For sure that wars in a multipart world that involve only minor powers or only one major power are not likely to be as devastating as a conflict between two major powers. But small wars always have the potential to widen into big wars. – To conclude: He saw the bipolar system is a more stable system. Bipolar distribution of power plays a central ole in preserving peace for decades. The end of that bipolarity means withdrawal Of soviet troops, an end Of Warsaw pact and a reduction Of American strategic role in Europe that all will lead to some kind of power vacuum. – Paul Kennedy and Robert Kaplan: – According to both of them, the world will be divided into 2 socio-economic layers in which the rich will constitute one bloc while the impoverished poor developing nations will constitute another bloc. – For Kennedy, these impoverished nations will not simply disappear, or suffer long in passive silence. Kennedy worries about mass migration; especially as populations overwhelm whatever meager resources they have available in their homelands. That kind of migration will either overrun the North, or be repelled by force. Kaplan adds to the migration worry the thought of rampant crime and instability in poor societies, what he calls “criminal anarchy’ which he maintains is “the national security issue of the early twenty-first century. ” – Kennedy suggests that we do what we can to provide economic assistance to the South. Develop new energy and food sources, improve family planning and healthcare in poor nations, and improve the U. N. As a peacekeeping body. Kaplan is less enthusiastic about providing aid. He favors early warning mechanisms in poor countries to that crises can be nipped in their early stages.
But he also suggests caution about military involvement-??only when the stakes are high and the cost low. – So, the main point to them is that rich countries may try as they can defend themselves against troubles coming from the poor south through refugees, corruption, crimes and collapsing stats. All of these will ultimately cause threats to the most advanced countries in the world. It will be as a nightmare to the north and the globe will be ruled by chaos. – Thomas Friedman: – In most of his writings, he identified globalization as dominating the new century.
Don’t waste your time!
Order your assignment!
For him, globalization is not just a phenomenon and not just a passing trend. It’s the international system that replaced the cold war system. – He defines globalization as the interweaving of markets, technology, information systems and telecommunications systems in a way that is shrinking the world from a size medium to a size small, and enabling each of us to reach around the world farther, faster, deeper, and cheaper than ever before, and enabling the world to reach into each of us farther, faster, peeper, cheaper than ever before.
He argues that it works in a way that is creating a single global market and to some degree a global village. – For him, globalization is associated with good values like “democracy, peace and prosperity’. It is a system that has united the fates of people all over the world. – He distinguishes between the cold war era and globalization age: the Cold War system was based on one overarching feature and that was division… All your threats and opportunities as a country or company tended to flow from who you were divided from. And that system was symbolized by nee word: The Wall, the Berlin Wall. + Globalization systems are also characterized by one overarching feature and that is integration. In this new system all your threats and opportunities increasing flow from who you are connected to, and it is symbolized by a single word: The Web, the World Wide Web. – He suggests that one can’t understand the morning news or know where to invest your money or think about where the world is going unless you understand this new system “globalization”, which is influencing the domestic policies & international relations of virtually every country in the world today.
He describes the global economic policy of globalization as the “Golden Straitjacket” that suppose all countries do put on and lace up tight. “As your country puts on the Golden Straitjacket, two things tend to happen: your economy grows and your politics shrinks” -Also he describes the millions of investors & the global financial market players as “Electronic herd”, which moves money around the world with the click of mouse and reshape the world in some fundamental ways. The electronic herd loves the golden straitjacket as it embodies all the liberal, free market rules that the herd ants to see in a country. According to Friedman, There is no existence anymore for what is called: 1st, 2nd and 3rd world. The world is divided between Fast world and slow world. – He recognized that globalization can lead to a problem which is division within state as the global economy produce winners and losers. “Globalization is creating astonishing riches for some and failure and poverty for many. Rising inequalities and increasing the gap between the rich and the poor within and between the countries” N. B: First, notice that all of these maps and their associated strategies re based on fault lines.
And on opposite sides of these fault lines are those who have facing in opposition those who do not have: For Fauvism it is those who have democracy, versus those who do not. For Huntington, it is those who have civilizations that are assertive, versus those who resent that assertiveness. For Marshier, it is those who have nations that are assertive, versus those who resent that assertiveness. For Friedman, it is those who have free markets and related technology, versus those who do not. And for Kennedy and Kaplan, it is those who have wealth, versus those who do not.