Global Intifadah? September 11th and the Struggle within Islam

Against the background of two dominant world order theories - the 'End of History' and the 'Clash of Civilisations' - this article argues that September 11th epitomised two interrelated patterns in world politics: first, the idiosyncrasies and perils of globalisation and second the struggle between different directions in contemporary 'Muslim' politics. The former challenges the traditional view that links globalisation solely to phenomena such as economic integration or the spread of liberal-democratic values, while the latter refers to intra-regional developments in the 'Muslim' world, questioning the characterisation of 'Islam' as a monolithic entity destined to challenge the security of the 'West'. Taken together, these two patterns defy traditional categories of international relations, touching on issues ranging from the role of the state to national security considerations.     

Globalisation,Transnational Political Mobilisation,and Networks of Violence

This article examines how globalisation processes provide new incentives and opportunities for non-state political entrepreneurs to build transnational political movements. Drawing on the literatures on non-violent social movements and transnational networks, the article examines terrorism and political violence as components of the ‘repertoires of contention’ used by radical transnational groups seeking political change. Examples from both the pre- and post-9/11 periods are provided, and the implications for traditional models of state security are discussed. The article concludes by contending that the combination of increased levels of globalisation and the emergence of new networks of violence is creating a fundamental shift in the international security environment, in which the distinction between internal and external security threats is increasingly blurred. While state security strategies are reflecting these changes, less attention has been paid to the political implications of these changes. New security responses need to also be matched by new sets of political strategies at the global level.     

A Turning Point for Globalisation? The Implications for the Global Economy of America's Campaign against Terrorism

Did September 11th herald a turning point for globalisation? Although America's campaign against terrorism could put at risk many of the gains globalisation has brought, the new environment likewise presents opportunities to smooth the rough edges of the globalisation associated with American policies of the past decade. Measures to tighten the security of cross-border flows of goods, people, information and capital may raise entry barriers still higher for poor countries seeking greater integration with the global economy. But September 11th also provided a wake-up call, alerting the wealthier nations and especially Americans to the direct link between their own well-being and ensuring that people around the world have a stake in the international system. Unfortunately, there is little evidence so far these lessons have been taken to heart in policies on trade, financial assistance, and advancing economic reform in the states of the Middle East.     

WorldWideWhale.Globalisation/Dialogue of Cultures?

This article questions the assumption that globalisation has fostered cultural dialogue. In order to understand how globalisation has specifically impacted the sphere of the cultural, it starts by examining the way cultural practises are transformed in its wake. Does globalisation yield new, global forms of culture? To address this conundrum, this article takes the example of a cultural movement that has sought to project itself on a global scale, the anti-whaling culture, exploring both its origins and the distinctive cultural forms it has constituted. It then raises anew the question of dialogue: what of the dialogue between this global anti-whaling movement and local cultures where whaling still occurs? And how does such 'global culture' negotiate with demands for cultural diversity?     

A Tougher Gordian Knot: Globalisation,Imperialism and the Problem of the State

This article aims to provide an overview of the debates around globalisation, and to rehearse an empirical, ideological and theoretical critique of Globalisation Theories. This assessment focuses on the inability of these approaches to understand the state and modern sovereignty as, respectively, a capitalist state and a modern capitalist sovereignty, that is, as part of the social relations of power which constitute the capitalist mode of production. The globalisation debates, which were more often than not predicated on some degree of antagonism between the global process and the nation-state, have proved unable to account for a nation-state which has historically advanced in a close organic relationship with global capitalism. The problem of the state is then used to introduce a review of Marxist contributions to the understanding of imperialism. A brief genealogy of Marxist thought on this subject introduces a discussion of theories of the new imperialism, which have gained considerable purchase in the wake of the United State's reinforced pursuance of an imperial agenda after the terrorist attacks of 9/11, and are again assessed from the angle of the under-theorised notion of the state. This critical review of the imperialism–globalisation debate is meant to underscore the need for a fully fledged Marxist theory of the state which will be able not only to avoid the mistakes built into liberal views about international affairs, but which will also elucidate the relationship between domestic capitals and the state administration, so as to better explain the specific forms of interstate conflict.     

Do Great Powers Have Great Responsibilities? Great Powers and Moral Agency

Since 1815 it has been generally understood that the Great Powers acting in concert have some responsibility for ensuring/underwriting order and stability within international society—although it is clear that only occasionally have they actually discharged this responsibility. Contemporary conditions, where there is only one superpower, change the situation radically; the United States may be able to take the lead in organising the provision of global public goods such as an open global economy and a secure strategic environment, but it also may possess the capacity to promote its own particular conception of the good in the world— the conservatism characteristic of a concert of Powers may not dominate the actions of a single superpower. However, changes in the nature of "power' ' in an age of globalisation and "Empire'' may actually limit the capacity of any actor, or collection of actors, to discharge its responsibilities.     

Globalisation

The term ‘globalisation’ is widely used to describe a variety of economic, cultural, social, and political changes that have shaped the world over the past 50-odd years. Because it is a complex and multifaceted phenomenon, globalisation has been credited with a wide range of powers and effects. Its proponents claim that it is both ‘natural’ and an inevitable outcome of technological progress, and creates positive economic and political convergences. Critics argue that globalisation is hegemonic and antagonistic to local and national economies. This article argues that globalisation is a form of capitalist expansion that entails the integration of local and national economies into a global, unregulated market economy. Although economic in its structure, globalisation is equally a political phenomenon, shaped by negotiations and interactions between institutions of transnational capital, nation states, and international institutions. Its main driving forces are institutions of global capitalism – especially transnational corporations – but it also needs the firm hand of states to create enabling environments for it to take root. Globalisation is always accompanied by liberal democracy, which facilitates the establishment of a neo-liberal state and policies that permit globalisation to flourish. The article discusses the relationship between globalisation and development and points out that some of the most common assumptions promoted by its proponents are contradictory to the reality of globalisation; and that globalisation is resisted by more than half of the globe's population because it is not capable of delivering on its promises of economic well being and progress for all.     

International NGOs and the challenge of modernity

The forces associated with economic globalisation and the apparent supremacy of market forces have unleashed a range of political and social processes that have served, and were indeed designed, to enrich and empower the few at the expense of the majority. These include phenomena such as the rise in armed conflict, threats to food security, the loss of livelihoods and traditional ways of life of millions of people worldwide, the commodification of social provision, assaults on national sovereignty, and the privatisation of citizenship. However, the author argues, the most significant impact of globalisation is the 'localisation' of social and political struggle, and the emergence of new forms of international solidarity. Many NGOs have too readily succumbed to the view that globalisation in its present form is inevitable and irreversible, and have accommodated to it by trading their essential values for technical professionalism, often imported from the private sector. However, if NGOs are to assume their place as part of a transformational movement for social justice, they must rediscover and foster the values of citizen participation and develop a genuine respect for diversity.     

The Global Workplace—challenging the race to the bottom

Founded in 1951, War on Want is a UK‐based NGO committed to the alleviation of poverty with strong roots in the labour movement. War on Want's programme on the Global Workplace provides trade unionists with a range of practical skills and knowledge about international development issues. Part of the programme involves a ‘Global Workers' Forum’, which takes grassroots trade union activists from the UK to a similar sector or even a plant owned by the same employer in the South. The aim is to enhance participants' understanding of the impact of globalisation on the industries in which they work, establish relationships that can act as starting points for global action, and encourage participants to spread the message within their own unions. There is also a website which raises awareness of the global economy and encourages activists to make links and undertake joint action. It is essential that now, as never before, trade unionists should work together as an international force to challenge globalisation and fight for the recognition of workers' rights. The Global Workplace suggests that showing global solidarity to workers around the world can help trade unionists rise to this challenge.     

Is Globalisation Good for the Poor? A Reply to Pogge

In an article from 2011, Thomas Pogge asks if globalisation is good for the world's poor. Pogge answers in the negative. As important evidence for the view that the globalisation period has not been good for the world's poor, Pogge cites a dataset provided by Branko Milanovi? (CUNY). In this article, we do not take issue with Pogge's definition of “globalisation”, “the world’s poor” or with the veracity of the empirical data he refers to in articulating and defending his view about globalisation and the world's poor. However, Pogge's reference to a dataset showing that there has been an economic polarisation between the wealthiest and poorest people of the world, is not, we contend, something that in itself offers strong support for his view that the global institutional order is a significant cause of this economic polarisation. We believe that Pogge overemphasises the impact of supranational institutions in relation to the question of what the main drivers have been of the economic polarisation in question. Our thesis is that a high population growth in the poorest regions of the world, relative to the population growth in the richest regions of the world, can help explain a non-negligible amount of the economic polarisation that has occurred between 1988 and 2005.     

Human Security: The Making of a UN Ideology

Inspired by the conclusions of the United Nations Intellectual History Project, this article seeks to enrich the ongoing discussion on the role of ideas in UN activities. The focus here is on security, an issue often regarded as the organisation's raison d'être. The article argues that over the past two decades the ideology of human security has been the driving normative force behind the global policies advocated by the UN in the area of security. The first part analyses the UN's official discourse, and demonstrates the political importance that it ascribes to the concept of human security. The second section examines a set of global policies that illustrate how the world body has sought to put the principles of human security into practice. While recognising that these policies fall short of the ambitions articulated in UN rhetoric, the article suggests that they have opened a small but very real breach in the epistemic framework underlying the traditional conception of security.     

Globalisation,Multipolarity and the L20 as an Alternative to the G8

The simultaneity of globalisation and the rise of powers such as China, India, Brazil and South Africa are raising fundamental questions about the aptness of the contemporary global governance architecture. A few years ago, former Canadian Prime Minister Paul Martin proposed a “Leaders' 20” or “L20” as an apex body for global governance. After having put the L20 proposal in theoretical and historical perspective, the paper investigates structural trends in favour of the L20 proposal as well as obstacles to it. Taking into account the challenges the world's powerful states are facing, an enlargement of the G8 looks inevitable. But thus far the obstacles appear to be even stronger. The paper concludes by elaborating on the idea that neither conducing elements nor obstacles are deterministically given.     

Networks of Global Interaction

Although the correlation between the Internet and globalisation is well recognised, we know relatively little about the social impact of the networked world order. Based on research on Internet growth in developing countries, this article seeks to identify some of its most salient features and how these influence, and in turn are influenced by, the broader processes of modernisation and globalisation. Through a closer examination of the social and cultural embeddedness of the Internet, the article will discuss how the organisational principle of networks is becoming more prominent in contemporary society, leading to the rise of the networked society. Rather than representing a post-modern social form, the networked society reaffirms some of the most fundamental, and rather contradictory, aspects of modernity, especially the dual processes of globalisation and individualisation. Representing a new medium for communication and interaction, the Internet allows users to establish and maintain social relations on a global scale. Rather than erasing local identities, these 'glocal' interactions have a tendency to enforce a localised sense of belonging. Nonetheless, the boundary-crossing nature of networks also has a tendency to make existing boundaries rather fuzzy and subject to mediated redefinition and re-imagining. This article builds on some of the findings of my recently completed research on the social dynamics of Internet development in developing countries (Uimonen 2000).     

Globalisation as a Problem of Political Analysis: Restoring Agents to a 'Process without a Subject' and Politics to a Logic of Economic Compulsion*

Globalisation, in both the popular and academic vernacular, is presented as a non-negotiable external economic constraint, which must simply be accommodated. Consequently, it is a process whose content, nature and consequences are not amenable--either in practice or in principle--to political, far less democratic, deliberation. It is not at all surprising, then, that the invocation of globalisation should be associated with the logic of economic compulsion and the absence of political choice. This paper argues that the perception of the non-negotiable character of globalisation is both misleading and, at the same time, intimately connected to its depiction as a causal 'process without a subject'. For it is only by failing to specify the mechanisms of complex change, in which agents are necessarily implicated, that generic and agentless processes such as globalisation acquire their necessitarian, non-negotiable and apolitical character. Restoring subjects to the process of globalisation and assessing the extent to which their behaviour is informed by constructions of globalisation are urgent challenges for critical political analysts. They are crucial to the broader task of demystifying globalisation, of holding it open to democratic political scrutiny and, in so doing, of challenging its perceived logic of no alternative. If we are to do this, we must develop an account of globalisation capable of acknowledging and incorporating a dynamic understanding of the relationship between conduct and context, and the material and the ideational. In short, if the character, content and consequences of the process of globalisation are to be held to account, we must first restore agents to this process without a subject and politics to this logic of economic compulsion.     

The Eu's Response to 9/11: A Case Study of Institutional Roles and Policy Processes with Special Reference to Issues of Accountability and Human Rights

ABSTRACT

The challenges of 9/11 required a wide ranging response across all three of the broad divisions of EU policymaking competence: the economic and monetary union, common foreign and security policy and internal security. These policy divisions make up the ‘three pillars’ of the EU's political architecture. This article reviews general issues of accountability and human rights protection in the EU's policymaking and implementation process, the evolution of the EU's response to terrorism, and the general response to 9/11. It then considers, in detail, the implications of the various response measures adopted under each ‘pillar’. The article demonstrates the emphasis that the Member States have placed on security measures and the wider concerns that their content and speed of adoption left little scope for other views to be heard. The article lays stress upon the fact that the effectiveness of the response measures are crucially dependent on the variable implementation capacity of the Member States. The article concludes by noting how the 2004 EU Constitution [Article I-42] requires Member States to ‘…?act jointly in a spirit of solidarity if a Member State is a victim of a terrorist attack….’     

Europe's global ambitions and the New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD): of what relevance is the Politique Africaine?

The New Partnership for African Development (NEPAD) agreed in 2001 between the G7 and African leaders is an ambitious initiative to resolve the problems of economic underdevelopment, political instability and armed conflict in Africa. Essentially, it rests on the promise of increased economic aid in exchange for African commitment to liberal political and economic governance. This article examines the implications of NEPAD for the EU's policies towards Africa. It argues that the EU's economic instruments are more suitable for tackling security problems in Africa than its evolving military capacity or global multilateral cooperation with African states through NEPAD structures. It is argued that extant structures of European-African relations can significantly impact on African governance processes and their security outcomes only if they can be graduated into ‘constitutive’ forms of economic intervention similar to processes of accession into the EU. Such a modification, based on variegated competitive partnerships, would be consistent with the French origins of European-African relations and maybe possible because of the links between French foreign policy and Europe's evolving global role.     

“There’s only three things he mentions in a sentence – a noun,a verb and 9/11”: terrorism,fear and the after,after 9/11

In the years since 11 September 2001, pundits, politicians and scholars of terrorism and international relations routinely have declared that 9/11 “changed everything”. This article explores not only how those decisions transformed the United States and the global response to terrorism, but also how both the decisions and response sustained a sense of fear. Further, they made possible, to paraphrase then candidate Joseph Biden’s critique of former New York Mayor Rudy Guiliani, the framing of so much of the global political debate about terrorism, and national security references as simply 9/11 accompanied by a noun and a verb. Finally, the article examines the consequences of this framing for not only our understanding of terrorism, but also our understanding of terrorism and violence within the current global system.     

论恐怖主义新发展及其对国际关系格局演变的影响

新世纪伊始 ,在和平与发展的时代主流推动下 ,全球战略格局继续向纵深演进。与此同时 ,世界各种矛盾不断交织、碰撞、激化带来的不稳定、不确定因素相对有所上升 ,特别是以“9·11”事件为标志的恐怖主义新发展对国际政治、经济、军事和安全形势的影响重要而深刻。但是 ,国际关系格局没有因此发生根本性改变 ,多极化进程继续在曲折中发展 ,整个国际形势依然呈现总体上和平、缓和、稳定 ,并伴随局部战乱、紧张和动荡的基本态势。我国应根据国际反恐领域的新动向 ,制定有利于我国和国际社会最大安全利益的应对方案和措施 ,积极参与反恐斗争的进程。     

The Importance of Europe in the Global Campaign Against Terrorism

ABSTRACT

Terrorism and how to respond to it looms large in the current transatlantic debate, with the Europeans often being accused of failing to recognise terrorism as the major strategic issue of the early twenty-first century and thus putting their own security as well as that of others at risk. This is both true and false. It is true in the sense that fifteen years after the end of the Cold War, the Europeans still lack a global strategic vision, never mind how the threat from terrorism might impact upon it. But it is false in the sense that it understates what the Europeans can and are doing to reduce and manage terrorism on a global scale. The article is structured into four sections. The first examines terrorist activity in Europe post-9/11. The second deals with how the Europeans responded to 9/11 collectively within the EU. The third section focuses on what are termed the “outreach” activities of the Europeans via the United National Security Council, G-8, OSCE, NATO, and the European Union. And finally the article concludes that it is this outreach by the Europeans that holds the most promise for effectively countering international terrorism, that the Americans are dependent on this activity, and that the Europeans have to modify their strategic vision in order to deliver more effectively.