Regionalization Vs Globalization

Regionalization vs.
Globalization
Regionalization--the establishment of new regional treaties and accords aimed to increase the cooperation, integration, or political involvement betwe
region. According to Telo (S17), regionalization comes hand in hand with globalization, but can come to play different roles or have different meanin
globalization. This different and conflicting relationships between processes of regionalization and globalization are characteristic of a multipolar wo
of the importance of USA, and the emergence of different foci of capitalism and of development worldwide.
Transition--according to Telo (S17), our world is not in the period of the «end of history», but rather in the period of transition. Since the symbolic fa
the fall of the Communist economy of the USSR, as well as China”s transition to market economy, our world has been full of political uncertainty an
blokes of power that used to control world politics are gone, and the processes of regionalization and the acceleration of globalization that we see now
our world trying to find a new equilibrium.
In his lecture, Telo considers six possible different relationships between regionalization and globalization, 3 of which he discards as too extreme and
realist scenarios). The 6 possible scenarios are:
Different perspectives of regionalization in the context of globalization:

1 a) Realist -- world politics will go back to pre-Cold War era of (European) interstate conflicts. States, as most important actors, will fight for ec
influence, and this fight will lead to regionalization, with each region led by the most powerful state there.
1.b) Realist -- Huntington´s thesis, which argues that the world is divided into civilizational spheres of influence competing with each other, and
regionalization is a means regionalization along civilizational lines. In each civilization a powerful state will emerge as a leader, around which the ec
activity will revolve.
1.c) Realist -- Wallerstein argues that after the fall of Soviet Union, the world will regionalize along the lines of center vs periphery, or North vs S
back to this historic system. the periphery will export raw materials and energy, while the center will export capital and continue directing the world
asymmetrical power relationship conflicts will arise.
Most likely scenarios of regionalization:

2. Regionalization subordinate to globalization--would proceed along with liberalization of markets and flows of capital, encompassing most cou
zone of free trade. This seems likely, since 60% of world trade already takes place within some sort of liberalized free-trade zone (EU, NAFTA, ALC
MERCOSUR, FTAA, Australia-New Zealand). Best example of this initiative is APEC, or Asian Pacific Economic Cooperation, which already inclu
Japan, and Russia among others, thus going beyond regionalization and creating a more global initiative. It also limits the possibility of conflict betw
regional blokes present in APEC, and includes countries of different ranking and stage of development. In this economic model the markets would be
encompass as many different countries as possible, regardless of location, politics, etc. This scenario was promoted by USA (in particular the Clinton
effort to liberalize international markets
during the Naples Summit of G7 in 1994.
The drawbacks of this scenario are that some countries will liberalize much faster than others, thus creating imbalanced and unequal development
countries far behind. This system would work best with a strong hegemon in charge of the initiative, but there is not one that fits that role now. The W
Organization must also reform itself and become stronger, more inclusive, and more legitimate to help the process of liberalization. The process of li
continue without stopping, or there is a strong possibility of a protectionist backlash against liberalization from the regional power blokes. The politic
dimension of security must also be taken into account, because nuclear powers threaten everyone around them, and equalizing the relations between
proliferation. Finally, free trade does not mean democracy and there exists a possibility of radical social changes, conflicts, and ethnic strife. All thes
resolved with strong global governance.
3. The virtuous scenario-- regionalization subordinate to globalization, where globalization actually means a whole architecture of international o
world government to lead global development and cooperation, and to limit competition between regional blokes. This system would rely on strong a
institutions (European Union, MERCOSUR, etc) to homogenize the countries within and to promote liberalization, and to maintain equilibrium betw
represent. Strong, cohesive regional institutions would limit conflicts between the center and the periphery within these institutions (for example, a st
would resolve conflicts between rich western European countries and the southern periphery countries), and all of the negotiation and treaties would
institutional level, rather than on a state level. Unlike the first scenario, which would happen almost automatically as a result of liberalization of worl
scenario will only result from deliberate negotiation, treaties, diplomatic processes, etc. It will result from deliberate political effort. Inn order to avoi
arising, different regions should express and strengthen their own social and economic models for a diverse world system.
Reform of U.N to make it more democratic, as well as the strengthening of regional organizations (and increasing their legitimacy) would help this p
Security Council should admit the emerging economies to facilitate regional integration in U.N., and U.N. itself should have a standing army in orde
maintain peace. It is possible to expect a Marshall Plan as a global initiative to help the marginalized or underdeveloped regions to integrate themselv
system.
4. Neo-realist scenario--where regionalization means each region and its strongest state becoming a pole of power in a multipolar world. In this syste
regular economic or geo-politic conflicts and warfare as state-led regions compete against each other to get more resources or to gain more power. U
version, this world is NOT a zero-sum game and there is still a lot of cooperation and institutionalization taking place; however, some states will gain
the tendency is to compete, and not to attempt to create a unified world economy/political order. This may take place in the context of a latent war be
more regional war between some powers, or simple peaceful competition. Telo believes this scenario would benefit Europe since at the moment it is
competing with emerging Asian economies, and may find globalization a 'tool' of the winning Asian economies, rather than a neutral process. Confli
North in this scenario are unlikely since developed western countries have very similar goals and objectives. This scenario comes from the fact that t
Europe, Japan, and USA has weakened considerably since the fall of USSR, and the Third World has lost its weight in negotiations, thus ushering in
competition and latent conflicts.

Regionalization Vs Globalization

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Regionalization Vs Globalization

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Description:

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Regionalization Vs Globalization

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Regionalization vs.

Different perspectives of regionalization in the context of globalization:

Most likely scenarios of regionalization:

You might also like