Globalization and International Relations A Geographical Perspective

Globalization and International Relations: A Geographical Perspective Globalization and international relations are intertwined concepts that help to define the way we understand how countries of the world both survive and behave. Daily front page coverage of major newspapers often features stories that fall within the category of globalization or international relations: a tragic war in some far-off region of the world or perhaps a trade agreement or dispute over some product that could affect jobs close to home. Two key issues underlie such headlines: • How do global patterns of economic, political, and cultural activities influence the way governments relate to each other? • How do international relations depend upon global aspects of trade, resource dependency, and capitalism? These questions represent two sides of the same coin in the currency of political geography. Each of the social sciences views globalization and international relations from the vantage point of its own academic interests. Geography offers an important view based on its multidisciplinary approaches to studying local, regional, and worldwide concerns. This geographic combination of multiple scales and overlapping perspectives is critical if we are to understand how globalization affects international relations and vice versa. Before we can discuss globalization and international relations, we must define these complex processes. Globalization is a newer and broader concept and perhaps is less prone to direct governmental behavior than international relations. Diplomats around the world see their work as the business of shaping and implementing international relations, but which particular group sees its role as shaping and implementing globalization? Globalization is a complicated term for geographers. It suggests that worldwide socioeconomic connectivity is growing and is dependent upon new forms of business interactions and technical capabilities, but it does not make clear who or what is most affected and why. Economists view globalization as the overall means by which international trade evolves, including economic accords among countries (such as a range 28 of “free trade” agreements), the role of worldwide financial institutions (the World Bank or the International Monetary Fund or the World Trade Organization), and the growing volume of data tracking the type and value of goods sold across international boundaries. The patterns that encourage international finance and trade can be traced back to the nineteenth century in the “First Era of Globalization,” but in fact, their roots are deeply imbedded in the longer history of industrialization and colonialism. More recently, the patterns of international trade and finance declined during the Great Depression of the 1930s, only to be reborn after World War II with the expansion of free trade agreements among the new nations becoming independent around the globe. Economists thus would view globalization as a potentially productive worldwide process that continues to shape patterns of supply and demand as well as financial flows. They have data to prove their case, ranging from volumes of imports and exports, gold values, and dollar trading. In contrast, political scientists would say that such an economic-centric view is only part of the story; they would point to historical patterns of conquest, plunder, and treaties among the ruling elite as setting the stage for modern-day globalization. Since World War II, the political side of globalization has been closely associated with the United Nations and its member organizations that respond to challenges of war, poverty, and human rights abuses, regardless of where in the world such concerns arise. International relations, in contrast to globalization, is widely understood as the political processes by which governments deal with each other. The history of international relations dates back to the 1500s with the 1648 Treaty of Westphalia as its official benchmark. International relations have had a turbulent history. War and chaos changed the shape of some states; other countries expanded by colonizing far-flung areas of the globe. Some countries are full of immigrants from many other countries, and others are still ethnically homogeneous, differences that can influence their international relations. Some European countries trace back their own formal history of international diplomacy 500 years, while some African countries have been independent for less than 50 years, and their international relations are still influenced by former colonizers. A point of this brief overview is to underscore that international relations are defined and implemented by a wide range of countries and governments, with diverse histories, varied cultures, and competing economies. While international relations can be bilateral—that is, between just two governments— more frequently they are multilateral, involving three or more governments from different parts of the globe. These relations encompass increasingly diverse issues, from measures that determine trading patterns to rules that define crimes against humanity. The business of bilateral international relations is conducted largely by foreign ministries and embassies 29 run by diplomats who are trained in the ways of managing both agreements and disputes. For the most part, their work is routine, building on decades of previous cooperation and aiming to keep bilateral relations on track. Increasingly, however, international relations are also influenced by multinational, global organizations of various types and sizes and managed by different groups of bureaucrats and officials. These organizations set up the institutions and legal rules for competition by which particular “global” objectives are addressed and ideally achieved. A good deal of global competition is about the natural resources controlled by national governments and international corporations. High-valued resources, particularly those marketed as oil and gas, play key roles in a fossil fuel–generated and globalized economy, making some states and corporations very wealthy and other states very dependent. Other international trading patterns are intended to create efficient and inexpensive labor forces that can produce a variety of cheap products for continually shifting world markets. This geography of labor supply and demand among 184 UN member states helps to underscore their relative roles in shaping globalization, with some clearly benefiting as measured by improved living conditions while others sink deeper into poverty. Recent economic growth patterns, for example, suggest that both wealthier and poorer countries have benefited much more from globalization than have middle-income countries, creating serious trade and development challenges. Today, the geography of globalization is less associated with vast European empires, as it was in a previous century, than it is with myriad and changing patterns of economic, political, and cultural influences. These patterns are both historical and dynamic with new sources of wealth, influential personalities, and growing religious influences shaping the way governments interact with one another. Political geography for the past century has offered a means to understand how states engage with each other and compete within an increasingly vigorous global arena. Perhaps no scholar understood the importance of geopolitical analysis in conceptualizing the changing “geographic pivot” among countries of the world better than Sir Halford Mackinder, political geographer and a British member of Parliament. Mackinder understood that countries, particularly those in his famous “heartland,” had competitive relationships shaped by their maritime and landbased locations. His ideas were furthered by German geographers who used “organic state” theories to make “geopolitical” arguments for justifying military dominance of foreign territory. The point is that in any effort to understand globalized international relations, particularly in times of conflict and war, geography matters. Old geopolitical stereotypes are dangerous because they confuse international interests while also contributing to misunderstandings that often underlie conflicts. A relevant 30 31 political geography encompasses complicated realities and trends at international, national, and subnational levels. How we monitor these realities and project these trends will shape the way governments make and implement policies. The “War on Terrorism,” for example, is one that requires an understanding of racial and religious tensions within countries, legal and illegal migration patterns between countries, and local and international access to various types of explosives and weaponry. Terrorism is characterized by an evolving political geography with different types of concerns in different parts of the world. As with other pressing security challenges, its shape will influence international relations and the future of globalization.