Global Affairs Module

Chapter Four: Globalization and Regionalism

Introduction
Globalization and Regionalism are two major phenomena influencing global trend. Both as a
form of integration and differentiation among states characterize a form of reorganization of
interstate relations: formal and informal. Globalization is often understood as a phenomena, or a
process characterized by increasing interconnectedness or interdependence. In short, it is a supra
regional process bringing the world into one global village.The economy, politics, and
technology have been the driving forces of globalization.Regionalism, on the other hand, is
conceived as a way of dealing with politico-economic, social, military and security issues
affecting states in common.

Both developments have continued to significantly shape the nature of global politics, peace and
security. The mutual causation between regionalism and globalization is an area of unsettling
debate involving convergence, divergence and overlap. This chapter, therefore, brings the whole
theoretical and practical debates around regionalism, regional integration, globalization and the
interplay among them in influencing global trends.

Objectives
After successfully completing this chapter students should be able to:
 Conceptualize the concepts of globalization and regionalism
 Expose themselves with the contemporary debates on the essence and direction of
globalization
 Develop a position regarding the essence and effects of Globalization
 Analyze the impacts of globalization on Africa, Ethiopia and the developing world
 Explain the theoretical caveats and practice of regionalism and regional integration

 Explain the mutual interaction between regionalism and globalization

Brainstorming Questions:

 What meaning do such terms as ‘globalization’, ‘regionalism‘, ‘localization’ give to

 Global Affairs Module

you?
 Are you supporter of ‘globalization’, ‘regionalism ‘or ‘localization’? Why? Which one
do you dislike most and why?

4.1. Defining Globalization

Globalization can be defined as a multidimensional process characterized by: (1) the stretching
of social and political activities across state (political) frontiers so that events, decisions, and
activities in one part of the world come to have significance for individuals and communities in
other parts of the world. For instance wars and conflicts in developing countries would increase
the flow of asylum seekers and illegal migrants in to the developed countries; (2) the
intensification or the growing magnitude of interconnectedness in almost every aspect of social
existence from the economic to the ecological, the spread of HIV-AIDS, from the intensification
of world trade to the spread of different weapons; (3) the accelerating pace of global interactions
and process as the evolution of worldwide systems of transport and communication increases the
rapidity of or velocity with which ideas, news, goods, information, capital and technology move
around the world; (4) the growing extensity, intensity, and velocity of global interaction is
associated with a deepening enmeshment of the local and global insofar as the local events may
come to have global consequences and global events may come to have serious local
consequences creating a growing collective awareness of the world as shared social space, i.e.
globality or globalism.

Although geography and distance still matters it is nevertheless the case that globalization is
synonymous with a process of time-space compression-literally meant that in the shrinking world
events or actions no longer coincides with the place in which it takes place. In this respect
globalization embodies a process of deterritorialization, viz., as social, political, and economic
activities are increasingly stretched across the globe they become in a significant sense no longer
organized solely according to territorial logic. For example terrorist and criminals operate both
locally and globally.

Another example is that under the condition of globalization, national economic space is no
longer coterminous with national territorial space since, as in the case of many U.S companies
based their headquarters in Europe. This indicates that, in the globalized world, territorial borders
no longer demarcate the boundaries of national economic or political space. This is not to argue
 Global Affairs Module

that territory and borders are now irrelevant but rather to acknowledge that under condition of
globalization this relative significance, as constrains of social action and exercise of power, is
declining. Note only that the distinction between the domestic and international, inside and
outside the state breaks down.

Activities:
What does globalization mean?
Discuss the different elements /dimensions of globalization

4.2. The Globalization Debates

Globalization is a contentious issue in international relations. There has been intense debate as to
the direction, nature and effect of globalization on states. In this regard, there are three
perspectives: the hyper-globalists, the skeptics, and transformationalists. Each perspective
delivers a distinct response to the questions of: what is new about globalization; and what are its
political consequences for sovereign statehood?

4.2.1. The Hyper-globalists

For the hyper-globalists, globalization today defines a new epoch in human history in which
nation states become obsolete to regulate their economy and boundary. This view of
globalization privileges the economic over the political, the market over the state, and prefigures
the decline of states. Advocates of this view argue that economic globalization is bringing about
a de-nationalization/ de-territorialization of economies through the establishment of transitional
networks of production, trade and finance. In this borderless economy national governments are
relegated to little more than transmission belts for global capital or ultimately powerless
institutions marginalized by the growing significance of local, regional and global mechanisms
of governance. In this respect the hyper-globalists share a conviction that economic globalization
is bringing about the decline of states. Under the condition of globalization, states becoming the
site of global and transnational flows and as opposed to the primary container of socio-economic
activity. Thus for the hyper globalists, the authority and legitimacy of states thereby is
undermined as the national governments become increasingly unable to control the Tran
boundary movements and flows of goods, services, ideas and different socio-economic activities
inside their borders. The cumulative effects of these forces would make the state in effective to
full fill the demands of its citizens.
 Global Affairs Module

Furthermore; the hyper globalists claim that economic globalization is generating a new pattern
of losers as well as winners in the international economy. The already existing South-North gap
has been considered as acronyms as a new international division of labor emerges with more
complex economic configuration of economic power. The competitive nature of the market
would bring new economic class as winners and losers, hence this put a challenge for the state,
especially welfare states, to helping those losers under the constraint of liberal market economy.

Hyper-globalist further argue that globalization is imparting new liberal ideas and implant
culture of modernization replacing the traditional culture having an impetus towards creating a
new global order marked by uniform cultural values or way of life.

4.2.2. The Skeptics

The skeptics rejected the view of super- globalist as a myth, flawed and politically naïve since it
fundamentally underestimate the enormous power of national governments to regulate
international economic activities. For them, rather than being out of control, the force of
globalization, which is synonymous to internationalization, very much dependent on the
regulatory power of the state to ensure the continuation of economic liberalism. States are central
actors and agents of globalization playing central role in shaping and regulating the economic
activities including the Trans-boundary flows of ideas, goods and peoples.

Skeptics also undermine the view that the world is interconnected and moving into a village
where by there exists a free flow of goods and services, investment and circulation of money
from one corner of the world in to another. For them, the so called globalization is not more than
regionalization that is being manifested in the emergence of financial and trading blocs in
Western countries, North America, in Asia and to some extent in Africa. For instance in Europe,
there exists EU as site and expression of globalization; in North America, there exist a trading
bloc, NAFTA, ASEAN in Asia. And we have seen more interconnectedness at regional level
lesser than at the global level. For that matter, Skeptics argues that there is no free flow of goods,
resources, technology and finance at the global level; instead we have regional based
globalization.

In this regard, it has become evident that the Western region is more intergraded and globalized
than the other part of the world such as Africa and Asia. In fact these countries are in one way or
 Global Affairs Module

another interconnected in terms of trade; yet we have seen less instantaneous flow of technology
financial capital from the west to Africa and other developing countries. Yet in terms of trade the
developing countries are integrated to the western market whereby the developing countries
supply their primary agricultural commodities to earn foreign currencies. However such trade
connection is not benefiting the developing nations. The Sceptics thus do not believe that
globalization would help to narrow the economic and technological gap that is still prevailing
between the Global North(developed Countries) and The Global South(Developing countries).
So, for the Skeptics, globalization brings nothing new, rather it is just the crystallization the
already existing realities of the world which has been marked by the North-South gap reflected
in terms of the deeply rooted patterns of in equality and hierarchy.

4.2.3. The Transformationalist

Central to the transformationalist perspective is the conviction that globalization is a critical
driving force behind the rapid social, political and economic changes which are reshaping
societies and international politics. According to the proponents of this view ,the contemporary
process of globalization are historically unprecedented such that governments and societies
across the globe are having to adapt to a world in which there is no longer a clear distinction
between the international and domestic affairs. At the core of the transformationist view is the
belief that globalization is reconstituting or reengineering the power, function and the authority
of the state, Even though the state has ultimate legal power to control events inside its boundary,
it can’t command sole control over trans-boundary issues, actors, resource movements. Under
globalization, national economic space no more coincides with state boundary.

In arguing that globalization is transforming or reconstituting the power and authority of national
governments, they however reject both the hyper globalist view of the end of the sovereign state
as well as the Sceptics claim that nothing much has changed. Instead they assert that a new
sovereignty regime is displacing traditional conception of state power as an absolute, indivisible,
territorially exclusive power. Accordingly, sovereignty today is the best understood as “….less a
territorially defined barrier than a bargaining resource for a politics characterized by complex
transnational network. Under globalization, there are non-state actors as Multinational
Corporation, transnational social movements, international regulatory agencies.
 Global Affairs Module

In this sense world order can no longer be conceived as purely State-Centric or even primarily
state managed as authority has become increasingly diffused amongst public and private a
agencies at the local, national, regional and at global levels i.e. down ward, up rewards and
sideways. This does not mean that the power of national government is necessarily diminished
but on the contrary it is being redefined, reconstituted and restructured in response to the
growing complexity of process of governance in a more interconnected world.

Activities:
 Discuss the different views on the ongoing debates about globalization?

 Which line (s) of debate is more compelling? Explain why?

4.3. Globalization and Its Impacts on Africa

Despite the ambiguities of the concept, the essential nature of globalization is the compression of
space and time, so that people from distant areas are able and in fact obliged to interact with one
another intensively and in a wide range of areas. As a result, the world becomes one, and
interactions among diverse people begin to look like those within a village. Thus terms such as
“One World” and “Villagization” are sometimes used as synonyms for globalization.

In its contemporary form, globalization is driven by a variety of forces. These are financial or the
flow of financial resources, economic with particular reference to the flow of goods and services
and, to a very limited extent, labor, technology, especially transport, communications and
information technology, the spread of culture from one corner of the world to the other, and the
global diffusion of religious ideas as well as ideologies. Other aspects that are unique to the
present form of globalization are the Americanization of the world, the propagation of a
universal paradigm for economic and political development, and the dominance of unilateralism
as a way of conducting international relations.

The Americanization of the World is the result of the huge and unprecedented gap between the
United States and its nearest rival in each and every sphere, military, economic, technological
and cultural, which is in turn transformed into the unequaled American influence on international
issues and decision-making, including those within the purview of major international
institutions such as the United Nations System, the Breton-Woods institutions, and the World
 Global Affairs Module

Trade Organization. Globalization has therefore increasingly taken the appearance of the
transformation of the international system from a multi-polar or bipolar system to an imperial
system under American hegemony. Within this system, decisions and outcomes are largely the
result of American unilateralism. A major consequence of this is the propagation of a universal
paradigm for both economic and political development, in the form of the so-called Washington
Consensus, whose main features are market forces and liberal democracy, without regard to the
historical and cultural specificities of individual countries.

In sum, globalization seems to be leading inexorably to the homogenization of the world, with
the United States as the model and the standard by which all other countries are to be judged.
Participants were unanimously of the view that globalization is inevitable and its consequences
pervasive. However, asymmetry in the distribution of power results in different perceptions and
evaluation of the impact of globalization, especially with respect to the distribution of the
benefits of globalization. In the case of Africa, its position in the international system has been
considerably weakened by the fact that it has been losing the race for economic development in
general, and human development in particular, to other regions. This poor performance by
African countries accounts in part for the political and social instability and the rise of
authoritarian regimes that have characterized much of postcolonial Africa further weakening the
ability of African countries to deal effectively with globalization.

The cold war has had significant consequences for Africa. During its height in the 1960’s and
1970’s, the cold war witnessed the emergence of authoritarian regimes in most African Countries
in the form of one-party or military regimes. This was largely a result of the support of the two
blocks to keep African countries in their respective camps. In any event, both one party and
military regimes inhibited the emergence of democratic governance and developmentally
oriented regimes in Africa. With the end of the cold war, support has been withdrawn by the
major powers for many African countries considered no longer of strategic importance. This has
entailed an increase in the number of so called “failed states” in Africa during the last two
decades. This development has also been inimical to the emergence and consolidation of
effective Democratic and developmentally oriented regimes in Africa.

In addition, the end of the cold war has witnessed an over-all decline in the strategic importance
of Africa. This has, in turn, substantially reduced Africa’s international negotiating power and its
 Global Affairs Module

ability to maneuver in the international system with a view to gaining a modicum of freedom of
choice, autonomy and leverage in its dealings with more powerful actors. In sum then, the cold
war and its demise has worked against democracy and economic development in Africa. The
problem therefore lies in Africa’s position in the global system and not in the specific form taken
by globalization.

Specific impacts of globalization on Africa can be identified. In the political sphere, the most
important consequence is the erosion of sovereignty, especially on economic and financial
matters, as a result of the imposition of models, strategies and policies of development on
African countries by the International Monetary Fund, the World Bank and the World Trade
Organization. On the other hand, globalization has promoted greater respect for human rights
and contributed to the development of an African press. This has opened African countries to far
greater scrutiny than in the past, making it somewhat more difficult for African governments to
get away with blatant and excessive abuses of democratic governance and transparency.
However, this positive development is negated by the fact that these principles of democratic
governance and transparency tend to be applied selectively and subjectively. More important is
the fact that globalization for the most part does not facilitate the establishment of the economic
conditions necessary for genuine democracy and good governance to take solid roots and thrive.

In this regard globalization has negative impacts on the development and effective governance of
African States. One form of this is the reduction of the capacity of governments to determine and
control events in their countries, and thus their accountability and responsiveness to their people,
given the fact that the context, institutions and processes by which these decisions are taken are
far from democratic. In addition, the fragmentation of national economies, polities, societies and
cultures that are triggered by globalization weaken national consciousness and cohesion, leading
to social divisiveness and instability, which in turn facilitate the emergence of authoritarian rule.
Strong countries are, however, in a better position to fend off these negative consequences and
may even see their democracies strengthened.

One major positive impact of globalization on Africa is that it has made available information on
how other countries are governed and the freedoms and rights their people enjoy. It has also
opened African countries to intense external scrutiny and exercised pressure for greater
transparency, openness and accountability in Africa. However, most of the forces unleashed by
 Global Affairs Module

globalization have had a negative impact on the growth and consolidation of democratic
governance in Africa. Among these are the following:

 While calling for greater accountability and responsiveness of leaders to their people,
globalization has often pressured African leaders to adopt policies and measures that
are diametrically opposite to the feelings and sentiments of the vast majority of their
people. This has led to the rise or reinforcement of authoritarian regimes. A good
recent example of this is the pressure on many African governments to take certain
measures in the fight against terrorism at the behest of external powers;
 By defining basic and generally accepted principles of democratic governance, such as
good governance, transparency and accountability, in narrow terms, conditioned by
particular historical, political, social, and cultural factors, while leaving little or no
room for adapting them to different societies and cultures, democracy takes on the
image of something alien and imposed from the outside. Support for the fundamental
principles of democracy is thus undermined, cynicism arises, and the effort itself fails
to develop roots in the countries to which they are being artificially transplanted.
 Globalization leads to the development of anti-developmentalism by declaring the state
irrelevant or marginal to the developmental effort. Development strategies and policies
that focus on stabilization and privatization, rather than growth, development and
poverty eradication, are pushed by external donors, leading to greater poverty and
inequality and undermining the ability of the people to participate effectively in the
political and social processes in their countries. Welfare and other programs intended
to meet the basic needs of the majority of the population are transferred from
governments to non-governmental organizations that begin to replace governments in
the eyes of the people. As a result, governments lose what little authority and
legitimacy they have. The consequent gap between government leaders and the public
leads to alienation of the population from the political process and creates a favorable
environment for the emergence of non-representative governments.
 By imposing economic specialization based on the needs and interests of external
forces and transforming the economies of African countries into a series of enclave
economies linked to the outside but with very little linkages among them, divisions
within African countries are accentuated and the emergence of national consciousness
 Global Affairs Module

and the sense of a common destiny is frustrated. Democracy, with its emphasis on
tolerance and compromise, can hardly thrive in such an environment.
 Further, because the economic specialization imposed on African countries makes
rapid and sustainable growth and development impossible, conflicts over the
distribution of the limited gains realized from globalization become more acute and
politicized. Vulnerable groups, such as women, the youth, and rural inhabitants, fare
very badly in this contest and are discriminated against. This further erodes the
national ethos of solidarity and reciprocity that are essential to successful democracies.
 Lastly, globalization, by insisting on African countries opening their economies to
foreign goods and entrepreneurs, limits the ability of African governments to take
proactive and conscious measures to facilitate the emergence of an indigenous
entrepreneurial class. Consequently, due to their weakness and incapacity to operate on
a national basis, rather than being forces for national integration and consolidation as
was and is the case of European and American entrepreneurs, African entrepreneurs
reinforce social divisions based on ethnicity, religion, race, language, culture, and
location.

Economically, globalization has, on the whole, reinforced the economic marginalization of

African economies and their dependence on a few primary goods for which demand and prices
are externally determined. This has, in turn, accentuated poverty and economic inequality as well
as the ability of the vast number of Africans to participate meaningfully in the social and political
life of their countries. Economic and social stagnation has also triggered a substantial brain-
drain from Africa, further weakening the ability of African countries to manage their economies
efficiently and effectively. As a result of the cultural domination from outside that goes with
globalization, African countries are rapidly losing their cultural identity and therefore their
ability to interact with other cultures on an equal and autonomous basis, borrowing from other
cultures only those aspects that meet its requirements and needs.

Finally, while the scientific and technological forces unleashed by globalization have facilitated
to some extent access by Africans to advanced technology and information, this has been at the
expense of stultifying the indigenous development of technology and distorting patterns of
production in Africa, notably by utilizing capital as against labor intensive methods of
 Global Affairs Module

production, which in turn increases unemployment and poverty. Overall therefore, the negative
consequences of globalization on Africa far out way their positive impact.

4.4. Ethiopia in a Globalized World

Ethiopia is one of the countries marginally integrated to the capitalist system during the post-
Cold War era. Despite the 17 years interruption during the Derg period, Ethiopia continued to be
marginally integrated to the post-Cold War global capital. This has multiple implications to the
way globalization influenced the country. In the post-1991 period Ethiopia found itself facing the
challenges of democratization and the reconstruction of the post-conflict society. This was
coincidentally interfaced with the advent of globalization. The course Ethiopia took to federalize
and democratize, for instance the FDRE constitution, bears the mark of globalization. The
marginal integration, according to the late Prime Minister of FDRE Meles Zenawi, have saved
the country from being adversely affected by the onslaught of global capital on the countries of
the south; and the global financial crisis that plagued the western market and those countries
whose markets are integrated to the Western market system. This owes to the cautious
developmental state political economy EPRDF pursued during the last decade.

Yet, Ethiopia like any other country found itself facing a fast track of multidimensional changes
that positively and negatively affected its place in the globe. For instance, the triumph of western
free market economy and liberal democracy has put the country’s defiant political economic
policy in a head-on collision course with the requirements of Briton woods institutions and
western powers. This indeed has its mark on the development aid and loan Ethiopia managed to
secure to finance its national development projects and design its own economic policy
independently. Nevertheless, with meticulous planning and strategic thinking, Ethiopia achieved
amazing economic transformation and gained a lot from the positive opportunities of
globalization. It has also benefited from the technological and knowledge transfer, free
movement of ideas, people and finance. The other side of the globalization coin shows negative
impacts on Ethiopia. Among others, the expansion of information communication opened the
historically closed doors of Ethiopia to new religious and secular values that affected the
religiosity and social solidarity of its people. This is reflected in the rise of religious radicalism
of every sort and posture. Socio-cultural impact of western values is amply observed in urban
centres. Furthermore, the glocalization dynamics contributed to the rise radical nationalism and
 Global Affairs Module

ethnicity. The prevalence of human trafficking and migration is partly attributable to the onset of
globalization. To sum up, Ethiopia has benefited less from globalization than its negative
influences.

Activity:
 Discuss the positive or negative impacts of globalization on the developing
countries in general and Africa/ Ethiopia in particular by looking at their:
 Economy
 Politics
 Culture
 Security

4.5. Pros and Cons of Globalization

Globalization has its merits and demerits. Among the leading merits of globalization are the
expansion of democratic culture, human right and the protection of historically minority and
subaltern groups. Innovation in science, medicine, and technology and information
communication has enabled the improvement of quality of life. Agricultural technological
expansion resulted in the lifting out of millions of people out of poverty. The technological and
social revolution significantly contributed to advancement of human security and safety.
Moreover, the free movement of good, service, people, ideas, expertise, knowledge and
technology across national borders strengthened international interdependence. This in turn
contributed to the birth of a new sense of global society and the perspective of global citizenship
that contradicts the classical idea of citizenship limited national borders and defined by
nationalism and patriotism. The emergence of the idea of global civil society also pertains to this
phenomenon. States ceased to be the sole actors and referents of international relations and
diplomacy, and conception of security as well. Along with it emerged the responsibility of states
to protect their citizens and the shared responsibility of the global society for protecting
vulnerable groups from human right violations and victimization. Furthermore, economist
characterize the rapid economic growth in some countries of the south to globalization.

However, globalization is not also without its demerits. Some commentators say that there is no
serious problem against globalization but against a certain type of globalization imposed by the
global financial elite. They recognize the prevalence of a gnawing gap between rich and poor
 Global Affairs Module

became considerably. Yet, this is an understatement of the challenges imposed by globalization.

It is an aspect of Western imperialism of ideas and beliefs eroding and inroading the sovereignty
of non-Western countries. For example, while wealth and power of the multinationals seems to
have increased significantly, neither they nor national governments have so much control over
macro-economic forces as they would like. Global capital and international financial institutions
like WB and IMF made free inroads into countries of the south influencing the economic and
political dynamics of negatively. With technological advancement, climatic, environmental and
technological risks have multiplied. Globalization, in the sense of connectivity to the global
economic and cultural life, brings with it a different order than what it was before threatening the
continuity of non-Western age-old traditions, way of life and cultural values.

Besides, the globalization has made the globalization of risks, threats and vulnerabilities like
global terrorism, religious fundamentalism, proliferation of Small Arms and Light Weapons
(SALWs), arms and human trafficking. Moreover, globalization has stimulated the emergence a
simultaneous but opposite process of Glocalization, which involves a process of integration to
the world and differentiation to the local. This process has contributed to the rise of radical
nationalism and ethnicity, which set the context for the emergence of the era of identity and
identity conflicts. In general, without denying the opportunities of globalization, countries of the
global south have faced multidimensional economic, political, socio-cultural, security and
military challenges induced by globalization.

Activity:
 Discuss the pros and cons of globalization? Also debate on which one
outbalances!

4.6. Defining Regionalism and Regional Integration

Region can be defined as a limited number of states linked together by a geographical
relationship and by a degree of mutual interdependence (Nye, 1968). Regionalism consequently
refers to intensifying political and/or economic processes of cooperation among states and other
actors in particular geographic regions, which can be developed either 'from below' i.e. from the
decisions by companies to invest and by people to move within a region or 'from above' i.e. from
political, state-based efforts to create cohesive regional units and common policies for them; or
 Global Affairs Module

from both approaches. Regionalism normally presents the sustained cooperation (either formal or
informal) among governments, non-governmental organizations, or the private sectors in three or
more countries for mutual gains (Allagappa 1994; Palmujoki 2001; Griffiths and O'Callaghan
2004).

Buzan et al (1998) categorized region into two types in accordance with its contexts. In the
societal context, unit means nation and region is the set of adjacent nations. Meanwhile, in the
political context, unit is identified with state and region means: a spatially coherent territory
composed of two or more states. Sub-region means part of such a region, whether it involves
more than one state (but fewer than all of the states in the region) or some transnational
composition (some mix of states, parts of states, or both). Micro-region refers to the subunit level
within the boundaries of a state (Buzan et a 1998: 18-19). These literatures led to a conclusion
that a spatial concept is the essence of regionalism. In this regard, the states that share
geographical proximity and a degree of mutual interdependence will participate in their regional
groupings (Karns and Mingst 2005). However, without regionness or regional awareness the
proximity of countries in the given regions cannot be referred to as a key driving force to
regionalize with intimate neighboring countries.

Regionalization can be conceived as the growth of societal integration within a given region,
including the undirected processes of social and economic interaction among the units (such as
nation-states; see Hurrell 1995a). As a dynamic process, it can be best understood as a
continuing process of forming regions as geopolitical units, as organized political cooperation
within a particular group of states, and/or as regional communities such as pluralistic security
communities (Whiting 1993). Similarly, the term regionalism refers to the proneness of the
governments and peoples of two or more states to establish voluntary associations and to pool
together resources (material and nonmaterial) in order to create common functional and
institutional arrangements. Furthermore, regionalism can be best described as a process
occurring in a given geographical region by which different types of actors (states, regional
institutions, societal organizations and other non-state actors) come to share certain fundamental
values and norms. These actors also participate in a growing network of economic, cultural,
scientific, diplomatic, political, and military interactions (Mace and Therien 1996).
 Global Affairs Module

The occurrences of regionalism have mushroomed across all parts of the world. In contrast, the
theories to explain these developments are limited (Soderbaum 2003). Most of the theories have
been developed under the dominant European contexts. This is due largely to the location of
regionalism and its successful story has been in the specific context of Europe. Later, we
experienced the successful regional grouping in North America. By and large, these
developments are considered as Western approaches to regionalism. As a result, these theories
are hardly relevant to the development of regionalism outside the West including the region of
Southeast Asia (Hurrell 1995). Therefore, this section is an attempt to demonstrate theories that
explain the possibilities of the formation of regional grouping as much as possible. While it does
not avoid the influence of the Eurocentric approaches, it seeks to book beyond the European
success to include other aspects as well.

4.6.1. The Old Regionalism

For many scholars, regionalism, as a voluntary and comprehensive process, is predominantly a
post-World War II phenomenon. It emerged in Western Europe in the late-1940s, subsequently
spreading to the developing world. Old regionalism lost much of its dynamism in Europe in the
early 1970s and gradually, also in the developing world. As will become evident below, it is
relevant to try separating the European-centered debate from the debate in the developing world.

Regional Integration in Europe and Beyond

Old regionalism has its roots in the devastating experience of inter-war nationalism and World
War II. It is therefore closely linked to the discussion about ‘regional integration’ in Europe, in
particular to the formation of the European Communities. In contrast to earlier discussions that
centered on mercantilism and competing alliances, post-War scholars usually viewed the
(Westphalian) nation-state as the problem rather than the solution, and the purpose of regional
integration was to achieve and consolidate peace and stability. Immediately after the Second
World War, there was a lot of discussion about European regionalism, not least about
reconstruction and reconciliation between France and Germany. A series of initiatives were
launched, which resulted in the European Coal and Steel Community (ECSC) in 1951. The long-
term goal was more ambitious, and in 1958 the European Economic Community (EEC) and the
European Atomic Energy Community (EAEC) were integrated into the EC through the Treaty of
Rome. The influence of EU goes beyond being successful experiment in regionalization and
came to dominate the discourse on regionalization.
 Global Affairs Module

As Breslin et al. (2002: 2) point out, they “used the European experience as a basis for the
production of generalizations about the prospects for regional integration elsewhere”. This
resulted in difficulties in identifying comparable cases, or anything that corresponded to their
definition of ‘regional integration’. The treatment of European integration as the primary case or
‘model’ of regional integration still dominates many of the more recent studies of regionalism
and regional integration,

Regional Integration in Africa

There was also an old (or classical) debate in the developing world, especially in Latin America
and Africa, but to some extent also in Asia and other developing regions. As previously
indicated, the discussion about regionalism in the developing world was closely linked to
colonialism/anti-colonialism and the quest to facilitate economic development in the newly
independent nation-states. Many of the discussions about regionalism in the developing world
were heavily influenced by the structuralist tradition of economic development, pioneered by
Gunnar Myrdal, Arthur Lewis, and Raúl Prebisch. In sharp contrast to the European debate,
which focused heavily on regional integration, the keywords here were development, state-
promoted industrialization and nation-building, first and foremost through protectionism and
import-substitution.

The Latin American structuralist discussion about underdevelopment reflected specific economic
experiences in various countries, particularly in terms of trade problems. The depression of the
1930s also had severe impact on Latin American development, creating pressure for change.
Encouraged by the United Nations Economic Commission for Latin America (ECLA) and its
dynamic Executive Secretary, Raúl Prebisch, the vision was to create an enlarged economic
space in Latin America in order to enhance import substitution regionally when it became
exhausted at the national level. Liberalized intra-regional trade in combination with regional
protectionism seemed to offer large economies of scale and wider markets, which could serve as
stimulus to industrialization, economic growth, and investment (Prebisch 1959).

From this perspective, the rationale of regional cooperation and integration among less
developed countries was not to be found in functional cooperation or marginal economic change
within the existing structure, but rather, through the fostering of ‘structural transformation’ and
the stimulation of productive capacities (industrialization), whereby investment and trading
 Global Affairs Module

opportunities were being created. The structuralist school thus shifted its focus away from
economic integration as means for peace and political unification, to one of regional economic
cooperation/integration as means for economic development and state-formation. The dependent
variable, as well as the underlying conditions for regionalism, was so different that it called for a
different theory, according to which Europe and the developing world were not comparable cases
(Axline 1994: 180).

This type of regionalism resulted in the creation of the Latin American Free Trade Association
(LAFTA) in Montevideo in 1960. LAFTA was a comprehensive and continental project and
included all countries on the South American continent plus Mexico. However, in spite of some
early progress and lively theoretical discussion, which has become internationally known as
central to the history of economic thought the old regionalism in Latin America made little
economic impact and was never implemented on a larger scale.

Regionalization in Latin America during 1960s and 1970s did not materialized because of
conflict and military dictatorship. Yet, at discourse level it was robust that it had ample include
on the dynamics of regionalization in Africa. The debate between the Federalist Casablanca and
Monrovia groups had also its own influence. The major ideological influence on regional
cooperation and integration, however, is embodied in the founding principles of OAU and later
AU such as Lagos Plan of Action (1980) and the Abuja treaty (1991). The major purpose of
regionalization was to resist colonial and post-colonial influence, protectionism and realizing
import substitution. Among the various state led regional organizations in Africa were the CFA
(Community of French Africa), East African Community (EAC) and SACU (Southern African
Community Union). The SADCC (The Southern Africa Development Coordination Conference,
a predecessor of the SADC) was established to against the influence of Apartheid and external
dependency (Söderbaum, 2015).

4.6.2. New Regionalism

The prospects of the fall of the Berlin Wall together with the 1985 White Paper on the internal
market and the Single European Act resulted in a new dynamic process of European integration.
This was also the start of what has often been referred to as ‘new regionalism’ on a global scale.
The new regionalism referred to a number of new trends and developments, such as the
spectacular increase in the number of regional trade agreements, an externally oriented and less
 Global Affairs Module

protectionist type of regionalism, an anti-hegemonic type of regionalism which emerged from

within the regions themselves instead of being controlled by the superpowers, the rise of a more
multi-dimensional and pluralistic type of regionalism, which was not primarily centered around
trading schemes or security cooperation and with a more varied institutional design, and the
increasing importance of a range of business and civil society actors in regionalization.

Activities:
 What do the terms ‘Regionalism’ and ‘Regional integration mean?
 Discuss the difference between Old regionalism and New regionalism
 Compare the European and African experiences of regional integration

Many scholars emphasized the fact that the new wave of regionalism needed to be related to the
multitude of often inter-related structural changes of and in the global system in the post-Cold
War era, such as the end of bipolarity, the intensification of globalization, the recurrent fears
over the stability of the multilateral trading order, the restructuring of the nation-state, and the
critique of neoliberal economic development and political systems in developing as well as post-
communist countries (cf. Gamble/Payne 1996; Hettne et al. 1999).

According to Söderbaum, the difference between old and new regionalism can be summarized as
provided in the table below:
Old Regionalism New Regionalism
World Order World order context Bipolar world Cold War
Context
Links between Taming nationalism (in Resisting, taming or advancing
National, Regional, Europe) or Advancing economic globalization
and Global modes nationalism (in South)
of governance
Sectors, Actors & Sector specific State-centric Multi-sectoral State vs. non-state actors
Forms of Formal regionalism Hard Regionalism vs. regionalization Formal
Organization regionalism vs. informal Hard vs. soft
Ontology Regional integration Ontological pluralism, confusion and
Regional organizations (& disagreement Regionalism
subsystems) Clear regional Regionalization Regional organizations
boundary lines
Epistemology Dominance of positivism & Rationalism vs. constructivism vs.
rationalism & materialism critical theory Materialism vs.
 Global Affairs Module

(and some structuralism in ideas/identities Epistemological

the South) conflict
Methodology Europe-focused Rigid Regional specialization (parochialism)
comparison vs. false universalism (Eurocentrism)
Comparison as parallel case studies or
quantitative studies Little dialogue
between EU studies and IR/IPE
regionalism

Table 1: The Difference between Old and New Regionalism

Source: (Söderbaum, 2015)
The historical dynamics of the old and the new regionalism at global level can be summarized as
follows:
Two Waves of Regionalism (Selected Organizations)
First Wave: 1950s-1970s
Europe and Soviet Bloc Latin America
-NATO (1949-) -OAS (1948-)
-WEU (1955-) -RIO Pact (1947-)
-Warsaw Treaty Organization (1955-1991) -Central American Common Market ( 1961-)
-Council of Europe ( 1948-) -Andean Community (1969-)
-ECSC (1952-) -CARICOM (1973-)
-EEC and -Euratom (1958-1992) -LAFTA (1969-1980)
-COMECON (1948-1991) Middle East
West and East Asia -League of Arab States (1945-)
-CENTO (1950s) Africa
-SEATO (1954-1975) -OAU (1964-2002)
-ASEAN (1967-)
Second Wave: 1980s-1990s
Europe Latin America
-CSCE (1975-) -Mercosur (1991-)
-EU (1992) -FTAA (1994-)
-CIS (1991-) -NAFTA (1993-)
Asia and Asia-Pacific Africa
-APEC (1989-) -ECOWAS (1975-)
-ARF (1994) -SADC (1992-)
Middle East -CoMESA (1994-)
Gulf Cooperation Council (1984) AU (2002-
Table 2: The Two Waves of Regionalism
Source: Margaret P. Kans and Karen A. Mingst (2005: 152)
 Global Affairs Module

4.7. Major Theories of Regional Integrations

4.7.1. Functionalism
Functionalist viewed regionalism as a functional response by states to the problems that derived
from regional interdependence. It was seen as the most effective means of solving common
problems. Regionalism has started from technical and non-controversial issues and has spilled
over into the realm of high politics and redefinition of group identity around the regional unit
(Hurrell 1995). According to functionalism, the task of policy makers is to encourage the states
to peacefully work together. The like-minded states would spread the web of international
activities and agencies in which and through which the interests and life of all states would be
gradually integrated from one activity to others (Mitrany 1946).

Regional organization was then built up to cope with one common problem and spill over to
other problems and areas of cooperation, which will deepen integration among member states.
Therefore, 'spillover' is the key explanation of _functionalist regionalism. According to fiurrell
(1995), there were two sorts of spillover. First, functional spillover whereby cooperation in one
area would broaden and deepen further areas; and second, political spillover whereby the
existence of supranational institutions would set in motion a self-reinforcing process of
institution building. The end-result would be a shift in loyalties from nationalism towards
regionalism, a new center whose institutions possesses or demands jurisdiction over the pre-
existing national states (Ernst 1958; Hurrell 1995). Accordingly, the functionalist and neo-
functionalist approaches presume that cooperation across national borders particularly in the
economic field spreads out to other sectors. This spillover effect leads finally to the formation of
supranational institutions and to the diminishing role of the nation-state (Palmujoki 2001).

Karns and Mingst (2005) argue that functionalism is applicable at both regional and global
levels; and later mention that the overwhelming number of international governmental
organizations (IGOs) could be classified as functional. That is, they have specific mandates, link
to economic issues, and limited memberships, often related to geographic region. Notably, their
statement could be deliberately illustrated by Thomas George's (1997) position. George states
that functionalism is a global approach rather than a regional approach and neo-functionalism is
derived from the functionalist doctrine and was applied in a regional context with some
modifications. In this regard, the process and dynamics of cooperation under neo-functionalist
 Global Affairs Module

approaches will work automatically to cope with the facing issues. As a result, political decisions
are needed at any key point and these may or may not be taken (Karns and Mingst 2005).
Therefore, functional spillover has to be in tandem with political spillover in order to reinforce
each other.

4.7.2. Neo-functionalism
Neo-functionalism emerged in the 1960s based on the key works of Ernst Haas and Leon
Lindberg. The model of integration is based on the following basic principles. Neo-functionalism
included clear departures from transactionalism, federalism and functionalism, which made it
clearly a distinct and independent theoretical entity. First, the clearest difference existed between
neo-functionalism and transactionalism. Transactionalism had defined integration as a condition,
and the attainment of integration was measured by the existence of a 'security-community'. Neo-
functionalists, on the contrary, defined integration as a process:

'Political integration is the process whereby political actors in several distinct national settings
are persuaded to shift their loyalties, expectations and political activities towards a new centre,
whose institutions possess or demand jurisdiction over the pre-existing national states. The end
result of the process of political integration is a new political community, superimposed over the
pre-existing ones.'(Haas 1968, 16).

Another distinguishing principle of neo-functionalism, as identified by Ben Rosamond is the

emphasis on political agency in integration process (Rosamond, 2002). It considers integration as
a process with special focus on political integration. According to Lindenberg, the following
preconditions for the success of an integration process. These conditions included according to
him: 1) Central institutions and central policies should be established and developed, because
only they can assure that someone represents and promotes the 'regional view' as well as solves
disputes between member states; 2) Their tasks and capacity to implement those tasks should go
well beyond the mandate of normal international institutions; 3) Their tasks should be inherently
expansive; 4) There should be some link between the interests of member states and the process
of integration. (Lindberg 1963, 7-13).

An important concept is spill over, originally coined by Haas, refereeing to the process of
integration from the political sphere into other aspects of life. Lindberg considers integration as
 Global Affairs Module

“inherently expansive task” that has to begin from the political sphere. The spill over according
to Lindberg is a condition that a given action leads to a certain goal and that arranges a condition
for the creation of a new action. Similarly, spill over in regional integration follows the same
logic of embarking a certain action that achieves a degree of integration and creates a condition
for integration at advanced and wider scale. In effect, it deepens the process of integration.

Inter-governmentalism
Inter-govemenmetalism or liberal intergovernmentalism is a theory and approach that focus on
the state for integration to succeed. It approaches the question of the state in an integration
process from the perspective of traditional international relations. It thus considers the state
mainly as an actor in the international system and the integration process to be a process in that
system. According to Moravcsik integration can be considered as part of the rational choice of
state actors. This rationalist framework disaggregates the process of integration into three stages:
national preference formation, interstate bargaining and institutional choice. In the first stage, the
degree of integration depends on the interests of influential domestic constituents exercising
pressure over their governments. Moravcsik (1993) explains that “the foreign policy goals of
national governments vary in response to shifting pressure from domestic social groups, whose
preferences are aggregated through political institutions”. For example, national governments
may pursue international agendas in the fields of trade and agriculture to satisfy domestic
producer groups. Nevertheless, he argues that national preference formation regarding
cooperation in the field of foreign and defence policy is subject to geopolitical interests,
revolving around a state’s ideological commitment. The problem with this approach is that
international relations have not given much weight to the domestic level or the society in the state’s
foreign policy decisions.

Supra-nationalism
In order to understand the supranational perception of European integration, we must first study
the original theory from which this line of thought has been derived: Neo-functionalism. The
roots of Neo-functionalism lie most visibly in the works of Haas (1958) on European integration
(Rosamund, 2000), who has developed three mechanisms through which he thought European
integration progresses: first, positive spillover effects; second, a transfer of allegiances from the
national to the supranational political arena; and third, a ‘technocratic automaticity,’ referring to
an increasingly autonomous role of supranational institutions in promoting further integration.
 Global Affairs Module

The spillover effect occurs when integration between states in a particular sector incentivizes
integration in other sectors too. One incentive is, for example, that the optimization of common
benefits of integration in the original sector requires integration in other sectors (Lindberg,
1963). The second mechanism refers to a process by which domestic interest groups shift their
activities from the domestic to the international realm. Oftentimes national institutions provide
less effective ways for interest groups to pursue their end goals than international institutions do.
Finally, the third mechanism is a process in which established supranational institutions develop
an interest of their own: encouraging deeper and broader integration. In the European case, the
European Commission, established to coordinate and implement integration strategies, has an
intrinsic interest to expand its competencies.

In sum, Haas first sees integration as a process led by elitist groups, like leaders of industry
associations or political parties, who recognize a lack of opportunities in pursuing a shared
interest at the domestic level and then push national governments to transfer policy competence
to a supranational body. Then, once supranational institutions are created, international
interdependence grows, and interest groups or political party leaders can shift their loyalties
away from national institutions by choosing to pursue their interests through newly established
international institutions.

Activity:
 Compare and contrast the major theories of regional integration based on their
assumptions, core propositions and policy prescriptions

4.8. Selected Cases of Regional Integration

Regional integration across the world followed divergent trajectories. Yet, it was mainly
influenced by the development in Europe. Owing to the ample influence of the European
experience, one can reasonable say that the idea of regional integration is Eurocentric. In this
section are briefly discussed three cases of regional integration namely the European Union,
Association of South East Asian States (ASEAN) and African Union.

The European Union began as European Economic Community underwent changes and
transformation creating common market, currency, institutional and policy harmonization that at
last became the European Union as one consolidated regional organization. It continued to
 Global Affairs Module

influence the experiment of regionalism in the rest of the world. AU evolved from the
Organization of African Unity, which expired after realizing the objective of ensuring the
decolonization of all African countries. The AU imitating EU was established to realize the
unification of African markets towards eventual political unification. Since its establishment in
2002, the AU have achieved a lot in terms of opening African Free trade Areas, the issuance of
visas on arrival and the strengthening of regional organizations like SADC, ECOWAS,
COMESA and the EAC. The ASEAN was founded in 1967 and established a preference area in
1977, and the Asian Free Trade Area in 1992.

In the first two decades after the Second World War (1945-1965) the region was shaped by
nationalism, decolonization, great power intervention and failed attempts at regional cooperation.
This resulted in the attainment of independence of states in the region namely Vietnam in 1945,
Indonesia in 1949, the Philippines in 1946, Myanmar in 1948, Cambodia and Laos in 1953,
Malaysia in 1957, Singapore in 1963, and Brunei in 1984 respectively. The main motive was not
economic goal rather than political and security motives for regional solidarity. The economic
achievements in the region was not induced by the integration, though. After the economic crisis
of 1997, the region has advanced its economic goals and created APFTA in the region.

4.9. Regionalization versus Globalization and State

The way regionalization, globalization and the state interact have various forms based on the
issues under consideration. For instance, the nature of interaction among the three on issues of
economics and security greatly differ. Therefore, it is vital to differentiate the issues before
addressing the nature of interaction. For instance, when trying to assess the complex relationship
between regionalization and globalization, one might conclude that the trend toward economic
regionalism is perhaps more mixed than the trend toward security regionalism: In the
international economy, globalization and regionalization appear to be pushing states in different
directions, but there is today no major impetus toward globalization in the security arena,
perhaps with the exception of nuclear issues such as nonproliferation (Lake 1997). Hence, the
regionalization of security is not a universal trend like the formation of economic regions.

4.10. The Relations between Regionalization and Globalization

There are three possible options regarding the mutual relations between regionalization and
globalization, especially in the economic dimension: (1) regionalization as a component of
 Global Affairs Module

globalization (convergent trends); (2) regionalization as a challenge or response to globalization

(divergent trends); (3) regionalization and globalization as parallel processes (overlapping
trends) (Mittelman 1996a).

Regionalization as a Component of Globalization: Convergence

Regionalism is emerging today as a potent force in the processes of globalization. If
globalization is regarded as the compression of the temporal and spatial aspects of social
relations, then regionalism may be understood as but one component, or ‘chapter’ of
globalization (Mittelman 1996a, 189). According to this view, by helping national economies to
become more competitive in the world market, regional integration will lead to multilateral
cooperation on a global scale, the adoption of liberal premises about cooperation, and the
opening of the local economies.

Thus, the process of regional integration can be interpreted as part of the international (or global)
economic order at the end of the twentieth century; if impelled by raw material forces (of the
market), then it becomes a result and a component of globalization (see Reynolds 1997, 1).
Moreover, since globalization unfolds in uneven rather than uniform dynamic patterns, it may
reveal itself in processes that are less than geographically global in scope. Therefore,
globalization may be expressed through regionalization (Holm and Sorensen 1995, 6–7).

Regionalization as a Challenge or Response to Globalization: Divergence

Is regionalism a means toward something else other than globalization? Can regionalism lead to
a more pluralistic world order populated by diverse and distinct patterns of socioeconomic
organizations that are accountable to their populations? (See Mittelman 1996a, 189). Unlike the
first trend, the impetus toward regionalization might stem in this case from a reaction and
challenge to the amorphous, undemocratic, and inexorable economic rules of globalization.

This reaction can be motivated by either nationalistic/mercantilistic or pluralistic/humanistic

concerns (in some cases, even by both). In the first place, by creating trade blocs and integration
frameworks based on mercantilistic premises, regionalism opposes the neoliberal ‘harmony of
interest’ view of the world economy in favor of national (and regional) loyalties and
frameworks.Conversely, the drive toward the formation of regions might be also motivated by
the denial of a single universal culture (and ideology) and the promotion of alternative or
 Global Affairs Module

pluralistic forms of social and political organizations other than the nation-states at the regional
level.

Regionalization and Globalization as Parallel Processes: Overlap

When we refer to the world economy, it encompasses the trends of both regionalization—i.e., the
division of the international economy into the mega-regions of North America (or the Americas),
Europe, and East Asia—and globalization (see Wyatt-Walter 1995). Conversely, in the
international (global) security arena, it is more difficult to assess the (co)existence of security
communities and security complexes without an overall dimension of global security, which is
less evident. Thus, rather than reacting to each other, a third possibility is that regionalization and
globalization might act as parallel or overlapping processes in the two issue-areas of economics
and security.

4.11. Regionalization, Globalization and the State

Bringing the forces of nationalism and the possible role(s) of the nation-state into the equation
creates the following possible linkages: (1) nation-states oppose globalization (divergent trends);
(2) nationalism and the formation of new states are encouraged by the forces of globalization
(convergent trends); (3) nation-states oppose the forces of regionalization (divergent trends); (4)
nationalism and the nation-states can be strengthened through regionalism (convergent trends);
(5) regionalization coexists with nationalism and with globalization (overlapping trends); (6)
nation-states mediate between trends of regionalization and globalization (overlapping trends);
and (7) nation-states oppose globalization through regionalization (divergent trends).

Nation-States and Nationalism as Rival Processes of Globalization

Processes of disintegration, fragmentation, autarky, and localization diverge from the overall
trend of globalization. For instance, the blossoming of statehood may be a response to the
homogenizing forces of globalization (Holsti 1996a, 22). The persistence or resurgence of
nationalism can be regarded as a response to the alienating forces of the global market, by
relocating or bolstering legitimacy and loyalties at the national or even sub-national levels, in
direct contradiction to the transnational or supranational logic of economic globalization.

Globalization as a Force of Nationalism and the Formation of New States

Through a process of technological dissemination, globalization might actually promote
nationalism and the formation of new states. Hence, globalization and nationalism might
 Global Affairs Module

converge, through a new (global) revolution of ‘rising expectations,’ which encourages states to
cope with and to manage the forces of globalization. Here lies an interesting paradox: Although
forces of globalization seem to undermine state sovereignty, technological changes might also
improve the material conditions for the enhancement or resurgence of nationalistic trends. Thus,
globalization creates new strategies and roles for the nation-state (Drezner 1998, 210 and 218).

Nation-States as Rival Forces of Regionalization

Nation-states might oppose forces of regionalization that attempt to transcend the power (and
authority) of the state in a supranational direction by setting limits and constraints to the
development of a regional identity and supranational institutions. Thus, states will regard
regionaland sub-regional integration frameworks through the prism of international organizations
with a limited mandate in terms of intervention, domestic jurisdiction, and the exercise of
sovereignty.

Regionalism as a Force of Nationalism and the Nation-States

As mentioned above, regionalization in a given region might result from mercantilistic or
nationalistic tendencies of the member-states that see frameworks of regional integration as a
means to pool and increase their national power resources. In this sense, the logic of the ‘new
regionalism’ is not very different from that of the ‘old’ security alliances. In both cases, the goal
is to guarantee the bloc (region) members greater security in their international relations in a
context of increasing vulnerability of either the world economy or global security (Axline 1996,
199).

Coexistence between Regionalism, Nationalism and Globalization

In this case we have neither convergence nor divergence but rather coexistence—the three
processes are taking place simultaneously. Thus, there might be parallel processes of
globalization and continuing trends of fragmentation and disintegration. Historically, political
fragmentation, often manifested by the quest for national self-determination and the creation of
new states, has been a trend with as much significance as the (parallel) forces of economic
globalization (Holsti 1996a, 21–22). In this perspective the effects of globalization upon
regionalization and especiallyon the nation-state are rather indeterminate: “the structural logic of
globalization and the recent history of the global economy can be read as providing rationales for
‘high stateness’ as well as ‘low stateness” (Evans 1997, 64). Whether processes of globalization
 Global Affairs Module

might undermine the roleand actions of the nation-state remains to be seen and should be
examined in particular regional contexts.

Nation-States as Mediators between Regionalism and Globalization

States are active players in the world arena, and their policies are probably the single most
important determinant of the scope and direction of both regionalization and globalization (see
Holm and Sorensen 1995, 7). The stronger the states, the more capable they are in coping with
theintricacies of the economic, political, social, technological, and cultural dimensions of
globalization. Conversely, the weaker they are, the more ‘penetrated’ or exposed to the
vulnerabilities of the world economy and the temptations of a shallow world culture and
ideology (see Evans 1997, 69–70).

Nation-States Opposing Globalization through Regionalism

Nationalism and globalization are linked dialectically. Globalization does not imply necessarily
the erosion of the nation-state’s authority but rather a needed change in state strategies and
redirection of state energies. Conversely, state strategies and state actions can determine the
future directions of globalization. One possible option open for states to cope with globalization
is by enhancing processes of regionalization, such as the creation of free trade areas that recreate
a double (and contradictory) logic of economic relations: liberal at the intraregional level but
protectionist/mercantilist toward other rival regions or ‘blocs.’