Академический Документы
Профессиональный Документы
Культура Документы
Globalisation
Neo-realists think that states are still the principal actors in international politics.
Globalization challenges some areas of state authority and control, but politics is still
international. Globalization provides opportunities and resources for transnational social
movements that challenge the authority of states in various policy areas. Neo-realists
are not supportive of any movement that seeks to open critical security issues to public
debate.
Neo-realists are concerned about new security challenges resulting from uneven
globalization, namely, inequality and conflict.
Free market neo-liberals believe globalization is a positive force. Eventually, all states
will benefit from the economic growth promoted by the forces of globalization. They
believe that states should not fight globalization or attempt to control it with unwanted
political interventions.
Some neo-liberals believe that states should intervene to promote capitalism with a
human face or a market that is more sensitive to the needs and interests of all the
people. New institutions can be created and older ones reformed to prevent the uneven
flow of capital, promote environmental sustainability, and protect the rights of citizens
Critiques of Neo-liberalism
From a Neo-Liberal perspective, the level of complex economic interdependence
between China, as a producer, and the Western world, as consumers, negates the
likelihood of a great power conflict. Mearsheimer tries to refute this by using the
example of Germany, who, despite a strongly growing economy, began a second war in
1939. Thus, using economic interdependence as an example to show the absolute
interpretation of Chinas rise is vulnerable. It undermines and oversimplifies the frictions
that economic interdependence causes between nations. High levels of economic
interdependence has the ability, as Samuel Huntington notes in The Clash of Civilisations
and the Remaking of World Order, to act as war-inducing and not peace-inducing as
Liberalists would argue. For example, it fails to account for the deterioration in Sino
Japanese relations which has undermined economic interdependence.
Critiques of Neo-realism
While there may be vested interests at stake for China, the level of cooperation and
integration exhibited by its increasing role in UN peacekeeping missionswhich seek
global peace and securitysuggests states are not only self-interested, as Realist
theory would advocate. Hence, to use only Realist interpretations of Chinas rise provides
too narrow a view, as it does not explain the full extent of Chinas rise through military
aspirations. While Chinas increased military assertiveness has been highlighted, it is
also important to note its diverse role in the international community
It can be argued that Mearsheimers arguments, based on historical analogies, are too
weak to hold merit in this discussion. How can historical analogies from an American
experience predict what China, a country with a contrasting and unique history and
culture, will do today? Analogical arguments are not causes or explanations; they
tend to haphazardly pick and choose the similarities to focus on, while ignoring
potentially important differences.