Has Globalization Made The World More Or Less Politically Stable?

GLOBALISATION AND POLITICAL INSTABILITY
Name
Course
Professor’s Name
Institution
Location of Institution
Date
Globalisation and Political Instability
Globalisation has increased interactions among people, corporate organizations, societies, and governments. The cross-border transfer of goods, services, information, technology, people, and capital has created an interdependence among various world’s systems. The political consequences of globalisation are wide-ranging and complex. This paper examines literature to find out the impact of globalisation on the world’s political stability. The paper takes the position that globalisation has made the world less politically stable. The features that characterise this political instability are economic inequality, competition for resources, cultural entrepreneurship, labour tensions, separatism, and worldwide availability of weapons.
A key feature of political instability as a result of globalisation is economic inequality. According to Marwah and Tomar (2015), globalisation has increased economic inequalities, causing discontent and conflicts in different parts of the world (p.116). Examples of countries that have experienced recurrent conflicts due to economic inequalities according to the authors are Nigeria and Pakistan. As shown by Houle (2018), economic inequality increases the wealth of the rich relative to the poor, dampens support for democracy, reduces participation, and increases the variation in policy preferences among different income groups. However, as informed by Marwah and Tomar (2015), economic inequalities do not directly cause political inequalities in all situations (p.116). In this regard, there exist some conditions necessary for economic inequalities to cause political instability. First, it is essential that the economic condition in the society is in a position to create awareness among the economically disadvantaged that they have been deprived of opportunities and that these opportunities are exploited by just a few members of society. Second, awareness has to drive the economically disadvantaged to come together and challenge the existing political system. Third, it is essential that the political system does not contribute to improving the lives of the ‘have nots’. The economic inequality that comes with globalisation is thus a key driver of the political instability present in countries like Nigeria and Pakistan. It is justifiable to say that without globalisation and income inequalities, the world would have been more politically stable.
Another key feature of political instability due to globalisation is competition for resources. As a result of globalisation, individuals and groups are competing for resources, and with this comes violent conflicts and consequently political instability. As informed by Tidwell and Lerche (2004), one of the ways through which globalisation influences the expression of conflict is the provision of new resources to compete over (p.4). Globalisation has created demand for resources such as diamond, oil, and gas that have been sources of conflicts, fuelling political instability in many countries around the world. The story of conflict diamonds as elucidated by Tidwell and Lerche (2004) show that globalisation has played a key role in driving political instability in many parts around the world. In Angola, when UNITA lost the US government support, it turned to diamonds to fund its military operations as it sought to oust the government (Tidwell & Lerche, 2004, p.4). In Sierra Leone, diamond smuggling was used by the Revolutionary United Front (RUF) to wage war against the government and resulted in deaths of tens of thousands of people. Furthermore, one of the world most dangerous terrorist groups, the Al Qaeda used diamonds to fund its operations, which are often bloody and violent. This has been made possible by globalization that has increased the value of these products.
The political instability present in the world today can be attributed to competition for resources, particularly oil and gas. Countries such as South Sudan, Syria, Nigeria, Ukraine, and Iraq have long-standing conflicts, which according to Klare (2014), have been driven by energy. The author points out that there is a desire among the conflicting parties to control oil and natural gas assets. It is important to note that oil and gas are among the most valuable commodities in the world today as government and companies that control them generate huge revenues from them. Klare (2014) points out that the struggle over energy resources has characterised many conflicts including the civil war in Sudan from 1983 to 2005, the Gulf War in the early 1990s, as well as the 1989-1988 war between Iraq and Iran. Oil is at the heart of each of the conflicts. The extremist groups that are responsible for the conflicts in the Middle East today including ISIS rely on oil to attain their goals. ISIS intends to create a caliphate and the only way to attain that is through oil. Therefore, the political instability in the region is attributable to the value of oil and gas. Competition for resources characterises many conflicts around the world and it is deducible that without such competition, political stability would prevail. It is the world’s dependence on natural resources, which is driven by globalisation that has brought about most of the violent conflicts we experience today. In this sense, the world has become less politically unstable due to competition for resources that is fuelled by globalisation.
Cultural entrepreneurship is another feature of political instability that characterises today’s globalised world. Cultural entrepreneurship is associated with conflicts hence causing political instability. According to Crawford (2006, p.7), during economic hardships, cultural entrepreneurs emerge to advocate for the affairs of distinct cultural groups and mobilize support to propel them to positions of power. Given that they promote identity politics as opposed to interest-based politics, they increase the risk of political conflicts. As informed by Crawford (2006), once the cultural entrepreneurs attain power and control resources, other cultural groups are denied the resources, increasing the odds of violence (p.4). In Tamil and Sinhalese populations in Sri-Lanka, political rivalries emerged as parties scrambled for political power. Tamil Tigers became powerful entrepreneurs among the Tamil and was determined to use violence to pursue their political aims. Therefore, cultural entrepreneurship is a feature of political instability that emerged in the world due to globalisation. The focus on cultural identity discriminates against other cultural groups, hence the potential for violent conflicts.
Labour tension is also a major feature of the political instability brought about by globalisation. Job automation is o...