Search

You searched for: Content Type Journal Article Remove constraint Content Type: Journal Article Political Geography United States Remove constraint Political Geography: United States Topic Globalization Remove constraint Topic: Globalization
Number of results to display per page

Search Results

  • Author: Henry Farrell, Abraham L. Newman
  • Publication Date: 07-2019
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: International Security
  • Institution: Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, Harvard University
  • Abstract: Liberals claim that globalization has led to fragmentation and decentralized networks of power relations. This does not explain how states increasingly “weaponize interdependence” by leveraging global networks of informational and financial exchange for strategic advantage. The theoretical literature on network topography shows how standard models predict that many networks grow asymmetrically so that some nodes are far more connected than others. This model nicely describes several key global economic networks, centering on the United States and a few other states. Highly asymmetric networks allow states with (1) effective jurisdiction over the central economic nodes and (2) appropriate domestic institutions and norms to weaponize these structural advantages for coercive ends. In particular, two mechanisms can be identified. First, states can employ the “panopticon effect” to gather strategically valuable information. Second, they can employ the “chokepoint effect” to deny network access to adversaries. Tests of the plausibility of these arguments across two extended case studies that provide variation both in the extent of U.S. jurisdiction and in the presence of domestic institutions—the SWIFT financial messaging system and the internet—confirm the framework's expectations. A better understanding of the policy implications of the use and potential overuse of these tools, as well as the response strategies of targeted states, will recast scholarly debates on the relationship between economic globalization and state coercion.
  • Topic: International Relations, Globalization, Information Age, Global Security, Weapons
  • Political Geography: United States, Global Focus
  • Author: Ray Kiely
  • Publication Date: 04-2014
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Journal of International Relations and Development
  • Institution: Central and East European International Studies Association
  • Abstract: This article examines the concepts of globalisation and imperialism, both in terms of their explanatory status, and in the light of changes in the international order since the end of the Cold War. It does so both through detailed theoretical and empirical analysis, and in part through focusing on a key contributor to this debate, Justin Rosenberg. It is argued that Rosenberg's theoretical post-mortem for globalisation is correct. However, it is also argued that Rosenberg's historical post-mortem is far less convincing, not least when related to his subsequent attempts to draw on the concept of uneven and combined development in order to explain the reality of geopolitical conflict in the international order. It is here that the concept of imperialism enters the picture, and the article suggests that attempts to update theories of geopolitical competition based on Lenin and Bukharin's work on imperialism are unconvincing, as they fail to take full account of the changes in the international order since 1945. These changes - the internationalisation of capital and rise of global production networks, the rise of manufacturing in the developing world, the internationalisation of the state, cooperation between developed capitalist powers, and US hegemony - are well described, if not necessarily explained by the concept of globalisation. However, this does not mean that the concept of imperialism is no longer of use, and the idea is defended through a discussion of the hierarchies associated with the globalisation of production. It is further illustrated by relating liberal military intervention to this continued reality of global hierarchy and inequality in the international order. The article concludes by defending the ideas of imperialism and uneven and combined development, but argues that these cannot be used to explain the nature of the international state system (or geo-politics), but rather the hierarchies associated with the international capitalist order (or political economy).
  • Topic: Globalization, Imperialism
  • Political Geography: United States
  • Author: Susan Ginsburg
  • Publication Date: 01-2014
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Journal on Migration and Human Security
  • Institution: Center for Migration Studies of New York
  • Abstract: The 1948 Universal Declaration of Human Rights affirmed in Article 13 that "[e]veryone has the right to leave any country, including his own, and to return to his country." In response to the Soviet Union's and China's prohibitive controls over the travel of their citizens, Article 13 recognized the right of individual citizens to take trips to other countries willing to receive them, knowing that they may return home at the end of their foreign stays.
  • Topic: Globalization, Human Rights
  • Political Geography: United States, China
  • Author: Ronen Palan
  • Publication Date: 06-2013
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Institution: Chatham House
  • Abstract: Tax havens have been around for decades but they were viewed as marginal if not esoteric phenomena. Attitudes are changing. As new data on international financial flows becomes available, it is difficult to avoid the conclusion that tax havens are at the very heart of 'neoliberal' globalization, aiding and facilitating tax avoidance on a vast scale.
  • Topic: Globalization
  • Political Geography: United States, Caribbean
  • Author: Robert B. Zoellick
  • Publication Date: 08-2013
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: The National Interest
  • Institution: Center for the National Interest
  • Abstract: LAST YEAR, during his visit to the United States, Chinese president Xi Jinping introduced the idea of a “new type of great-power relationship.” In March of this year, in apparent response, President Obama's national-security adviser, Tom Donilon, suggested an interest in building “a new model of relations between an existing power and an emerging one.” This June, the two presidents met in California to explore whether their strategic outlooks can be reconciled. I suspect that President Xi's concept reflects the senior leadership's study of history. At last year's meeting of the U.S.-China Strategic and Economic Dialogue, former president Hu Jintao stated, “We should prove that the traditional belief that big powers are bound to enter into conflict is wrong, and [instead] seek new ways of developing relations between major countries in the era of economic globalization.” In the United States, professors Graham Allison and Joseph Nye at Harvard have referred to this challenge as “the Thucydides trap”: in explaining the cause of the great Peloponnesian War of the fifth century BC, Thucydides pointed to the rise of Athens and the fear it inspired in Sparta. In the centuries since, scholars have pondered how power shifts have led to competitive tensions, which sometimes have been managed and sometimes led to conflict. This essay will pose a question: What might be the substance of a new type of great-power relationship between China and the United States? Kevin Rudd, former prime minister and foreign minister of Australia, has also taken up this topic in a series of thoughtful speeches. His approach points to the need for reinforcing dialogues and cooperative efforts.
  • Topic: International Relations, Economics, Globalization
  • Political Geography: United States, China
  • Author: Anthony J. DiBella
  • Publication Date: 09-2013
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: PRISM
  • Institution: Institute for National Strategic Studies (INSS), National Defense University
  • Abstract: Leadership has long been a focal point of human curiosity but has recently gathered even more attention. As globalization becomes increasingly the dominant force in political, social, and economic affairs, leaders far and wide are being called upon to take on new roles and address emergent challenges. This trend may be most prominent in the arena of national security. In particular, military leaders must now interact with a broader range of social communities as engagements span national and cultural boundaries. While in the past, national militaries or their forces or branches acted alone, most of today's engagements involve coalitions, “partners”, or joint forces. How do the traditional traits and characteristics of military leaders align with this new environment? This paper will examine several traits or characteristics of military leaders, compare them to those of other global leaders, and suggest ways to prepare military leaders for global leadership roles that go beyond parochial interests.
  • Topic: Globalization, War
  • Political Geography: United States
  • Author: Priscilla M. Regan
  • Publication Date: 08-2012
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: Political Science Quarterly
  • Institution: Academy of Political Science
  • Abstract: The debate about the balance between privacy and security has intrigued scholars for decades and has become of increased relevance in our post-September 11 era. Simon Chesterman approaches this issue from a perspective yielding some very interesting insights. He argues that the traditional distinction between foreign and domestic intelligence has eroded due to the nature of terrorist threats, globalization, and innovations in communications and information technologies. The focus of Chesterman's analysis is on domestic intelligence activities, especially those of the Federal Bureau of Investigation and Britain's Security Service (MI5). His conclusion is that in democratic societies, a new "social contract" is emerging by which individuals give government and private institutions information in exchange for security and convenience. Chesterman's analysis of the changes in domestic surveillance activities is carefully researched, thoughtfully organized, and well-supported; however, his conclusions regarding this new social contract need to be more fully developed.
  • Topic: Globalization
  • Political Geography: United States, United Nations
  • Author: Andrew Hurrell, Sandeep Sengupta
  • Publication Date: 05-2012
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Institution: Chatham House
  • Abstract: There is a widespread perception that power is shifting in global politics and that emerging powers are assuming a more prominent, active and important role. On this account the global system is increasingly characterized by a diffusion of power, to countries including emerging and regional powers; by a diffusion of preferences, with many more voices demanding to be heard both globally and within states as a result of globalization and democratization; and by a diffusion of ideas and values, with a reopening of the big questions of social, economic and political organization that were supposedly resolved with the end of the Cold War and the liberal ascendancy. There is a strong argument that we are witnessing the most powerful set of challenges yet to the global order that the United States sought to construct within its own camp during the Cold War and to globalize in the post-Cold War period. Many of these challenges also raise questions about the longer-term position of the Anglo-American and European global order that rose to dominance in the middle of the nineteenth century and around which so many conceptions and practices of power-political order, of the international legal system and of global economic governance have since been constructed.
  • Topic: Globalization
  • Political Geography: United States, America, Europe
  • Author: Bhubhindar Singh, Philip Shetler-Jones
  • Publication Date: 09-2011
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: International Relations of the Asia-Pacific
  • Institution: Japan Association of International Relations
  • Abstract: Japan has steadily extended its military reach from a domestic zone of defense against territorial invasion in the late 1950s, through regional security policy in the late 1970s to what has now become a globally scaled military role. This re-expansion is perceived by some as evidence of revived militaristic ambitions, and by others as subservience to the US global strategy. However, taking the cue from Japan's 2004 National Defence Programme Guideline (New Taikō), this paper assesses the role globalization has played in this territorial expansion. The impact of globalization is evident in the double expansion of Japan's national security conception in geographical terms and self-defense forces roles in global security. These 'expansions' are studied through two key elements of globalization – the deterritorialization of complex relations of interdependence between states (security globality) and the inter-penetrating nature of these relations blur the boundary between foreign and domestic spaces (intermestic space).
  • Topic: Globalization
  • Political Geography: United States, Japan
  • Author: Sheldon W. Simon
  • Publication Date: 09-2011
  • Content Type: Journal Article
  • Journal: International Relations of the Asia-Pacific
  • Institution: Japan Association of International Relations
  • Abstract: A successful edited volume not only requires that the editors recruit qualified specialists for each chapter but also that those editors integrate the separate analyses so that the book displays a coherence beyond the sum of its individual parts. Michael Green and Bates Gill have succeeded admirably on both dimensions: enlisting renowned Asian country specialists and experts on the various types of cooperation that characterize Asian multilateralism. Moreover, their Introduction illuminates how these types relate to one another. Over the past 45 years, Asia has experienced a plethora of multilateral political, economic, and security arrangements – some long-lived and well-institutionalized (ASEAN) and others formed to deal with a specific situation such as the Core Group that provided aid to those countries devastated by the December 2004 tsunami. There is considerable overlap in states ' memberships among these bodies, though they tend to group in a Southeast Asian-led formation centered in ASEAN and a Northeast Asian coterie dealing with North Korea in the Six-Party Talks. An additional transnational dimension may be found in nontraditional security such as infectious diseases, criminal and terrorist activities, piracy and human trafficking, all of which cross national boundaries and are generally seen by Asian states as susceptible to cooperative action. Traditional, hard security concerns – territorial disputes, historical animosities, and resource conflicts – on the other hand, though discussed in a number of multilateral settings, produce a great deal of rhetoric but very little resolution. Another concern, especially for great powers such as the United States and India, is whether East Asian multilateral groups will be inclusive or exclusive – trans-Pacific or Asia only.
  • Topic: Economics, Globalization, National Security
  • Political Geography: United States, Japan, Asia