NO COLDWAR
stabilized itself after the depressing 1990s and has even reestablished a lite version of the Soviet sphere of influence. India is rising, albeit haltingly, as a regional and economic power. And while China and the U.S. are clearly a head above the rest, combined they are less powerful – in relative terms – than the U.S. and the Soviet Union at the conclusion of World War II. As such, it will be difficult for Beijing and Washington to neatly carve up the world as Moscow and Washington did in the 1950s. It will be difficult for Beijing and Washington to neatly carve up the world as Moscow and Washington did in the 1950s. This is important... There is an interplay between geopolitics and globalization that is not obvious or linear. Because the international order of states is anarchic, there is no global government that enforces rules and norms of behavior. As such, the degree of anarchy depends on the distribution of power between states. A unipolar system – where a single hegemon rules over the rest – is the most conducive to globalization. The superpower in charge gets to set the rules and norms of behavior. It gets to launch Tomahawks against unruly upstarts looking to carve out nascent spheres of influence. The most recent example is the U.S. in the 1990s. At the time, the U.S. provided not only geopolitical rules of
the game but also the macroeconomic best practices, propagated by the IMF and the World Bank via a set of norms called the Washington Consensus. The U.S. was the world policeman, the consumer of last resort, and the creditor of lasts resort. This hegemony greased the wheels of globalization, at a not insignificant cost to the U.S. that it hoped to recoup through access to foreign markets that it bestowed to its corporations. A bipolar system – where two superpowers divide the world into spheres of influence – is the least conducive to globalization. The two powers – assuming that they are at geopolitical odds with one another (which is not always obvious) – have the relative power necessary to carve out the world into neat spheres of influence. They set the rules of the game within those spheres and, most importantly, punish unruly allies who dare to flirt with the other side. Somewhat paradoxically, if unipolarity is the most conducive to globalization, multipolarity is not the least conducive. A multipolar system that is characterized by balance-of-power dynamics can still support some level of globalization of trade and capital. GLOBALIZATION AND DEGREES OF GLOBAL ANARCHY Why? The answer lies in the interaction between allies in a multipolar world. In a bipolar world, allies of a superpower are weak and dependent on their powerful ally for security. For example, during the Cold War, the U.S. went to great lengths to limit
66
February 2021
Made with FlippingBook - professional solution for displaying marketing and sales documents online