sovereignty is a principle which that anarchy is as strong as ever, and international actors operate. Even in legitimises internal political that military force remains an the economic arena, it is the states organisation and control, while important instrument of international that ensure that major international external sovereignty is a mechanism policy. Indeed, Iraq's invasion of fmancial crises are averted, andifthey for enhancing international security. Kuwait in 1990 is a reminder that the do arise, states often take measures Internal sovereignty revolves around logic ofpower politics is still relevant. to try to minimise their impact. For three factors: population, territory and Moreover, problems on the Korean example, it was the developed recognised authority. It is predicated peninsula are an indication that countries that organised financial on the principle that each state is free cheating in international relations rescue plans for Indonesia, South to pursue its domestic affairs without remains a major problem. In this Korea and Thailand in 1997. It was outside interference. Internal sense, power politics and the role of also the states that liberalised sovereignty, also known as empirical the state in world politics have not international trade rules through sovereignty, refers to not only the been diminished.· From another various GATT rounds. It is also the right but also the capacity to exercise perspective, Iraq and North Korea states that provide the safe control. However, this control is to can be seen as isolated cases, and that environment in which the media and be exercised with some degree of international institutions and even other transnational forces operate. As consent and legitimacy from society. N GOs are playing significant roles in Peter Dickens has argued, Nevertheless, the processes global governance. From this latter globalisation is directed by the states' described as globalisation have perspective, anarchy and self-help policies. 18 Even the most successful created opportunities for people to would appear to have ceased to have transnational corporations are travel around the world more freely, the influence they have traditionally dependent on secure political and to engage in activities in many had on state behaviour. environments provided by the states. countries. This has effectively meant that the power which states exercise The role of non-government However, this does not deny the fact over those within their territories has organisations that the role of the state might be diminished and people now appear to The argument that the role of the state shifting; the duties and rights of states have multiple loyalties. However, it in world affairs is diminishing partly have always shifted in response to needs also to be recognised that such because of transnational forces is changing international conditions. activities can take place only because exaggerated and has no historical Even state sovereignty is an evolving the states have been willing to relax basis. The structures and activities of institution which can be reinterpreted immigration controls. The implication states determine the environment in differently in accordance with the this development has for security is which NGOs function. Transnational prevailing notions of security. Indeed, that states cannot avoid consulting forces are, and have been for it is true to argue, as many analysts and cooperating with other states in centuries, significant players in world have done, that state sovereignty has efforts to maintain security internally. affairs, but they are not taking over increasingly been encroached upon the functions ofthe state. The phrase 'transnational forces' here refers to multinational corporations, critical 18 Peter Dicken Global Shift London, Paul Chapman, 1992, 2nd edn., pp.l49-150. social movements and other NGOs 19 Harold J. Laski Studies in the Problem ofSovereignty New Haven Yale University Press 1917) which are based in one country but p. 14. ' ' ' engage in activities in other states. 20 See Alan James, 'Sovereignty: ground rule or gibberish?' Review ofInternational Studies 10, 1, Transnational forces include such 1984, pp.1-18. corporations as Shell, IBM, Ford and

8,------~------April/May 1998 ~ '~ '€!:d'l''f:'tlU1,:4ffqir8 Bulletin li.:".g~·g,;;~~,~:;;ffr LIBR.4R' Coca Cola, which engage in successful in exploiting the be solved individually".21 It can afso international economic activities. improvements in the technology of be seen as embracing multilateralism, They also include agencies which are transport and communications. openness, and interpenetration.22 This concerned with human rights, the suggests that dialogue, cooperation environment and humanitarian Some of the critical social and consultation have become activities, such as Amnesty movements have the capacity to raise significant tools for dealing with the International, Greenpeace, the huge sums of money, have access to, effects of globalisation. While these International Committee of the Red and can manipulate, the media, and diplomatic tools may be associated Cross (ICRC), and Medicines sans they can also lobby various with globalisation in the late 20th Frontieres. These organisations play governments around the world. There century, they have, in fact, been increasingly important roles in world is no doubt that social movements and utilised for many centuries. What politics, interact with various other environmental and humanitarian makes the situation different now is governments, and can bring pressure agencies have become extremely the fact that communication is easier to bear on states, but they are not influential in international diplomacy. and faster. accountable to the public. Indeed, NGOs can set international agendas and bring about changes to Cooperation and consultation can take A number of people have argued that international norms. But, again, there place between two parties, but states due to globalisation, the planet, rather is nothing novel about such activities. have also found it necessary to than the state, has become the focal For example, both before and after establish regional and global point of human interactions. In other World War II, the ICRC played a very organisations and networks for words, globalisation has been important role in creating the modem dealing with issues that require presented as a process in which international humanitarian law. collective efforts. Although some individual human beings, their commentators have claimed that associations and NGOs are International history is full of intergovernmental organisations have increasingly assuming prominent examples of NGOs and individuals eroded the role of the state, these roles on the world stage. For example, performing important global roles, but networks and organisations are the work of the ICRC and the they did not take over the functions efficient and effective only because International Campaign to Ban of the states and governments. What the states are willing to support them Landmines (ICBL), was crucial in they did, and can still do, is highlight politically and fmancially. persuading governments to accept the issues and put pressure on the the need to sign a treaty banning the governments to take appropriate The only universal organisation is the use of anti-personnel land mines in measures. Many NGOs operate with United Nations and its agencies. December 1997. ease because they are not Although there have been claims that accountable to governments and are the UN undermines the sovereignty There is nothing new about individuals not subject to the constraints which of some of its members, the reality or private organisations taking the states are subject to. appears to be different; in fact, the prominent roles in world affairs. UN has hindered the erosion or even Marco Polo, Christopher Columbus, Notwithstanding globalisation and the evolution of state sovereignty. The Vasco da Gama, and Cecil Rhodes are effects of transnational forces, states UN Charter proclaims that the just a few of the many who played and their representatives still have the organisation is based on the principle important roles in world politics capacity and resources to determine of the sovereign equality of all its during their time. Moreover, it was a when and how action can be taken members, and that its primary private corporation, the British East to deal with particular problems. responsibility is the maintenance of Africa Company, that colonised Transnational forces and individuals international peace and security. The Kenya and Uganda before the British can use the media and other means Charter sought to protect state · government got interested in Eastern to put pressure on governments to sovereignty through two sections. Africa. It was also William act, but the ultimate decisions will be Article 2(7) prohibited intervention 'in Wilberforce and some evangelical taken bypoliticalleaders- at a national, matters which are essentially within groups that took the lead in the regional or international level. Besides the domestic jurisdiction of any state', struggle to abolish the trade in slaves the NGOs, other pressures on states and Article 2( 4) prohibited the threat in 1807. So the idea that individuals come from intergovernmental or use of force by any state against and private organisations are taking organisations, both regional and the political independence or territorial leading roles in world affairs is not global. integrity of another state. From this by itself an indication that the state perspective, the UN is a guarantor of, has been, or is about to be, eclipsed. Intergovernmental institutions not a threat to, state sovereignty. The difference between now and then Globalisation, as one analyst has is how the process has been assisted argued, "implies an awareness that In the past five decades, the UN has by the revolution in information the whole of humanity has to face a been a major influence in world technology, especially in the last set of common problems that cannot politics, especially in the field of quarter of the 20th century. Philanthropic organisations and multinational corporations in the late 21 Montserrat Guibemau Nationalisms Cambridge UK, Polity Press, 1995, p.129. 20th century have been very 22 Clark op.cit., p.l.

9 Current Affairs Bulletin April/May 1998 economic development and and expand it. Interestingly, the WED, institutions. However, the pressure international peacekeeping. However, the OSCE and the EU also have for homogenisation will merely the UN has also been an arena for security functions. intensify the struggle for diversity, great power politics, and in the past autonomy, and heterogeneity. The few years, there have been claims that In the Asia-Pacific region, the best question of how to reconcile the Security Council, which is known regional organisations are the difference with uniformity, dominated by the five permanent Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation universalism with particularism, and members (USA, Russia, UK, France (APEC) and the Association of globalisation with fragmentation, will and China), has been mainly interested Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), remain central to policy makers at the in pursuing the Western agenda. As but again neither one poses a threat national, regional and global levels. John Mearsheimer has argued: 'The to the independence or identity of Political leaders will continue to most powerful states in the system member states. APEC is a primarily determine whether or not to take create and shape institutions so that economic institution, with a steadily action to deal with whatever problems they can maintain their share of world growing membership. ASEAN was their countries confront. However, it power, or even increase it' .23 In this established in 1967 as an economic, can be assumed that critical social sense, it could be argued that the UN's political and cultural association, but movements and other transnational performance has not reflected its it recently appended a security forces are likely to step up their universal membership. element, the ASEAN Regional Forum efforts to try to influence the (ARF) in 1994. The ARF enables decision-making processes at In addition to the UN, states often ASEAN states to maintain a regular national, regional and global levels. work through regional organisations, dialogue with the US, China, Japan, Political leaders will continue to most of which pursue specific Australia and other interested powers. determine policies that facilitate or political, economic or military The recent transformation of ASEAN frustrate globalisation, taking into objectives. Again, these organisations, and the creation of APEC in 1989, account domestic and external many of which were established long indicate a readiness by countries in pressures. But, at the same time, before the term globalisation became the Asia-Pacific region to establish a transnational forces will continue to fashionable, do not threaten the collective framework for exploiting lobby the states, regional survival of the state. The exception the benefits of globalisation. organisations and the UN to try to might be the European Union (EU), influence those policies. It is this which was established in 1957. The In Africa, South America, and the inter-subjective relationship between ED's original goal was economic Middle East, the main regional the policy-makers and the cooperation, but it has since evolved organisations - the Organisation of transnational forces that determines into a multi-function institution with African Unity (OAU), the the character of globalisation. mechanisms for coordinating its Organisation of American States members' domestic and foreign (OAS), and the Arab League - are However, the spurious assumption policies. The EU appears to have primarily political institutions which that states and governments are emasculated its member states to the pose no threats to the identities of bystanders to globalisation, and that extent no other organisation has done, their members. These organisations the real driving forces are the markets, but all these changes have been made also often play mediating roles in suits many political leaders. 24 by the states themselves. regional conflicts. For many years, Government officials will often try to the OAU was also involved in the blame globalisation for their policy The other major regional organisations southern African liberation struggles, failures. They will claim that they in Europe include the North Atlantic while the Arab League has were powerless to do much for their Treaty Organisation (NATO), the consistently demanded the right of countries in the face of globalising Organisation for Security and Palestinians to have their own state. forces. But, as always, they will claim Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), and In recent years, the OAU and OAS credit for any positive results from the Western European Union (WED). have expanded their agenda to include globalisation. Whatever claims some None of these organisations threatens good governance, and have called on academics, corporate leaders and the interests or identities of its their members to respect human state representatives may make, member states. NATO is the primary rights and carry out democratic globalisation is an outcome of state military institution, which was reforms. policies. It is a reflection of the established in 1949 specifically to deal interests, values, institutions, with the perceived Soviet threat Conclusion standards, and rules of the major during the Cold War. With the end of There is every indication that powers. the Cold War and the disintegration globalisation will increase. Western of the USSR in 1991, NATO's powers and the Western-based NGOs rationale appeared to wane, but its are likely to continue to promote the Samuel M. Makinda members have sought to reconstruct universalisation of values, rules and Dr Makinda is Senior Lecturer in international politics at Murdoch University in Western Australia. He wishes to thank 23 his colleague Jane Hutchinson for critical John J. Mearsheirner, 'The False Promise oflntemational Institutions' International Securityl9, 3, Winter 1994/95, p.l3. comments on an earlier version ofthis article. 24 See Hurrell and Woods, 'Globalisation and Inequality' Millennium 24, 3, 1995, p.448. ------0 10,------