Course Overview
This course introduces students to the contemporary world by examining the
multifaceted phenomenon of globalization. Using the various disciplines of the social
sciences, it examines the economic, social, political, technological, and other
transformations that have created an increasing awareness of the interconnectedness
of peoples and places around the globe. To this end, the course provides an overview
of the various debates in global governance, development, and sustainability. Beyond
exposing the student to the world outside the Philippines, it seeks to inculcate a sense
of global citizenship and global ethical responsibility.
To ensure that the learners will acquired the competency in this course the
course pack has been structured into 3 modules as follows:
Module 1: The Structure of Globalization
Module 2: A World of Ideas: Cultures of Globalization
Module 3: ​Movement and Sustainability
At the completion of this course pack, learners should be able to:
● distinguish different interpretations of and approaches to globalization
● describe the emergence of global economic, political, social, and cultural
systems
● analyze the various contemporary drivers of globalization
● understand the issues confronting the nation-state
● assess the effects of globalization on different social units and their responses
● analyze contemporary news events in the context of globalization
● analyze global issues in relation to Filipinos and the Philippines
● articulate personal positions on various global issues
● identify the ethical implications of global citizenship
Students in this course are encourage to go through each lessons in every module
sequentially to acquire meaningful learning. They should work all of the exercises as
they build on the concepts of each topic on every lesson. They may ask for help from
their peers, tutors, or friends to maintain collaborative learning.
Learning is not attained by chance, it must be sought for with ardor and attended to
with diligence.
- Abigail Adams-
Table of Contents
Module 1 The Structure of Globalization​1
Lesson 1 What is Globalization2
Lesson 2 The Globalization of World Economics10
Lesson 3 A History of Global Politics: Creating an Internal Order20
Lesson 4 The United Nations and Contemporary Global Governance29
Lesson 5 A World of Regions38
Module Assessment47
Summary50
References51
Module 2 A World of Ideas: Cultures of Globalization​53
Lesson1 The Globalization of Religion54
Lesson 2 Media and Globalization62
Lesson 3 The Global City70
Module Assessment79
Summary81
References82
Module 3 Movement and Sustainability
Lesson 1 Global Demography
Lesson 2 Global Migration
Lesson 3 Environmental Crisis and Sustainable Development
Module Assessment
Summary
References
Module 1 The Structure of Globalization
Welcome to module 1! This module will introduce you to the various drivers
of the globalization process, with specific focus on economics and politics. Although
it emphasizes that you experience globalization on an “everyday” level, you must also
realize that there are big institutions that create large-scale changes. This module will
first trace the emergence of these institutions historically. It will then move on to
explain how they affect the countries and people today. This module will share
unfamiliar ideas and cultures that may spark new interests and concerns to you.
Along the way, you may feel exhausted of reading through text. But always
remember, every achievement is rewarding especially if you put all of your effort on
it. Stay positive always!
This Module contain the following lessons:
Lesson 1: What is Globalization?
Lesson 2: The Globalization of World Economics
Lesson 3: A History of Global Politics: Creating an International Order
The major learning outcomes of this module are to:
●
●
●
●
describe the various contemporary drivers of globalization; and
analyze the emergence of global economic and political systems.
identify the actors that facilitate economic globalization.
examine the history of global market integration in the twentieth century
1
Module 1 The Structures of Globalization
Objectives
At the end of this lesson, you should be able to:
● agree on a working definition of globalization for the course;
● differentiate the competing conceptions of globalizations; and
● narrate a personal experience of globalization
Introduction
Hello! Welcome to lesson 1. How are you today? Are you ready to feed your
mind with informative view of global trend?
Since ancient times, humans have sought distant places to settle, produce, and
exchange goods enabled by improvements in technology and transportation. In this
lesson you will discover how connected we are to the rest of the world by the process
of globalization. Enjoy reading!
Activity
Story Reading
2
3
4
5
Analysis
6
Global Experiences
Gio and Latif’s story is fictional but very plausible since it is in fact, based on
the real-life experience of one of the authors. It was through such friendships that one
was able to appreciate the meaning and impact of globalization.
We begin our definition of globalization with this narrative to illustrate how
concrete the phenomenon is. The story shows how globalization operates at multiple,
intersecting levels. The spread of Filipino TV into Malaysia suggests how fast this
popular culture has proliferated and criss-crossed all over Asia.
The model UN activity that Gio and Latif participated in is an international
competition about international politics. Gio met Latif (a Malaysian involved in the
model UN) in Sydney, a global city that derives its wealth and influence from the
global capital that flows through it. Sydney is also a metropolis of families of
international immigrants or foreigners working in the industries that also sell their
products abroad. After the two had gone back to their home countries, Gio and Latif
kept in touch through Facebook, a global social networking site that provides
instantaneous communication across countries and continents. They preserved their
friendship online and then rekindled this face-to-face in Singapore, another hub for
global commerce, with 40 percent of the population being classified as “foreign
talents”.
What other hints of globalization did you find in the story?
Some Description
Our discussion should begin with this intuitive sense that something is
happening, and it is not affecting everyone in the same way. Gio’s story is a very
privileged way of experiencing global flows, but for other people, the shrinking of the
world may not be as exciting and edifying. For example, it is very common for young
women in developing countries to be recruited in the internet as “mail-order brides”
for foreign men living in other countries. After being promised a good life once
married to a kind husband in a rich city, they end up becoming sexual and domestic
servants in foreign lands. Some were even sold off by their “husbands” to gangs
which run prostitute rings in these cities. Like Gio, they too have experienced the
shrinking of the world, albeit negatively.
Governments that decide to welcome the foreign investments on the belief that
they provide jobs and capital for the country offer public lands as factory or industrial
sites. In the process, poor people living in these lands, also called “urban poor
communities”, are being evicted by the government. The irony is that these people
forcibly removed from their “slums” are also the labor force sought by foreign
companies. They had to be kicked out of their homes, and then told that they could
take an hour or two of bus travel from their relocated communities back to the “old
homes” for minimum-wage work.
Because different people encounter globalization in a variety of ways, it is
deemed useful to ask simple questions like: “Is globalization good or bad? Is it
beneficial or detrimental?” The discussion begins with two premises. First,
7
globalization is a complex phenomenon that occurs at multiple levels. Second, it is an
uneven process that affects people differently.
Globalization: A Working Definition
Most accounts view globalization as primarily an economic process. When a
newspaper reports that nationalists are resisting “globalization”, it usually refers to the
integration of the national markets to a wider global market signified by the increased
free trade. When activists refer to the “anti-globalization” movement of the 1990s,
they mean resisting the trade deals among countries facilitated and promoted by
global organizations like the World Trade Organization.
Globalization scholars do not necessarily disagree with people who criticize
unfair international trade deals or global economic organizations. In fact, many are
sympathetic to the critique of economic globalization. Academics differ from
journalists and political activists, however, because they see globalization in much
broader terms. They view the process through various lenses that consider multiple
theories and perspectives. Academics call this an interdisciplinary approach, and it is
this approach used by the general education (GE) courses that you will be taking
alongside this one.
The best scholarly description of globalization is provided by Manfred Steger
who described the process as “the expansion and intensification of social relations and
consciousness across world-time and across world-space.” Expansion refers to “both
the ​creation and new social networks and the multiplication of existing connections
that cut across traditional political, economic, cultural, and geographic boundaries”.
These various connections occur at different levels. Social media, for example,
establish new global connections between people, while international groups of
non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are networks that connect a more specific
group – social workers and activists – from different corners of the globe. In the story,
Gio was able to join a model UN competition because his university was part of an
international network.
Intensification refers to the ​expansion​, ​stretching,​ and ​acceleration of this
network. Not only are global connections multiplying, but they are also becoming
more closely-knit and expanding their reach. For example, there has always been a
strong financial market connecting London and New York. With the advent of
electronic trading, however, the volume of that trade increases exponentially, since
traders can now trade more at higher speeds. The connection is thus accelerating.
Apart from this acceleration, however, as the world becomes more financially
integrated, the intensified trading network between London and New York may
expand and stretch to cover more and more cities. After China committed itself to the
global economy in the 1980s, for example, Shanghai steadily returned to its old role
as a major trading post.
It is not only in financial matters that you can find these connections. In 2012,
when the monsoon rains flooded much of Bangkok, the Honda plant making some of
the critical car parts temporarily ceased production. This had a strong negative effect
on Honda-USA which relied heavily on the parts being imported from Thailand. Not
8
only was it unable to reach the sales targets it laid out, but the ability of the service
centers nationwide to assist Honda owners also suffered. As a result, the Japanese car
company’s global profits also fell.
The final attribute of this definition relates to the way people perceive time
and space. Steger notes that “globalization processes do not occur merely at an
objective, material level but they also involve the subjective plane of human
consciousness”. In other words, people begin to feel that the world has become a
smaller place and distance has collapsed from thousands of miles to just a
mouse-click away. One can now e-mail a friend in another country and get a reply
instantaneously, and as a result, begins to perceive their distance as less
consequential. Cable TV and the internet has also exposed one to news from across
the globe, so now, he/she has this greater sense of what is happening in other places.
Steger posits that his definition of globalization must be differentiated with an
ideology he calls ​globalism.​ If globalization represents the many processes that allow
for the expansion and intensification of global connections, globalism is a widespread
belief among powerful people that the global integration of economic markets is
beneficial for everyone, since it spreads freedom and democracy across the world. It
is a common belief forwarded in media and policy circles. In the next lesson, you will
realize why it is problematic.
For now, what is crucial to note is that when activists and journalists criticize
“globalization”, they are, more often than not, criticizing some manifestations of
globalism. Often, these criticisms are warranted. Nevertheless, it is crucial to insist
that “globalization” as a process refers to a larger phenomenon that cannot simply be
reduced to the ways in which global markets have been integrated.
Conclusion: Globalization from the Ground Up
All this talk of large, intersecting processes may be confusing. Indeed, it may
be hard to assess globalization or comment on it because it is so diffuse and almost
fleeting. Some scholars have, therefore, found it simpler to avoid talking about
globalization as a whole. Instead, they want to discuss “multiple globalizations”,
instead of just one process.
For anthropologist Arjun Appadurai, different kinds of globalization occur on
multiple and intersecting dimensions of integration that he calls “scapes”. An
“ethnoscape”, for example, refers to the global movement of people, while a
“mediascape” is about the flow of culture. A “technoscape” refers to the circulation of
mechanical goods and software; a “financescape” denotes the global circulation of
money; and an “ideoscape” is the realm where political ideas move around. Although
they intersect, these various scapes have differing logics. They thus distinct windows
into the broader phenomenon of globalization.
Appadurai’s argument is simple: there are multiple globalizations. Hence,
even if one does not agree that globalization can be divided into the five “scapes”, it is
hard to deny Appadurai’s central thrust of viewing globalization through various
lenses.
9
Depending on what is being globalized, a different dynamic (or dynamics)
may emerge. So while it is important to ask “What is globalization?” it is likewise
important to ask “What is/are being globalized?” Depending on what is being
globalized, the vista and conclusions change.
Application
“INVENTORY OF MY ROOM”
Philippine Brand
10
International Brand
Made in what country?
Module 1 The Structures of Globalization
11
Objectives
At the end of this lesson, you should be able to:
● define economic globalization
● identify the actors that facilitate economic globalization.
● narrate a short history of global market integration in the twentieth century;
and
● articulate your stance on global economic integration.
Introduction
Hi! Have you been well? I hope you are ready for another lesson.
Are you interested on how the economy of a certain country is doing? How it works?
What is it for? Even if you don’t care at all you are affected by it. You may not feel
but indeed you are part of an economic system. Countries have built economic
partnerships to facilitate exchange of goods over many centuries. ​In this lesson you
will know ​Global economics’ looks at how trade has shaped the global economy and
considers the costs and benefits of free trade – it also provides an analysis of the
major problems facing the global economy in the 21st Century. In this lesson, you
will learn how wide and broad global economy affects our lives.
Activity
​“Guess
the
Pic”
12
The International Monetary Fund (IMF) regards “economic globalization”
as a historical process representing the result of human innovation and technological
progress. It is characterized by the increasing integration of economies around the
world through the movement of goods, services, and capital across borders. These
changes are the products of people, organizations, institutions, and technologies. As
with all other processes of globalization, there is a qualitative and subjective element
to this definition. How does one define “increasing integration?” When it is
considered that trade has increased? Is there a particular threshold?
Even while the IMF and ordinary people grapple with the difficulty of arriving
at precise definitions of globalization, they usually agree that a drastic economic
change is occurring throughout the world. According to the IMF, the value of trade
(goods and services) as a percentage of world GDP increased from 42.1 percent in
1980 to 62.1 percent in 2007. Increased trade also means that investments are moving
all over the world at faster speeds. According to the ​United Nations Conference on
Trade and Development (UNCTAD), the amount of foreign direct investments
flowing across the world was US$ 57 billion in 1982. By 2015, that number was
$1.76 trillion. These figures represent a dramatic increase in global trade in the span
of just a few decades. It has happened not even after one human lifespan.
Apart from the sheer magnitude of commerce, we should also note the
increased speed and frequency of trading. These days, supercomputers can execute
millions of stock purchases and sales between different cities in a matter of seconds
through a process called high-frequency trading. Even the items being sold and traded
are changing drastically. Ten years ago, buying books or music indicates acquiring
physical items. Today, however, a “book” can be digitally downloaded to be read with
an e-reader, and a music “album” refers to the 15 songs on mp3 format you can
purchase and download from iTunes.
This lesson aims to trace how economic globalization came about. It will also
assess this globalization system, and examine who benefits from it and who is left out.
International Trading Systems
International trading systems are not new. The oldest known international
trade route was the Silk Road – a network of pathways in the ancient world that
spanned from China to what is now Middle East and to Europe. It was called as such
because one of the most profitable products traded through this network was silk,
which was highly prized especially in the area that is now the Middle East as well as
in the West (today’s Europe). Traders used the Silk Road regularly from 130 BCE
when the Chinese Han dynasty opened trade to the West until 1435 BCE when the
Ottoman Empire closed it.
However, while the Silk Road was international, it was not truly “global”
because it had no ocean routes that could reach the American continent. So when did
13
full economic globalization begin? According to historians Dennis O. Flynn and
Arturo Giraldez, the age of globalization began when “all important populated
continents began to exchange products continuously – both with each other directly
via other continents—and in values sufficient to generate crucial impacts on all
trading partners.” Flynn and Giraldez trace this back to 1571 with the establishment of
the galleon trade that connected Manila in the Philippines and Acapulco in Mexico.
This was the first time that Americans were directly connected to Asian trading
routes. For Filipinos, it is crucial to note that economic globalization began on the
country’s shores.
The galleon trade was part of the age of mercantilism. From the 16​th century to
the 18​ century, countries, primarily in Europe, competed with one another to sell
more goods as a means to boost their country’s income (called monetary reserves later
on). To defend their products from competitors who sold goods more cheaply, these
regimes (mainly monarchies) impose high tariffs, forbade colonies to trade with other
nations, restricted trade routes, and subsidized its exports. Mercantilism was thus also
a system of global trade with multiple restrictions.
th
A more open trade system emerged in 1867 when, following the lead of the
United Kingdom, the United States and the other European nations adopted the gold
standard at an international monetary conference in Paris. Broadly, its goal was to
create a common system that would allow for more efficient trade and prevent the
isolationism of the mercantilist era. The countries thus established a common basis for
currency prices and fixed exchange rate system—all based on the value of gold.
The gold standard, though once common, has proven to be very restrictive form of global
trade
Despite facilitating simpler trade, the gold standard was still very restrictive
system, as it compelled countries to back when their currencies with fixed gold
reserves. During World War I, when countries depleted their gold reserves to fund
their armies, many were forced to abandon the gold standard. Since European
countries had low gold reserves, they adopted floating currencies that were no longer
redeemable in gold.
Returning to a pure standard became more difficult as the global economic
crisis the Great Depression started during the 1920s and extended up to the 1930s,
further emptying government coffers. This depression was the worst and longest
recession ever experienced by the Western world. Some economists argued that it was
14
largely caused by the gold standard, since it limited the amount of circulating money
and, therefore, reduced demand and consumption. If government could only spend
money that was equivalent to gold, its capacity to print money and increase the money
was severely curtailed.
Economic historian Barry Eichengreen argues that the recovery of the United
States really began when, having abandoned the gold standard, the US government
was able to free up money to spend on reviving the economy. At the height of World
War II, other major industrialized countries followed suit.
Though more indirect versions of the gold standard were used until as late as
the 1970s, the world never returned to the gold standard of the early 20​th century.
Today, the world economy operates based on what are called fiat
currencies—currencies that are not backed by precious metals and whose value is
determined by their cost relative to other currencies. This system allows governments
to freely and actively manage their economies by increasing or decreasing the amount
of money in circulation as they see it.
The Bretton Woods System
After the two world wars, world leaders sought to create global economic
system that would ensure a longer-lasting global peace. They believed that one of the
ways to achieve this goal was to set up a network of global financial institutions that
would promote economic interdependence and prosperity. The Bretton Woods system
was inaugurated in 1994 during the United Nations Monetary and Financial
Conference to prevent the catastrophe of the early decades of the century from
reoccurring and affecting international ties.
The scenic Bretton Woods where policymakers established the contours of modern global economics
The Bretton Woods system was largely influenced by the ideas of British
economist John Maynard Keynes who believed that economic crises occur not when a
country does not have enough money, but when money is not being spent and,
thereby, not moving. When economies slow down, according to Keynes, governments
have to reinvigorate markets with infusions of capital. This active role of governments
in managing spending served as the anchor for what would be called a system of
global Keynesianism.
15
Delegates at Bretton Woods agreed to create two financial institutions. The
first was the ​International Bank for Reconstruction and Development (IBRD, or
World Bank) to be responsible for funding postwar reconstruction projects. It was
affected the Western economies that were reliant on oil. To make matters worse, the
stock markets crashed in 1973-1974 after the United States stopped linking the dollar
to gold effectively ending Bretton Woods system. The result was a phenomenon that
Keynesian economics could not have predicted—a phenomenon called stagflation, in
which a decline in economic growth and employment 9stagnation) takes place
alongside a sharp increase in prices (inflation).
Around this time, a new form of economic thinking was beginning to
challenge the Keynesian orthodoxy. Economists such as Friedruch Hayek and Milton
Friedman argued that the governments’ practice of pouring money into their
economies had caused inflation by increasing demand for goods without necessarily
increasing supply. More profoundly, they argued that government intervention in
economies distort the proper functioning of the market.
Economists like Friedman used the economic turmoil to challenge the
consensus around Keynes’s ideas. What emerged was a new form of economic
thinking that critics labeled neoliberalism. From the 1980s onward, neoliberalism
became the codified strategy of the United States Treasury Department, the World
Bank, the IMF, and eventually the ​World Trade Organization (WTO)—a new
organization founded in 1995 to continue the tariff reduction under the GATT. The
policies they forwarded came to be called the Washington Consensus.
The Washington Consensus dominated global economic policies from the
1980s until the early 2000s. its advocates pushed for minimal government spending to
reduce government debt. They also called for the privatization of
government-controlled services like water, power, communications, and transport,
believing that the free market can produce the best results. Finally, they pressured
governments, particularly in the developing world, to reduce tariffs and open up their
economies, arguing that it is the conceded that, along the way, certain industries
would be affected and die, but they considered this “shock therapy” necessary for
long-term economic growth.
The appeal of neoliberalism was in its simplicity. Its advocates like US
President Ronald Reagan and British Prime Minister Margaret Thatcher justified their
reduction in government spending by comparing national economies to households.
Thatcher, in particular, promoted an image of herself as a mother, who reined in
overspending to reduce the national debt.
The problem with the household analogy is that governments are not
households. For one, governments can print money, while households cannot.
Moreover, the constant taxation systems of governments provide them a steady flow
of income that allows them to pay and refinance debts steadily.
Despite the initial success of neoliberal politicians like Thatcher and Reagan,
the defects of the Washington Consensus became immediately palpable. A good early
example is that of post-communist Russia. After Communism had collapsed in the
16
1990s, the IMF called for the immediate privatization of all government industries.
The IMF assumed that such a move would free these industries from corrupt
bureaucrats and pass them on to the more dynamic and independent private investors.
What happened, however, was that only individuals and groups who had accumulated
wealth under the previous communist order had the money to purchase these
industries. In some cases, the economic elites relied on easy access to government
funds to take over the industries. This practice has entrenched an oligarchy that still
dominates the Russian economy to this very day.
The Global Financial Crisis and the Challenge to Neoliberalism
Russia’s case was just one example of how the “shock therapy” of
neoliberalism did not lead to the ideal outcomes predicted by economists who
believed in perfectly free markets. The greatest recent repudiation of this thinking was
the recent global financial crisis of 2008-2009.
Neoliberalism came under significant strain during the global financial crisis
of 2007-2008 when the world experienced the greatest economic downturn since the
Great Depression. The crisis can be traced back to the 1980s when the United Sate
systematically removed various banking and investments restrictions.
The scaling back of regulations continued until the 2000s paving the way for a
brewing crisis. In their attempt to promote the free market, government authorities
failed to regulate bad investments occurring in the US housing market. Taking
advantage of “cheap housing loans,” Americans began building houses that were
beyond their financial capacities.
To mitigate the risk of these loans, banks that were lending house owner’s
money pooled these mortgage payments and sold them as “​Mortgage-Backed
Securities​” (MBSs). One MBS would be a combination of multiple mortgages that
they assumed would pay a steady rate.
Since there was so much surplus money circulating the demand for MBSs
increased as investors clamored for more investment opportunities. In their haste to
issue these loans, however, the banks became less discriminating. They began
extending loans to families and individuals with dubious credit record—people who
were unlikely to pay their loan back. These high risk mortgages became known as
sub-prime mortgages.
Financial experts wrongly assumed that, even if many of the borrowers were
individuals and families who would struggle to pay, a majority would not default.
Moreover, banks thought that since there were so many mortgages in just one MBS, a
few failures would not ruin the entirety of the investment.
Banks also assumed that housing prices would continue to increase. Therefore,
even if homeowners defaulted on their loans, these banks could simply reacquire the
homes and sell them at a higher price, turning a profit.
17
Sometime in 2007, however, home prices stopped increasing as supply caught
up with demand. Moreover, it slowly became apparent that families could not pay off
their loans. This realization triggered the rapid reselling of MBSs, as banks and
investors tried to get rid of their bad investments. This dangerous cycle reached a
tipping point in September 2008, when major investment banks like Lehman Brothers
collapsed, thereby depleting major investments.
The crisis spread beyond the United States since many investors were foreign
governments, corporations, and individuals. The loss of their money spread like
wildfire back to their countries.
These series of interconnections allowed for global multiplier effect that sent
ripples across the world. For example, Iceland’s banks heavily depended on foreign
capital, so when the crisis hit them, they failed to refinance their loans. As a result of
this credit crunch, three of Iceland’s banks defaulted. From 2007 to 2008, Iceland’s
debt increased more than seven-fold.
Until now, countries like Spain and Greece are heavily indebted (almost like
Third World countries), and debt relief has come at a high price. Greece, in particular,
has been forced by Germany and the IMF to cut back on its social and public
spending. Affecting services like pensions, health care, and various forms of social
security, these cuts have been felt most acutely by the poor. Moreover, the reduction
in government spending has slowed down growth and ensured high levels of
unemployment.
The United States recovered relatively quickly thanks to a large
Keynesian-style stimulus package that President Barrack Obama pushed for his first
months in office. The same cannot be said for many other countries. In Europe, the
continuing economic crisis has sparked a political upheaval. Recently, far-right parties
like Mrine Le PEN’S Front National in France have risen to prominence by unfairly
blaming immigrants for their woes, claiming that they steal jobs and leech off welfare.
These movements blend popular resentment with utter hatred and racism. We will
discuss their rise further in the final sem.
Economic Globalization Today
The global financial crisis will take decades to resolve. The solutions proposed
by certain nationalist and leftist groups of closing national economies to world trade,
however, will no longer work. The world has become too integrated. Whatever one’s
opinion about the Washington Consensus is, it is undeniable that some form of
international trade remains essential for countries to develop in the contemporary
world.
Exports, not just the local selling of goods and services, make national
economies grow at present. In the past, those that benefited the most from free trade
were the advanced nations that were producing and selling industrial and agricultural
goods. The US, Japan, and the member-countries of the European Union were
responsible for 65 percent of global exports, while the developing countries only
18
accounted for 29 percent. When more countries opened up their economies to take
advantage of increased free trade, the shares of the percentage began to change. By
2011, developing countries like the Philippines, India, China, Argentina, and Brazil
accounted for 51 percent of global exports while the share of advanced
nations—including the US—had gone down to 45 percent. The WTO-led reduction of
trade barriers, known as trade liberalization, as profoundly altered the dynamics of the
global economy.
In the recent decades, partly as result of these increased exports, economic
globalization has ushered in an unprecedented spike in global growth rates. According
to the IMF, the global per capita GDP rose over five-fold in the second half of the 20​th
century like Japan, China, Korea, Hong Kong, and Singapore.
And yet, economic globalization remains an uneven process, with some
countries, corporations, and individuals benefiting a lot more than others. The series
of trade under the WTO have led to unprecedented reductions in tariffs and other
trade barriers, but these processes have often been unfair.
First, developed countries are often protectionists, as they repeatedly refuse to
lift policies that safeguard their primary products that could otherwise be
overwhelmed by imports from the developing world. The best example of this double
standard is Japan’s determined refusal to allow rice imports into the country to protect
its farming sector. Japan’s justification is that rice is “sacred.” Ultimately, it is its
economic muscle as the third largest economy that allows it to resist pressures to open
its agricultural sector.
The United States likewise fiercely protects its sugar industry, forcing
consumers and sugar-dependent businesses to pay higher prices instead of getting
cheaper sugar from plantations of Central America.
Faced with these blatantly protectionist measures from powerful countries and
blocs, poorer countries can do very little to make economic globalization more just.
Trade imbalances, therefore, characterize economic relations between developed and
developing countries.
The beneficiaries of global commerce have been mainly transitional
corporations (TNCs) and not governments. And likely any other business, these TNCs
are concerned more with profits than with assisting the social programs of the
governments hosting them. Host countries, in turn, loosen tax laws, which prevents
wages from rising, while sacrificing social and environmental programs that protect
the unprivileged members of their societies. The term ​“race to the bottom” refers to
countries’ lowering their labor standards, including the protection of workers’
interests, to lure in foreign investors seeking high profit margins at the lowest cost
possible. Governments weaken environmental laws to attract investors, creating fatal
consequences on their ecological balance and depleting them of their finite resources
(like oil, coal, and minerals).
19
Localizing the Material
Many Philippine industries were devastated by unfair trade deals under the
GATT and eventually the WTO. One sector that was particularly affected was
Philippine agriculture. According to Walden Bello and a team of researchers at Focus
on the Global South, the US used its power under the GATT system to prevent
Philippine imposters from purchasing Philippine poultry and pork—even as it sold
meat to the Philippines.
Although the Philippines expected to make up losses in sectors like meat with
grains in areas such as coconut products, no significant change was realized. In 1993,
coconut exports amounted to $
​ ​1.9 billion in 2000.
Most strikingly, Bello and company noted that the Philippines became net
food importer under the GATT. In 1993, the country had an agricultural trade surplus
of $
​ ​292 million. It had a deficit of $
​ ​764 million in 1997 and $
​ ​794 in 2002.
-
Bello, Walden, Herbert Docena, Marissa de Guzman, and Mary Lou Malig. ​The
Anti-Development State: The Political Economy of Permanent Crisis in the
Philippines​: London and New York: Zed BOOks, 2006, 140-142
Conclusion
International economic integration is a central tent of globalization. In fact, it
is so crucial to the process that many writers and commentators confuse this
integration for the entirety of globalization. As reminder, economics is just one
window into the phenomenon of globalization: it is not the entire thing.
Given the stakes involved in economic globalization, it is perennially
important to ask how this system can be more just. Although some elements of global
free trade can be scaled back, policies cannot do away with it as a whole. International
policymakers, therefore, should strive to think of ways to make trading deals fairer.
Governments must also continue to devise ways of cushioning the most damaging
effects of economic globalization, while ensuring that its benefits accrue for everyone.
20
Application
21
Module 1 The Structures of Globalization
Objectives
At the end of this lesson, you should be able to:
●
●
●
●
●
●
identify key events in the development of international relations;
differentiate internationalization from globalization;
define the state and the nation;
distinguish between the competing conceptions of internationalism; and
discuss the historical evolution of international politics.
create an imaginary interview with the popularly known personalities from
the past that played an important role in nation and state building.
Introduction:
Hi how have you been? You are now few steps closer in unlocking the
module. Welcome to the third lesson in module 1. We will be looking into the history
of Global Politics in creating International Order. The long wait is over, here is the
first catch for you in the deeper understanding of Global Politics and how
international organizations played an important role in maintaining peace and order
during Post World Wars. Without further ado, here’s what we got for you. Enjoy your
learning experience with fun and have a blast. Setting Sail in 54321.
Activity
22
Analysis
1. What is the common concept in the items presented above?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
2. How important is the treaty of Westphalia in nation building?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
__________________________________________________________________
Abstraction
Internationalization does not equal globalization, although it is a major part of
globalization. As we explained in Lesson I, globalization encompasses a multitude of
connections and interactions that cannot be reduced to the ties between governments.
Nevertheless, it is important to study international relations as a facet of globalization,
because states/governments are key drivers of global processes. In this lesson, we will
examine internationalization as one window to view the globalization of politics.
Although this course is about the contemporary world, we cannot avoid history. What
international relations are today being largely defined by events that occurred as far
back as 400 years ago. Don’t worry; we will eventually discuss contemporary world
politics. But to do that, we need first to work backward. This lesson will begin with
identifying the major attributes of contemporary global politics and then proceed to
ask: How did this system emerge? In doing so, you will have a solid foundation to
understand the major issues of global governance in the next lesson.
The Attributes of Today’s Global System
World politics today has four key attributes. First, there are countries or states
that are independent and govern themselves. Second, these countries interact with
each other through diplomacy. Third, there are international organizations, like the
23
United Nations (UN), that facilitate these interactions. Fourth, beyond simply
facilitating meetings between states, international organizations also take on lives of
their own. The UN, for example, apart from being a meeting ground for presidents
and other heads of state, also has task-specific agencies like the World Health
Organization (WHO) and the International Labour Organization (ILO).
What are the origins of this system? A good start is by unpacking what one
means when he/she says a “country”, or what academics also call the nation-state.
This concept is not as simple as it seems. The nation-state is a relatively modern
phenomenon in human history, and people did not always organize themselves as
countries. At different parts in the history of humanity, people in various regions of
the world have identified exclusively with units as small as their village of their tribe,
and at other times, they see themselves as members of larger political categories like
“Christendom” (the entire Christian world).
The nation-state is composed of two non-interchangeable terms. Not all states
are nations and not all nations are states. The nation of Scotland, for example, has its
own flag and national culture, but still belongs to a state called the United Kingdom.
Closer to home, many commentators believe that the Bangsamoro is a separate nation
existing within the Philippines but, through their elites, recognizes the authority of the
Philippine state. Meanwhile, if there are states with multiple nations, there are also
single nations with multiple states. The nation of Korea is divided into North and
South Korea, whereas the “Chinese nation” may refer to both the People’s Republic
of China (the mainland) and Taiwan.
What then is the difference between nation and state? In layman’s terms, state refers
to a country and its government, i.e., the government of the Philippines. A state has
four attributes. First, it exercises authority over a specific population, called its
citizens.​ Second, it governs a specific territory. Third, a state has a structure of
government that crafts various rules that people (society) follow. Fourth and the most
crucial, the state has ​sovereignty over its territory. Sovereignty here refers to internal
and external authority. Internally, no individuals or groups can operate in a given
national territory by ignoring the state. This means that groups like churches, civil
society organizations, corporations, and other entities have to follow the laws of the
state where they establish their parishes, offices, or headquarters. Externally,
sovereignty means that a state’s policies and procedures are independent of the
interventions of other states. Russia or China, for example, cannot pass laws for the
Philippines and vice versa.
On the other hand, the nation, according to Benedict Anderson, is an
“imagined community”. It is limited because it does not go beyond a given “official
boundary”, and because rights and responsibilities are mainly the privilege and
concern of the citizens of that nation. Being limited means that the nation has its
boundaries. This characteristic is in stark contrast to many religious imagined
communities. Anyone, for example, can become a Catholic if one chooses to. In fact,
Catholics want more people to join their community, they refer to it as the call to
discipleship. But not everyone can simply become a Filipino. An American cannot
24
simply go to the Philippine Embassy and “convert” into a Philippine citizen. Nations
often limit themselves to people who have imbibed a particular culture, speak a
common language, and live in a specific territory.
Calling it “imagined” does not mean that the nation is made-up. Rather the
nation allows one to feel a connection with a community of people even if he/she will
never meet all of them in his/her lifetime. When you cheer for a Filipino athlete in the
Olympics, for example, it is not because you personally know that athlete. Rather, you
imagine your connection as both members of the same Filipino community. In a given
national territory like the Philippine archipelago, you rest in the comfort that the
majority of people living in it are also Filipinos. Finally, most nations strive to
become states. Nation-builders can only feel a sense of fulfillment when that national
ideal assumes an organizational form whose authority and power are recognized and
accepted by “the people”. Moreover, if there are communities that are not states, they
often seek some form of autonomy within their “mother states”. This is why, for
example, the nation of Quebec, though belonging to the state of Canada, has different
laws about language (they are French-speaking and require French language
competencies for their citizens). It is also for this reason that Scotland, though part of
the United Kingdom, has a strong independence movement led by the Scottish
Nationalist Party.
Nation and state are closely related because it is nationalism that facilitates
state formation. In the modern and contemporary era, it has been the nationalist
movements that have allowed for the creation of nation-states. States become
independent and sovereign because of nationalist sentiment that clamors for this
independence.
Sovereignty is, thus, one of the fundamental principles of modern state
politics. Understanding how this became the case entails going back as far as 400
years ago.
The Interstate System
The origin of the present-day concept of sovereignty can be traced back to the
Treaty of Westphalia, which is a set of agreements signed in 1648 to end the Thirty
Years’ War between the major continental powers of Europe. After a brutal religious
war between Catholics and Protestants, the Holy Roman Empire, Spain, France,
Sweden, and the Dutch Republic designed a system that would avert wars in the
future by recognizing that the treaty signers exercise complete control over their
domestic affairs and swear not to meddle in each other’s affairs.
The Westphalian system provided stability for the nations of Europe, until it
faced its first major challenge by Napoleon Bonaparte. Bonaparte believed in
spreading the principles of the French Revolution – liberty, equality, and fraternity –
to the rest of Europe and thus challenged the power of kings, nobility, and religion in
Europe. The Napoleonic Wars lasted from 1803-1815 with Napoleon and his armies
marching all over much of Europe. In every country they conquered, the French
implemented the Napoleonic Code that forbade birth privileges, encouraged freedom
25
or religion, and promoted meritocracy in government service. This system shocked
the monarchies and the hereditary elites (dukes, duchesses, etc.) of Europe, and they
mustered their armies to push back against the French emperor.
Anglo and Prussian armies finally defeated Napoleon in the Battle of Waterloo
in 1815, ending the latter’s mission to spread his liberal code across Europe. To
prevent another war and to keep their systems of privilege, the royal powers created a
new system that, in effect, restored the Westphalian system. The Concert of Europe
was an alliance of “great powers” – the United Kingdom, Austria,
Russia, and Prussia – that sought to restore the world of
monarchial, hereditary, and religious privileges of the time before
the French Revolution and the Napoleonic Wars. More
importantly, it was an alliance that sought to restore the
sovereignty of states. Under this Metternich system (named after
the Austrian diplomat, Klemens von Metternich, who was the
system’s main architect), the Concert’s power and authority lasted
from 1815 to 1914, at the dawn of the World War I.
Despite the challenge of Napoleon to the Westphalian system and the eventual
collapse of the Concert of Europe after World War I, present-day international system
still has traces of this history. Until now, states are considered sovereign, and
Napoleonic attempts to violently impose systems of government in other countries are
frowned upon. Moreover, like the Concert system, “great powers” still hold
significant influence over world politics. For example, the most powerful grouping in
the UN, the Security Council, has a core of five permanent members, all having veto
powers over the council’s decision-making process.
Internationalism
The Westphalia and Concert systems divided the world into separate,
sovereign entities. Since the existence of this interstate system, there have been
attempts to transcend it. Some, like Bonaparte, directly challenged the system by
infringing on other states’ sovereignty. Still, others imagine a system of heightened
interaction between various sovereign states, particularly the desire for greater
cooperation and unity among states and peoples. This desire is called
internationalism.
Internationalism comes in different forms, but the principle may be divided
into two broad categories: liberal internationalism and socialist internationalism.
The first major thinker of liberal internationalism was the late 18th century
German philosopher Immanuel Kant. Kant likened states in a global system to people
living in a given territory. If people living together require a government to prevent
lawlessness, shouldn’t that the same principle be applied to states? Without a form of
world government, he argued, the international system would be chaotic. Therefore,
states, like citizens of countries, must give up some freedoms and “establish a
26
continuously growing state consisting of various nations which will ultimately include
the nations of the world”. In short, Kant imagined a form of global government.
Writing in the late 18th century as well, British philosopher Jeremy Bentham (who
coined the word “international” in 1780), advocated the creation of “international
law” that would govern the inter-state relations. Bentham believed that objective
global legislators should aim to propose legislation that would create “the greatest
happiness of all nations taken together”.
To many, these proposals for global government and international law seemed
to represent challenges to states. Would not a world government, in effect, become
supreme? And would not its laws overwhelm the sovereignty of individual states?
The fist thinker to reconcile nationalism with liberal internationalism was the
19th century Italian patriot Giuseppe Mazzini. Mazzini was both and advocate of the
unification of the various Italian-speaking mini-states and a major critic of the
Metternich system. He believed in a Republican government (without kings, queens,
and hereditary succession) and proposed a system of free nations that cooperated with
each other to create an international system. For Mazzini, free, independent states
would be the basis of an equally free, cooperative international system. He argued that
if the various Italian mini-states could unify, one could scale up the system to create,
for example, a United States of Europe. Mazzini was a nationalist internationalist,
who believes that free, unified nation-states should be the basis of global cooperation.
Mazzini influenced the thinking of United States president
(1913-1921) Woodrow Wilson, who became one of the 20th
century’s most prominent internationalist. Like Mazzini, Wilson
saw nationalism as a prerequisite for internationalism. Because of
his faith in nationalism, he forwarded the principle of
self-determination – the belief that the world’s nations had a right
to a free, and sovereign government. He hoped that these free
nations would become democracies, because only by being such would they be able to
build a free system of international relations based on international law and
cooperation. Wilson, in short, became the most notable advocate for the creation of
the League of Nations. At the end of World War I in 1918, he pushed to transform the
League into a venue for conciliation and arbitration to prevent another war. For his
efforts, Wilson was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 1919.
The League came into being that same year. Ironically and unfortunately for
Wilson, the United States was not able to join the organization due to strong
opposition from the Senate. The League was also unable to hinder another war from
breaking out. It was practically helpless to prevent the onset and intensification of
World War II. On one side of the war were the Axis Powers – Hitler’s Germany,
Mussolini’s Italy and Hirohito’s Japan – who were ultra-nationalists that had an
instinctive disdain for internationalism and preferred to violently impose their
dominance over other nations. It was in the midst of this war between the Axis
Powers and the Allied Powers (composed of the United States, United Kingdom,
France, Holland, and Belgium) that internationalism would be eclipsed.
27
Despite its failure, the League gave birth to some of the more task-specific
international organizations that are still around until today, the most popular of which
are the World Health Organization (WHO) and the International Labor Organization
(ILO). More importantly, it would serve as the blueprint for future forms of
international cooperation. In this respect, despite its organizational dissolution, the
League of Nations’ principles survived World War II.
The league was the concretization of the concepts of liberal
internationalism. From Kant, it emphasized the need to form common
international principles. From Mazzini, it enshrined the principles of
cooperation and respect among nation-states. One of Mazzini’s biggest critics
was German socialist philosopher Karl Marx who was also an internationalist, but
who differed from the former because he did not believe in nationalism. He believed
that any true form of internationalism should deliberately reject nationalism, which
rooted people in domestic concerns instead of global ones. Instead, Marx placed a
premium on economic equality; he did not divide the world into countries, but into
classes. The capitalist class referred to the owners of factories, companies, and other
“means of production”. In contrast, the proletariat class included those who did not
own the means of production, but instead, worked for the capitalists.
Marx and his co-author, Friedrich Engels, believed that in a socialist
revolution seeking to overthrow the state and alter the economy, the
proletariat “had no nation”. Hence, their now-famous battle cry,
“Workers of the world, unite! You have nothing to lose but your
chains”. They opposed nationalism because they believed it
prevented the unification of the world’s workers. Instead of
identifying with other workers, nationalism could make workers in individual
countries identify with the capitalists of their countries.
Marx died in 1883, but his followers soon sought to make his vision concrete
by establishing their international organization. The ​Socialist International (SI) was a
union of European socialist and labor parties established in Paris in 1889. Although
short-lived, the SI’s achievements included the declaration of May 1 as ​Labor Day
and creation of an ​International Women’s Day​. Most importantly, it initiated the
successful campaign for an 8-hour workday.
The SI collapsed during World War I as the member parties refused or were
unable to join the internationalist efforts to fight for the war. Many of these sister
parties even ended up fighting each other. It was a confirmation of Marx’s warning,
when workers and their organizations take the side of their countries instead of each
other, their long-term interests are compromised.
As the SI collapsed, a more radical version emerged. In the
so-called Russian Revolution of 1917, Czar Nicholas II was
28
overthrown and replaced by a revolutionary government led by the Bolshevik Party
and its leader. Vladimir Lenin. This new state was called the Union of Soviet Socialist
Republics, or USSR. Unlike the majority of the member parties of the SI, the
Bolsheviks did not believe in obtaining power for the working class through elections.
Rather, they exhorted the revolutionary “vanguard” parties to lead the revolution
across the world, using methods of terror if necessary. Today, parties like this are
referred to as Communist parties.
To encourage these socialist revolutions across the world, Lenin established
the ​Communist International (Comintern) in 1919. The Comintern served as the
central body for directing Communist parties all over the world. This International
was not only more radical than the Socialist International, it was also less democratic
because it followed closely the top-down governance of the Bolsheviks.
Many of the world’s states feared the Comintern, believing that it was working
in secret to stir up revolutions in their countries (which was true). A problem arose
during World War II when the Soviet Union joined the Allied Powers in 1941. The
United States and the United Kingdom would, of course, not trust the Soviet Union in
their fight against Hitler’s Germany. These countries wondered if the Soviet Union
was trying to promote revolutions in their backyards. To appease his allies, Lenin’s
successor, Joseph Stalin, dissolved the Comintern in 1943.
After the war, however, Stalin re-established the Comintern as the ​Communist
Information Bureau (​ Cominform). The Soviet Union took over the countries in
Eastern Europe when the United States, the Soviet Union, and Great Britain divided
the war-torn Europe into their respective spheres of influence. The Cominform, like
the Comintern before it, helped direct the various communist parties that had taken
power in Eastern Europe.
With the eventual collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991, whatever existing
thoughts about communist internationalism also practically disappeared. The SI
managed to re-establish itself in 1951, but its influence remained primarily confined
to Europe, and has never been considered a major player in international relations to
every day.
For the postwar period, however, liberal internationalism would once again be
ascendant. And the best evidence of this is the rise of the United Nations as the center
of global governance.
Conclusion
This lesson examined the roots of the international system. In tracing these
roots, a short history of internationalism was provided. Moreover, internationalism is
but one window into the broader phenomenon of globalization. Nevertheless, it is a
very crucial aspect of globalization since global interactions are heightened by the
increased interdependence of states. This increased interdependence manifests itself
not just through state-to-state relations. Increasingly, international relations are also
29
facilitated by international organizations that promote global norms and policies. The
most prominent example of this organization, of course, is the United Nations.
Module 1 The Structures of Globalization
Lesson 4: THE UNITED NATIONS AND CONTEMPORARY GLOBAL
GOVERNANCE
Objectives
At the end of this lesson, you should be able to:
●
● define global governance;
● identify the roles and functions of the United Nations; and
● determine the challenges of global governance in the twenty-first
century
reflect on the significant role played by the UN Peace Keeping Forces
30
Introduction
Welcome to the fourth lesson in module 1. You have gone this far with your
journey in the concept of Globalization and Internationalization. The concept of
Globalization requires an in depth discussion of how these concepts help address
issues between countries and continent. We will be looking into the United Nations
and the International Organizations around the world. Are you ready Future LPTs?
Good to know that, Setting Sail in 4321. Find Fun in learning!
Activity
1. What is the common concept in the items presented above?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
2. How important is international relations in addressing issues between countries?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
____________________________________________________________________
31
Although many internationalists like Bentham and Kant imagined the
possibility of a global government, nothing of the sort exists today. There is no one
organization that various states are accountable to. Moreover, no organization can
militarily compel a state to obey predetermined global rules. There is, however, some
regularity in the general behavior of states. For example, they more or less follow
global navigation routes and, more often than not, respect each other’s territorial
boundaries. Moreover, when they do not – like when Russia invaded Crimea in 2014
– it becomes a cause for global concern and debate. The fact that states in an
international order continue to adhere to certain global norms means that there is a
semblance of world order despite the lack of a single world government. Global
governance refers to the various intersecting processes that create this order. There are
many sources of global governance. States sign treaties and form organizations, in the
process legislating public international law (international rules that govern
interactions between states as opposed to, say, private companies). International
non-governmental organizations (NGOs), though not having formal state power, can
lobby individual states to behave in a certain way (for example, an international
animal protection NGO can pressure governments to pass animal cruelty laws).
Powerful transnational corporations can likewise have tremendous effects on global
labor laws, environmental legislation, trade policy, etc. Even ideas such as the need
for “global democracy” or the clamor for “good governance” can influence the ways
international actors behave.
One lesson will not be able to cover the various ways global governance
occurs. As such, this lesson will only examine how global governance is articulated
by intergovernmental organizations. It will focus primarily on the United Nations
(UN) as the most prominent intergovernmental organization today.
What is an International Organization?
When scholars refer to groups like the UN or institutions like the IMF and the
World Bank (see Lesson 2), they usually call them ​international organizations (IOs).
Although international NGOs are sometimes considered as IOs, the term is commonly
used to refer to international intergovernmental organizations or groups that are
primarily made up of member-states.
One major fallacy about international organizations is that they are merely
amalgamations of various state interests. In the 1960s and 1970s, many scholars
believed that IOs were just venues where the contradicting, but sometimes
intersecting, agendas of countries were discussed – no more than talk shops. What has
become more evident in recent years, however, is that IOs can take on lives of their
own. For example, as
32
seen in Lesson 2, the IMF was able to promote a particular form of economic
orthodoxy that stemmed mainly from the beliefs of its professional economists. IOs
can thus become influential as independent organizations. International relations
scholars Michael N. Barnett and Martha Finnemore listed the following powers of
IOs.
First, IOs have the power of classification. Because IOs can invent and apply
categories, they create powerful global standards. For example, it is the UN
High Commissioner for Refugees (UNHCR) that defines what a refugee is
(see Lesson 10 for more). And since states are required to accept refugees
entering their borders, this power to establish identity has concrete effects.
Second, IOs have the power to fix meanings. This is a broader function related
to the first. Various terms like “security” or “development” need to be
well-defined. States, organizations, and individuals view IOs as legitimate
sources of information. As such, the meanings they create have effects on
various policies. For example, recently, the United Nations has started to
define security as not safety from military violence, but also safety from
environmental harm.
Finally, IOs have the power to diffuse norms. Norms are accepted codes of
conduct that may not be strict law, but nevertheless produce regularity in
behavior. IOs do not only classify and fix meanings; they also spread their
ideas across the world, thereby establishing global standards. Their members
are, as Barnett and Finnemore emphasized, the “missionaries” of our time.
Their power to diffuse norms stems from the fact that IOs are staffed with
independent bureaucracies, who are considered experts in various fields. For
example, World Bank economists come to be regarded as experts in
development and thus carry some form of authority. They can, therefore,
create norms regarding the implementation and conceptualization of
development projects.
Because of these immense powers, IOs can be sources of great good and great
harm. They can promote relevant norms like environmental protection and human
rights. But, like other entrenched bureaucracies, they can become sealed-off
communities that fail to challenge their beliefs. For example, the Nobel Prize-winning
economist Joseph Stiglitz famously criticized the IMF for using a “one-size-fits-all”
approach when its economists made recommendations to developing countries.
The United Nations
Having examined the powers, limitations, and weaknesses of
IOs, the spotlight will now fall on the most prominent IO in the
contemporary world, the United Nations (UN). After the collapse of
the League of Nations at the end of World War II, countries that
33
worried about another global war began to push for the formation of a more lasting
international league. The result was the creation of the UN. Although the organization
is far from perfect, it should be emphasized that it has so far achieved its primary goal
of averting another global war. For this reason alone, the UN should be considered a
success.
The UN is divided into five active organs;
1. The General Assembly (GA) is UN’s “main
deliberative policymaking and representative organ”.
According to the UN charter: “Decisions on important
questions, such as those on peace and security,
admission of new members, and budgetary matters,
require a two-thirds majority of the General Assembly.
Decisions on other questions are done by simple
majority. Annually, the General Assembly elects a GA
President to serve a one-year term of office”. All
member states (currently at 193) have seats in the GA.
The Philippines played a prominent role in the GA’s early years when Filipino
diplomat Carlos P. Romulo was elected GA president from 1949-1950.
2. The Security Council (SC). ​Although the GA is the
most representative organization in the UN, many
commentators consider the Security Council (SC) to be
the most powerful. According to the UN, this body
consists of 15 member states. The GA elects ten of
these 15 to two-year terms. The other five–sometimes
referred to as the Permanent 5 (P5) – are China,
France, Russia, the United Kingdom, and the United
States. These states have been permanent members
since the founding of the UN, and cannot be replaced
through election. The SC takes the lead in determining the existence of a threat to the
peace or an act of aggression. It calls upon the parties to a dispute to settle the act by
peaceful means and recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement. In
some cases, it can resort to imposing sanctions or even authorizing the use of force to
maintain or restore international peace and security. Because of these powers, states
that seek to intervene militarily in another state need to obtain the approval of the SC.
With the SC’s approval, a military intervention may be deemed legal. This is an
immense power.
Much attention has been placed on the SC’s P5 due to their permanent seats
and because each country holds veto power over the council’s decisions. It only takes
one veto vote from a P5 member to stop an SC action dead in its tracks. In this sense,
the SC is heir to the tradition of “great power” diplomacy that began with the
34
Metternich/Concert of Europe system (see the previous lesson). It is especially telling
that the P5 consists of the major Allied Powers that won World War II. The Security
Council will be further discussed in the next section.
3. The third UN organ is the Economic and Social
Council (ECOSOC), which is “the principal body for
coordination, policy review, policy dialogue, and
recommendations on social and environmental issues, as
well as the implementation of internationally agreed
developmental goals”. It has 54 members elected for
three-year terms. Currently, it is the UN’s central
platform for discussions on sustainable development.
4. The fourth is the International Court of Justice
whose task “is to settle, in accordance with international
law, legal disputes submitted to it by states and to give
advisory opinions referred to it by authorized United
Nations organs and specialized agencies”. The major
cases of the court consist of disputes between states that
voluntarily submit themselves to the court for
arbitration. The court, as such, cannot try individuals
(international criminal cases are heard by the
International Criminal Court, which is independent of
the UN), and its decisions are only binding when states
have explicitly agreed to place themselves before the
court’s authority. The SC may enforce the rulings of the ICJ, but this remains subject
to the P5’s veto power.
5. Finally, the secretariat consists of the
“Secretary-General and tens of thousands of
international UN staff members who carry out the
day-to-day work of the UN as mandated by the General
35
Assembly and the organization’s other principal organs”. As such, it is the
bureaucracy of the UN, serving as a kind of international civil service. Members of
the secretariat serve in their capacity as UN employees and not as state
representatives.
Challenges of the United Nations
Given the scope of the UN’s activities, it naturally faces numerous challenges.
Chief among these are the limits placed upon its various organs and programs by the
need to respect state sovereignty. The UN is not a world government, and it functions
primarily because of voluntary cooperation from states. If states refuse to cooperate,
the influence of the UN can be severely circumscribed. For example, the UN Council
on Human Rights can send special rapporteurs to countries where alleged human
rights violations are occurring. If a country does not invite the rapporteur or places
conditions on his/her activities, however, this information-gathering mechanism
usually fails to achieve its goals.
However, perhaps the biggest challenge of the United Nations is related to
issues of security. As mentioned, the UN Security Council is tasked with authorizing
international acts of military intervention. Because of the P5’s veto power, it is tough
for the council to release a formal resolution, much more implement it. This became
an issue, for example, in the late 1990s when the United States sought to intervene in
the Kosovo war. Serbian leader Slobodan Milosevic was committing acts of ethnic
cleansing against ethnic Muslim Albanians in the province of Kosovo. Hundreds and
thousands of Albanians were victims of massacres, mass deportations, and internal
displacement. Amid this systematic terror, members of the North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO, see Lesson 5), led by the United States, sought SC
authorization to intervene in the Kosovo war on humanitarian grounds. China and
Russia, however, threatened to veto any action, rendering the UN incapable of
addressing the crisis. In response, NATO decided to intervene on its own. Through
the NATO intervention was largely a success, it, nevertheless, left the UN ineffectual.
Today, a similar dynamic is evident in Syria, which is undergoing a civil war.
Russia has threatened to veto any SC resolution against Syria; thus, the UN has done
very little to stop state-sanctioned violence against opponents of the government.
Since Syrian President Bashar al-Assad is an ally of Russian dictator Vladimir Putin,
the latter has shied away from any policy that could weaken the legitimacy of the
former. As a result, the UN is again ineffectual amid a conflict that has led to over
220,000 people dead and 11 million displaced.
Despite these problems, it remains important for the SC to place a high bar on
military intervention. The UN Security Council has been wrong on issues of
intervention, but it has also made right decisions. When the United States sought to
invade Iraq in 2001, it claimed that Iraq’s Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass
destruction (WMD) that threatened the world. However, UN members Russia, China,
and France were unconvinced and vetoed the UN resolution for intervention, forcing
the United States to lead a small “coalition of the willing” with its allies. It has since
36
been discovered that there were no weapons of mass destruction, and the invasion of
Iraq has caused problems for the country and the region that last until today.
Conclusion
Global governance is such a complex issue that one can actually teach an
entire course in itself. This lesson has focused on the IOs and the United Nations in
particular. International organizations are highlighted because they are the most
visible symbols of global governance. The UN, in particular, is the closest to a world
government. What is important to remember is that international institutions like the
UN are always in a precarious position. On the other hand, they are groups of
sovereign states. On the other, they are organizations with their own rationalities and
agendas. It is this lesson that will continue to inform the evolution of these
organizations.
However, note that there are many institutions, groups, and ideas that hold
international and global politics together. In your own time, you may want to explore
these topics on your own.
37
Research in Google what the United Nations peacekeepers are the countries
that send these peacekeepers, their responsibilities, and the places where they
have been involved in the last 50 years. After familiarizing yourselves with the
UN’s peacekeeping function, you will now be ready to deal with a crisis. Read
the scenario below.
38
Your class is that peacekeeping force. List down the things you need to do to
prepare for this mission. Once you have established your presence, think of
measures you have to take to keep the peace, knowing that you will not be
there permanently. Good luck.
Measures To Be
Considered During
the Mission
1.
2.
3.
4.
Module 1 The Structures of Globalization
39
Objectives
At the end of this lesson, you should be able to:
●
●
●
●
● differentiate between regionalization and globalization;
explain how regions are formed and kept together;
discuss the advantages and disadvantages of regionalism; and
identify the factors leading to a greater integration of the Asian region.
give value on the importance on the importance of Regionalization in Asia, the
Philippines and the ASEAN Region.
Introduction
Congratulations! You are now in the last part of the First Module. What can
you say about Globalization? You are right, the world works amazingly. It
encompasses a varied networks of connections from a single country to international
linkages and global partnership. This best describes the beauty of how connected the
world is to every single place in the planet. Are you hungry for more learnings? Good
to know that, well the long wait is over? Here are the timely facts you need to know
about how the world works in a synchronous manner. Have fun while reading!
Kudos!
Activity
Analysis
1. How did Asian Countries connect with other neighboring countries?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
2. Based on the map presented above, what are the Regions in Asia?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
40
Governments, associations, societies, and groups form regional
organizations and/or networks as a way of coping with the challenges of
globalization. Globalization has made people aware of the world in general, but it has
also made Filipinos more cognizant of specific areas such as Southeast Asia. How, for
instance, did the Philippines come to identify itself with the Southeast Asian region?
Why is it part of a regional grouping known as the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations (ASEAN)?
While regionalism is often seen as a political and economic phenomenon, the
term actually encompasses a broader area. It can be examined in relation to identities,
ethics, religion, ecological sustainability, and health. Regionalism is also a process,
and must be treated as an “emergent, socially constituted phenomenon”. It means that
regions are not natural or given; rather, they are constructed and defined by
policymakers, economic actors, and even social movements.
This lesson will look at regions as political entities and examine what brings
them together as they interlock with globalization. The other facets of regionalism
will then be explored, especially those that pertain to identities, ethics, religion,
ecological sustainability, and health. The lesson will conclude by asking where all
these regionalisms are bringing us as members of a nation and as citizens of the
world.
Countries, Regions, and Globalization
Edward D. Mansfield and Helen V. Milner state that economic and political
definitions of ​regions vary, but there are certain basic features that everyone can agree
on. First, regions are “a group of countries located in the same geographically
specified area” or are “an amalgamation of two regions [or] a combination of more
than two regions” organized to regulate and “oversee flows and policy choices”.
Second, the words ​regionalization and ​regionalism should not be interchanged, as the
former refers to the “regional concentration of economic flows” while the latter is “a
political process characterized by economic ​policy cooperation and coordination
among countries”.
Countries respond economically and politically to globalization in various
ways. Some are large enough and have a lot of resources to dictate how they
participate in processes of global integration. China, for example, offers its cheap and
huge workforce to attract foreign businesses and expand trade with countries it once
considered its enemies but now sees as markets for its goods (e.g., the United States
and Japan). Other countries make up for their small size by taking advantage of their
strategic location. Singapore and Switzerland compensate for their lack of resources
41
by turning themselves into financial and banking hubs. Singapore developed its
harbor facilities and made them a first-class transit port for ships carrying different
commodities from Africa, Europe, the Middle East, and mainland Southeast Asia to
countries in the Asia-Pacific. In most cases, however, countries form a regional
alliance for – as the saying goes – there is strength in numbers.
Countries form regional associations for several reasons. One is for military
defense. The most widely known defense grouping is the ​North Atlantic Treaty
Organization (NATO) formed during the Cold War when several Western European
countries plus the United States agreed to protect Europe against the threat of the
Soviet Union. The Soviet Union responded by creating its regional alliance, the
Warsaw Pact​, consisting of the Eastern European countries under Soviet domination.
The Soviet Union imploded in December 1991, but NATO remains in place.
Countries also form regional organizations to pool their resources, get better
returns for their exports, as well as expand their leverage against trading partners. The
Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC) was established in 1960
by Iran, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, and Venezuela to regulate the production and
sale of oil. This regional alliance flexed its muscles in the 1970s when its member
countries took over domestic production and dictated crude oil prices in the world
market. In a world highly dependent on oil, this integration became a source of
immense power. OPEC’s success convinced nine other oil-producing countries to join
it.
Moreover, there are countries that form regional blocs to protect their
independence from pressures of superpower politics. The presidents of Egypt, Ghana,
India, Indonesia, and Yugoslavia created the ​Non-Aligned Movement (NAM) in 1961
to pursue world peace and international cooperation, human rights, national
sovereignty, racial and national equality, non-intervention, and peaceful conflict
resolution. It called itself non-aligned because the association refused to side with
either the First World capitalist democracies in Western Europe and North America of
the communist states in Eastern Europe. At its peak, the NAM had 120 member
countries. The movement, however, was never formalized and continues to exist up to
the present, although it lacks the same fervor that it had in the past.
Finally, economic crisis compels countries to come together. The Thai
economy collapsed in 1996 after foreign currency speculators and troubled
international banks demanded that the Thai government pay back its loans. A rapid
withdrawal of foreign investments bankrupted the economy. This crisis began to
spread to other Asian countries as their currencies were also devalued and foreign
investments left in a hurry. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) tried to reverse
the crisis, but it was only after the ASEAN countries along with China, Japan, and
South Korea agreed to establish an emergency fund to anticipate a crisis that the
Asian economies stabilized.
The crisis made ASEAN more “unified and coordinated”. The Association has
come a long way since it was formed as a coalition of countries which were
pro-American and supportive of the United States intervention in Vietnam. After the
42
Vietnam War, ASEAN continued to act as a military alliance to isolate Vietnam after
it invaded Cambodia, but there were also the beginnings of economic cooperation.
Non-State Regionalism
It is not only states that agree to work together in the name of a single cause
(or causes). Communities also engage in regional organizing. This “new regionalism”
varies in form; they can be “tiny associations that include no more than a few actors
and focus on a single issue, or huge continental unions that address a multitude of
common problems from territorial defense to food security.” Organizations
representing this “new regionalism” likewise rely on the power of individuals,
non-governmental organizations (NGOs), and associations to link up with one another
in
pursuit of a particular goal (or goals). Finally, “new regionalism” is identified with
reformists who share the same “values, norms, institutions, and system that exist
outside of the traditional, established mainstream institutions and systems”.
Their strategies and tactics likewise vary. Some organizations partner with
governments to initiate social change. Those who work with governments
(“legitimizers”) participate in “institutional mechanisms that afford some civil society
groups voice and influence [in] technocratic policy-making processes”. For example,
the ASEAN issued its Human Rights Declaration in 2009, but the regional body left it
to member countries to apply the declaration’s principles as they see fit. Aware that
democratic rights are limited in many ASEAN countries, “new regionalism”
organizations used this official declaration to pressure these governments to pass laws
and regulations that protect and promote human rights.
In South America, left-wing governments support the Hemispheric Social
Alliance’s opposition to the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), while
member of the Mesa de Articulación de Asociaciones Nacionales y Redes de ONGs
de América Latina y El Caribe (Roundtable of National Associations and Networks
and NGOs in Latin America and the Caribbean) participate in “forums, summits, and
dialogues with presidents and ministers”. Likewise, a group called the Citizen
Diplomacy Forum tries to influence the policies and programs of the Organization of
American States. In Southeast Asia, the organization of an ASEAN Parliamentarians
for Human Rights was in part the result of non-government organizations and civil
society groups pushing to “prevent discrimination, uphold political freedom, and
promote democracy and human rights throughout the region”.
Other regional organizations dedicate themselves to specialized causes.
Activists across Central and South America established the Rainforest Foundation to
protect indigenous peoples and the rainforests in Brazil, Guyana, Panama, and Peru.
Young Christians across Asia, Africa, the Middle East, the Americas, and the
Caribbean formed Regional Interfaith Youth Networks to promote “conflict
prevention, resolution, peace education, and sustainable development”. The Migrant
Forum in Asia is another regional network of NGOs and trade unions “committed to
protect[ing] and promot[ing] the rights and welfare of migrant workers”.
43
These organizations’ primary power lies in their moral standing and their
ability to combine lobbying with pressure politics. Unfortunately, most of them are
poorly financed, which places than at a disadvantage when dealing with their official
counterparts who have large state funds. Their impact in global politics is, therefore,
limited.
New regionalism differs significantly from traditional state-to-state
regionalism when it comes to identifying problems. For example, states treat poverty
or environmental degradation as technical or economic issues that can be resolved by
refining existing programs of state agencies, making minor changes in economic
policies, and creating new offices that address these issues. However, new
regionalism advocates such as the NGO Global Forum see these issues as reflections
of flawed economic development and environmental models. By “flawed”, they mean
economic development plans that are market-based, profit-driven, and hardly
concerned with social welfare, especially among the poor.
Another challenge for new regionalists is the discord that may emerge among
them. For example, disagreements surface over issues like gender and religion, with
pro-choice NGOs breaking from religious civil society groups that side with the
Church, Muslim imams, or governments opposed to reproductive rights and other
pro-women policies. Moreover, while civil society groups are able to dialogue
withgovernments, the latter may not be welcoming to this new trend and set up one
obstacle after another. Migrant Forum Asia and its ally, the Coordination of Action
Research on AIDS (CARAM), lobbied ASEAN governments to defend migrant labor
rights. Their program of action, however, slowed down once countries like Malaysia,
Singapore, and Thailand refused to recognize the rights of undocumented migrant
workers and the rights of the families of migrants.
Contemporary Challenges to Regionalism
Today, regionalism faces multiple challenges, the most serious of which is the
resurgence of militant nationalism and populism. The refusal to dismantle NATO
after the collapse of the Soviet Union, for example, has become the basis of the
anti-NATO rhetoric of Vladimir Putin in Russia. Now, even the relationship of the
United States – the alliance’s core member – with NATO has become problematic
after Donald Trump demonized the organization as simply leeching off American
military power without giving anything in return.
Perhaps the most crisis-ridden regional organization of today is the European
Union. The continuing financial crisis of the region is forcing countries like Greece to
consider leaving the Union to gain more flexibility in their economic policy.
Anti-immigrant sentiment and a populist campaign against Europe have already led to
the United Kingdom voting to leave the European Union in a move the media has
termed the “Brexit”.
44
ASEAN members continue to disagree over the extent to which member countries
should sacrifice their sovereignty for the sake of regional stability. The Association’s
link with East Asia has also been problematic. Recently, ASEAN countries also
disagreed over how to relate to China, with the Philippines unable to get the other
countries to support its condemnation of China’s occupation of the West Philippine
Sea. Cambodia and Laos led the opposition favoring diplomacy over confrontation,
but the real reason was the dramatic increase of Chinese investments and economic
aid to these countries. Moreover, when some formerly authoritarian countries
democratized, this “participatory regionalism” clashed with ASEAN’s policy of
non-interference, as civil society groups in Indonesia, the Philippines, and Thailand
demanded that the other countries democratized adopt a more open attitude towards
foreign criticism.
A final challenge pertains to differing visions of what regionalism should be
for. Western governments may see regional organizations not simply as economic
formations but also as instruments of political democratization. Non-Western and
developing societies, however, may have a different view regarding globalization,
development, and democracy. Singapore, China, and Russia see democracy as an
obstacle to the implementation and deepening of economic globalization because
constant public inquiry about economic projects and lengthy debate slow down
implementation or lead to unclear outcomes. Democracy’s tedious procedures must,
therefore, give way to efficiency.
Conclusion
Official regional associations now cover vast swaths of the world. The
population of the countries that joined the Asia-Pacific Economic Council (APEC)
alone comprised 37 percent of the world’s population in 2007. These countries are
also part of “smaller” organizations that include the Association of Southeast Asian
Nations, the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the North American Free Trade
Agreement, the Caribbean and Pacific Group of States, and the Union of South
American Nations. Even “isolationist” North Korea is part of the Regional Forum,
which discusses security issues in the region.
In the same way the countries will find it difficult to reject all forms of global
economic integration, it will also be hard for them to turn their backs on their regions.
Even if the UK leaves the EU, it must continue to trade with its immediate neighbors
and will, therefore, be forced to implement many EU rules. None of this is to say that
regional organizations will remain unaltered. The history of regionalism shows that
regional associations emerge as new global concerns arise. The future of regionalism
will be contingent on the immense changes in global politics that will emerge in the
21​st​ century.
45
Application
From Kingdoms to Empires, to Colonies, and to Republics
Organize yourselves based on these following broad regional divisions:
East Asia
South Asia
Middle East
Southeast Asia
Central Asia
46
Instructions​: Provide single picture for each system per region and a short
description of how these system defines their cultural identity.
DISTINCT FEATURES IN REGIONS OF ASIA
REGION
POLITICAL SYSTEM
ECONOMIC SYSTEM
SOCIO-CULTURAL
SYSTEM
1.EAST ASIA
2.SOUTH
ASIA
EAST
3.SOUTH ASIA
4.CENTRAL ASIA
5.NORTHERN
ASIA
6.WEST ASIA
47
Module Assessment
48
Module Assessment
Test I. Multiple Choice Questions
1. This refers to a widespread belief among powerful people that the global
integration of economic markets is beneficial for everyone, since it spreads
freedom and democracy across the world.
a. Globalization
b. International Trading System
c.
Globalism
d.
Internationalism
2. He believed that economic crises occur not when a country does not have
enough money, but when money is not being spent and, thereby, not moving.
a. David Ricardo
b. John Maynard Keynes
c. Friedruch Hayek
d. Dennis O. Flynn
3. How do the countries established a common basis for currency prices and fixed
exchange rate system?
a. Based on the political standing of the country
b. All based on the value of gold.
c. By the scope of their territory
d. All based on the products they could able be to produced
4. The following described the The Bretton Woods System, except;
a. a network of global financial institutions that would promote economic
interdependence and prosperity
b. established IBRD, or World Bank to be responsible for funding postwar
reconstruction projects.
c. inaugurated in 1994 during the United Nations Monetary and Financial
Conference to prevent the catastrophe of the early decades of the century from
reoccurring and affecting international ties.
d. enacted role of governments in managing spending served as the anchor for
what would be called a system of global Keynesianism.
49
5. Which of the is the best example of Economic​ ​Globalization?
a. Japan’s determined refusal to allow rice imports into the country to protect
its farming sector.
b. United States fiercely protects its sugar industry, forcing consumers and
sugar-dependent businesses to pay higher prices
c. Philippines exporting fruits such as banana and pineapple to various
country around Asia while importing rice from Vietnam.
d. None of the above
6. This refers to a country and its government, i.e., the government of the Philippines.
What is this concept being described to?
a. nation
b. nation-state
c. sovereignty
d. state
7. The origin of the present-day concept of sovereignty can be traced back
to_______________, which is a set of agreements signed in 1648 to end the Thirty
Years’ War between the major continental powers of Europe. What is being asked in
the statement?
a. Treaty of Westphalia
b. Treaty of Paris
c. Treaty of Versailles
d. Treaty of Zaragoza
8. Its main task “is to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes
submitted to it by states and to give advisory opinions referred to it by authorized
United Nations organs and specialized agencies”. Which organ of the UN is being
described in the statement?
a. Secretary General
b. The Security Council
c. Economic and Social Council
d. International Court of Justice
9. This takes the lead in determining the existence of a threat to the peace or an act of
aggression. It calls upon the parties to a dispute to settle the act by peaceful means
and recommends methods of adjustment or terms of settlement. In some cases, it can
resort to imposing sanctions or even authorizing the use of force to maintain or restore
international peace and security. Which organ of the UN is being described in the
statement?
a. Secretary General
b. The Security Council
50
c. Economic and Social Council
d. International Court of Justice
10. This is the most widely known defense grouping formed during the Cold War
when several Western European countries plus the United States agreed to protect
Europe against the threat of the Soviet Union. What regional associations is being
highlighted in the phrase?
a. OPEC
b. ASEAN
c. WARSAW PACT
d. NATO
Test II. Essay
1. How is regionalism different from and yet a part of globalization?
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
_____________________________________________________________________
2. Compare and contrast the assumptions of the original Bretton Woods system with
those of the Washington Consensus.
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________
51
Module Summary
● Different people encounter globalization in a variety of ways.
Globalization is a complex phenomenon that occurs at multiple levels
and it is an uneven process that affects people differently. Defined as
an integration of the national markets to a wider global market
signified by the increased free trade.”
● The International Monetary Fund (IMF) regards “economic
globalization” as a historical process representing the result of human
innovation and technological progress. The Bretton Woods system was
inaugurated in 1994 during the United Nations Monetary and Financial
Conference to prevent the catastrophe of the early decades of the
century from reoccurring and affecting international ties.
● Internationalism is but one window into the broader phenomenon of
globalization. Nevertheless, it is a very crucial aspect of globalization
since global interactions are heightened by the increased
interdependence of states. This increased interdependence manifests
itself not just through state-to-state relations.
● After the collapse of the League of Nations at the end of World War II,
countries that worried about another global war began to push for the
formation of a more lasting international league. Resulted to the
creation of the United Nations (UN). Is divided into five active organs;
(1) The General Assembly (GA) (2) The Security Council (SC) (3)
The third UN organ is the Economic and Social Council
(ECOSOC),(4) The fourth is the International Court of Justice (5)
“Secretary-General and tens of thousands of international UN staff
members
● International institutions like the UN are always in a precarious
position. They are groups of sovereign states. They are also an
organization with their own rationalities and agendas and continually
evolving.
● Regions are “a group of countries located in the same geographically
specified area” or are “an amalgamation of two regions [or] a
combination of more than two regions” organized to regulate and
“oversee flows and policy choices”. R​egionalization and ​regionalism
should not be interchanged, as the former refers to the “regional
concentration of economic flows” while the latter is “a ​political
process characterized by economic ​policy cooperation and
coordination among countries”.
● Much of globalization is anchored on changes in the economy. Global
culture, for example, is facilitated by trade. Filipinos, would not be as
52
aware of American culture if not for the trade that allows locals to
watch American movies, listen to American music, and consume
American products. The globalization of politics is likewise largely
contingent on trade relations. These days, many events of foreign
affairs are conducted to cement trading relations between and among
states.
REFERENCES
Textbook
Claudio L.et. al,(2018), The Contemporary World, C&E Publishing, Inc. Quezon
City, Philippines
Images
Lesson 1
https://au.travel.yahoo.com/galleries/g/30922256/how-to-spend-a-day-in-singapore-like-a-loc
al/​ ​[pp. 3]
http://www.colwis.ca/index.php/resume/11091/​ ​[pp. 4]
Lesson 2
stock.adobe.com ​[pp. 10]
http://bitnewz.net/News/Timeline/Central-Banks-Should-Observe-Blockchain-Says-Japans-C
entral-Bank-Official​ ​[pp. 10]
https://born2invest.com/articles/gold-real-rates-dollar/​ ​[pp. 12]
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bretton_Woods_Conference​ ​[pp. 13]
Lesson3
http://www.emersonkent.com/history_notes/klemens_von_metternich.htm ​[pp. 20]
https://www.biography.com/us-president/woodrow-wilson [​pp. 24]
https://plato.stanford.edu/entries/marx/ ​[pp. 25]
https://www.biography.com/political-figure/vladimir-lenin ​[pp. 26]
Lesson 4
https://medium.com/@inkbotdesign/top-10-united-nations-logos-un-logo-design-inspiration-a
963ff839cb9​ [pp. 29]
53
https://www.ippf.org/news/ippf-deeply-condemns-us-administrations-decision-halt-funding-w
orld-health-organization ​[pp. 29]
https://geneticliteracyproject.org/2017/01/20/gmos-biotechnology-poses-challenge-internation
al-relations/ ​[pp. 30]
https://www.mastersportal.com/articles/584/what-can-i-become-if-i-study-international-relati
ons.html ​[pp. 30]
https://oppourtunities.com/2019-world-bank-manager-global-engagement-and-partnerships-re
cruitment/ ​[pp. 32]
https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/how-are-judges-elected-to-the-international-co
urt-of-justice/article20619816.ece ​[pp. 32]
https://www.plenglish.com/index.php?o=rn&id=54597&SEO=iran-announces-withdrawal-ofits-membership-quota-from-the-imf ​[pp. 32]
https://peacekeeping.un.org/en/role-of-general-assembly ​[pp. 33]
https://www.dw.com/en/five-new-non-permanent-members-elected-to-un-security-council/a-1
8000513 ​[pp. 33]
http://dagdok.org/un-system/economical-and-social-council/ ​[pp. 33]
https://www.thehindu.com/news/international/how-are-judges-elected-to-the-international-co
urt-of-justice/article20619816.ece ​[pp.34]
https://www.aljazeera.com/indepth/opinion/2016/08/secretary-general-commit-accountability160827151419570.html ​[pp. 34]
Lesson 5
https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/6/61/Location-Asia-UNsubregions.p
ng/320px-Location-Asia-UNsubregions.png ​[pp.38]
Criteria/ Rubric
Lesson 3&4
CRITERIA
POINTS
Content and Organization
10
Relevance
5
TOTAL
15
CRITERIA
POINTS
Content and Organization
10
Lesson 2&5
54
Relevance
5
Creativity and Resourcefulness
5
TOTAL
20
55