Chapter Nine © 2012 Pearson Education

Global Futures: Competing Visions of the Twenty-First Century STANLEY MICHALAK, 2001 “As optimists, we like to think that solutions exist ‘out there,’ new ideas that, once discovered, could usher in a new era of peace and amity.... The truth is: none exists.” PETER SINGER, 2002 “Now the twenty-first century faces the task of developing a suitable form of government for that single world. It is a daunting moral and intellectual challenge, but one we cannot refuse to take up.” © 2012 Pearson Education

Global Futures Visions of the Future The End of History One World A World State War Becomes Unthinkable An Engendered Peace A Clash of Civilizations Great Power War World is always in flux, and change is the only constant. Where are the major trends leading? What is the global future? Realists: the more things change, the more they stay the same. Nonrealists: change is trumping continuity. © 2012 Pearson Education

Future I: The End of History The Vision Relative peace at the end of a third wave of democratization Optimism: end of history—point at which all great debates about how human beings should organize themselves politically and economically are resolved. Democracy and market capitalism Some cultures still mired “in history” – Islamic countries China: modernization theory Critical mass of democratic nations will be attained; major wars no more The Critique Recent developments: three trends in particular – Transitions to democracy can increase the propensity for war – Too many countries still not democratic: China, Middle East, many parts of Asia and Africa— may not transition – Democratization in Lebanon and Palestine did not equal peace but rather empowered militants © 2012 Pearson Education

Future II: One World The Vision Pacifying impact of economic globalization Thomas Friedman: “Golden Arches” and “Dell” theories of conflict Emergence of one world and global peace Reunification of China and Taiwan No emergence of a new cold war Nothing that would be bad for business or that would undercut global prosperity. Economic interdependence trumps outmoded notions of geopolitics. The Critique Angell’s book, The Great Illusion (1910) – Humans are rational Great recession of 2008 similar in some ways to 1930s—states may limit global ties Problematically, humans are limited in their capacity to rationally identify and link ends and means. – Decision-making takes place in an environment of limited knowledge; miscalculations can emerge. Angell assumes that humans are motivated by well-being and prosperity. This view may be too limited. But war would be very costly. © 2012 Pearson Education

Future III: A World State The Vision New medievalism – Wide array of substate and nonstate actors would share power with diminished states New institutions created at a supranational level with authority beyond the sovereign state. Wendt (2003): 5 stages of emergence of world state 1.Sovereign state system 2.Society of states 3.World society 4.Collective security 5.World state The Critique Questions of both desirability and feasibility. World state is something to be feared: a threat to local norms, traditions, and cultures. – Democratic deficit National identities difficult to abandon Civil war – would a world state continually be fighting back against local elements frustrated by a distant government? © 2012 Pearson Education

Future IV: War Becomes Unthinkable The Vision War is an idea whose time has passed. Becomes less and less acceptable as an option. – Much like practices such as dueling and slavery are now universally rejected Costs too high for losers and winners alike. “Long peace” The Critique It only takes a single state and its leadership to disrupt the peace. The argument that war has become unthinkable rests on an assumption of rationality. The assumption that human beings are coming to a universal consensus about war is belied by recent evidence. While Western Europeans may have concluded that war is no longer acceptable, this has not spread on a global scale. © 2012 Pearson Education

Future V: An Engendered Peace The Vision Progress of women; leaders in business and society Critical mass of women attain positions of government authority at the highest levels. – New women leaders will be distinct from past women leaders who were exceptions to the rule. Feminization of politics has made the world a more peaceful place. – More diplomacy; fewer guns The Critique When women have risen to positions where they can directly shape foreign policy, they have often demonstrated a willingness to rely on military power as readily as any man. – Margaret Thatcher – Indira Gandhi – Hillary Clinton – Condoleezza Rice Women’s involvement in pacifist moments has been relatively recent. © 2012 Pearson Education

Future VI: A Clash of Civilizations The Vision Samuel Huntington (1993) September 11, 2001 Multipolar era along lines of eight or nine great civilizations. – Western, Islamic, Chinese (Sinic), Orthodox, Hindu, Latin American, Japanese, Buddhist, and African Has been a bloody twenty-first century rather than one world Western civilization in decline Rise of China and its soft power (the power to attract) The Critique Central weakness of the thesis is that it treats civilizations as monolithic and internally homogeneous. Danger: preparing for a clash of civilizations is the best way to ensure that such a clash will occur. © 2012 Pearson Education

Future VII: Great Power War The Vision Authoritarian regimes will push back in response to Western policies of democracy promotion. Tensions rise in a multipolar twenty-first century world – WTO overwhelmed by trade disputes – ICJ and ICC become ignored and irrelevant as does the UN Different responses from realists – Offensive realism—maintain security by preventing other states from establishing regional supremacy – Defensive realism—balance of power will maintain order Scenario: Chinese attack Taiwan; U.S. responds The Critique Scenario fails to consider internal politics Dismisses the liberal commercialist argument regarding the pacifying impact of economic interdependence – Both states would destroy vital economic assets (U.S. could destroy U.S.-owned enterprises in China; China would be harming its market in the U.S.). Glosses over the impact of nuclear weapons The realist scenario for U.S.–Chinese war could become a self-fulfilling prophecy. © 2012 Pearson Education

Making a Better World In judging and evaluating the perspectives discussed, we must ask: – How well does each describe the way that world politics works? – The fundamental divide between realists and their critics is over the question of whether we can do better than the world that realists describe. © 2012 Pearson Education