Global Politics: New Approaches Klaus Segbers MGIMO/ FUB March 30, 2005

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Content  Globalization as „ causal agent “  New directions of global politics  New concepts for global politics  Alternative futures

copyright klaus segbers 2005 How to Cope with Confusion The opposite of a correct statement is a false statement. But the opposite of a profound truth may well be another profound truth. (Niels Bohr)

copyright klaus segbers 2005 What is globalization? (1) Globalization is a concept with many connotations and meanings. For our purposes, we understand it as a process generated by world-wide interplay of capital flows and communication flows enabled by new technologies. This process - in one way or another – connects and divides countries, societies, firms and individuals, far beyond national boundaries.

copyright klaus segbers 2005 What is globalization? (2) While perceptions and interpretations of these trends differ, and while abilities to cope with them differ as well, it becomes ever more difficult, if not impossible to ‘ opt out ’ and to pursue auto-centric, de- coupled paths of development. Globalization ‘ is widely perceived … as a universal causal agent ’. (Cameron/ Palan 1999).

copyright klaus segbers 2005 What is globalization? (3) Globalization may be treated as a dependent variable. That means – which factors can explain it? Globalization also can be treated as an independent variable. That means – what effects does it cause? Like – „ a universal causal agent... “. This latter thing is applied here.

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Effects of globalization While globalization can be understood as a ‚ universal causal agent ‘, it does not lead to homogenization. Globally transmitted impulses and flows are not perceived in the same way. So the process of absorbing and transforming stimuli leads also to heterogenization. Globalization, and the flows and techniques generated by it, create new divides – those of access, and those of digital (in)competence.

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Indicators for globalization (1) The increasingly unregulated and apparently uncontrollable movement of capital, accompanied by new instruments for generating, investing, insuring and transferring capital. New possibilities for transporting and transmitting goods, services, people and information, resulting in the acceleration of operations everywhere.

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Indicators for globalization (2) Digitalization of information and communications, leading to new patterns of production, trade, services (b 2 b and b 2 c options) … … and to new patterns of consumption, basically shaped by the Internet and by multimedia tools. Diverse forms of reaction in everyday life to the permanent influx of multiple stimuli related to work, leisure and information, which produce multi-tasking as an everyday form of activity for the connected.

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Indicators for globalization (3) The creation of new centralities - mega- cities, headquarters, internet providers, transnational institutions, while traditional regulators like states and governments are becoming players with reduced status. Another important effect of globalization is the changing content of space and place.

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Indicators for globalization (4) The erosion of the classical concept of sovereignty – presupposing state agencies able to control a clearly delineated space. The erosion of the classical concept of territoriality – as the nexus b/w the state and the materialization of its basic domination and protection functions: “ Many social functions become relatively delinked from territorial geography. ” (Scholte)

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Directions of Development 1 LEVELS One or two: state, international Two or more, simultaneous/ parallel games, flows

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Directions of Development 2 ACTORS Polis, state as unitary actors, container units Multitude of actors, different levels, patchwork

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Directions of Development 3 INSTITUTIONS and RULES Formal, complementary, top-down Informal, overlapping, multi-level

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Directions of Development 4 ACTION Consistent, directed, sovereign Fragmented, responding to external agendas, adhocistic

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Directions of Development 5 INTERACTION Diplomacy, negotiations, sequential Bargaining, responding to external agendas, flows and scapes

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Directions of Development 6 FIELD of ACTION Territory, borders, demarcation domestic/ foreign Blurring boundaries; patchwork; new mapping/ cartography; transnational, shifting identities

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Directions of Development 7 TOPICS, ISSUES, CLEAVAGES Traditional in/security; distribution of power, of wealth; paths of development Cultural turn; identity modules; new divides of digital education and access

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Globalization and regulation (1) We have to accept that the relative decline of the regulatory capabilities of nation states and of states in general is a given. The movement of goods and services, information and entertainment, of capital and of people resembles flows rather than traditional forms and channels of exchange. These flows are hard to control and to direct. They are embedded in markets and networks, and in attempts of inter-national regulation.

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Globalization and regulation (2) The tools, concepts and approaches with which national and inter-national politics are interpreted are not sufficient any more. They may even become obsolete. G. may require new decentralized and networking regimes. G. may produce ‚ new centralities ‘ (Saskia Sassen). G. may be in need of patchwork interpretations.

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Globalization and regulation (3) Before globalization, governments and governance appeared to be synonymous. Since the advent of globalization, the question of organizing politics becomes increasingly dramatic: How is regulation possible? On what level/s? By whom? Are alternative concepts like moderation, or navigation, more promising and realistic?

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Globalization and polisci G. devaluates old approaches and requires a new political mapping (>>> demo). G. requires new thinking. G. produces new concepts – like flows (Castells), scapes (Appadurai), new centralities (Sassen), patchworks (Segbers)...

copyright klaus segbers 2005 New Concepts New Centralities (Sakia Sassen) Network Society (Manuel Castells) Flows (Manuel Castells) Scapes (Arjun Appadurai) Patchworks

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Globalization and our ego ‘ s We all know about the battles going on around making sense of globalization. There are hard-line pro and con factions. Do they matter? How about Habermas ‘ suggestion to accept the unevitable, and then to proceed and to enable as much people as possible to cope, to operate?!

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Meta: Positivism (ratchoice) Reflectivism (constructivism) Macro classical: (Neo)Realism (Neo)Institutionalism World system Pluralism/ domestic Cognitivist Macro new: New centralities Flows, scapes Patchworks

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Future scenarios 1: Anarchization Global Anarchization: failing und failed states proliferation, unconventional conflicts and wars, weak institutions... This is not an unlikely option. Probably, to avoid this option is preference # 1?

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Future scenarios 2: Institutionalization and Learning An alternative szenario would be global institutionalization ( „ governance “ ), produced and enhanced by global learning. Institions would exist, work, regulate, contain conflicts and produce security and well-being. In a way, a global order guaranteed by s/t like a world state. Does this seem likely? With what kind of time perspective?

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Future scenarios 3: Selective stabilization There is potential third option: selective stabilization. This would imply to concentrate stabilization and inclusion on issues, tasks and regions which realistically will qualify for institutionalization. This would not allow to rule increasingly huge parts of the world by protectorates, financed by the OECD. Also, the U.S. certainly will not qualify to fulfill this role (neither a benign, nor a rational hegemon, no resources for „ building “ etc.). Prime candidates for attention are arms and health issues, also education and – in terms of regions - Turkey, Mexiko, Usbekistan, India...

copyright klaus segbers 2005 Quote – Losing or gaining control? The implicit message in all this... is that it is possible to actively take control of one ‘ s situation or circumstances and, thereby, to change one ‘ s fate. Nothing need be accepted as an unalterable fait accompli.... Everything can be explored, rearranged, reprogrammed. Nothing has to be fixed or final. Everything, finally, is open to condidered choice, initiative, creativity – and daring. (Ohmae)