Do inequality and mass-poverty threaten the security of the international political system ?

University Degree Social studies

Name : John Fenning

Tutor : Matteo Fumagali

IR1005

Do inequality and mass-poverty threaten the security of the international political system ?

Near half of the world’s population live on under two dollars a day, while a relative minority, mainly in the developed world live in relative luxuary. Near all these people live in the global south—this is what we call ‘mass poverty’. Therefore we have a north-south divide, where the world is dominated by the rich northern states, and also inequality within states (the richest 1% of the world own as much as the poorest 57% (Wilkin :635)). Conventionally security is concerned with nation-state and inter-state relations (Wilkin : 633), but the global security agenda is being widened to consider non-traditional matters such as health, the environment and poverty issues (Thomas : 5). Does this imbalance threaten to change the status quo of the international political system ?

Over the last twenty years especially we saw the gap between north and south, rich and poor, grow larger—Wilkin points out that between the short period of 1988 to 1993 inequality grew by 5%. At the same time with the end of the cold war we saw ‘a burst of new armed conflicts’ (Kegley and Wittkopf : 207). Many, see that these two growths are linked. For example, Michael Camdessus, managing director of the International Monetary Fund referred to poverty as the ‘ultimate systematic threat’, that the widening gap between rich hand poor nations was ‘potentially socially explosive’ and could ‘undermine societies through confrontation, violence and civil disorder’ (Thomas: 3). Global governance institutions are awakening to the fact that ‘pervasive poverty and deepening inequality are potential threats to the global order’ (Thomas: 3).

This is exemplefied in the case of AIDS. On the tenth of January 2000, the United Nations Security Council, a body associated with discussing global political and military problems—debated the strategic implications of the HIV/AIDS virus for the first time (Dupont : 5). This event symbolises something that has been believed for a long time : ‘AIDS is as destabalising as any war, in the post cold war world, international security is about more than guns and bombs and the balance of power’ (Holbrooke). AIDS is now destabalising countries politically, reversing decades of economic progress and reducing the numbers and expertise in conscript armies. Between 1995 and 2000 Asian-Pacific states forfeited an estimated $38-52 billion in lost production and the spiralling cost of health care for AIDS—the proliferation of the disease will undermine national development objectives, leading to inequities and disaffection, which may be harnessed by those seeking to gain control over natural and economic resources (Dupont : 6). Countries will be further destabalised by weakened military forces ; 40-60% of Angola’s military is already HIV positive and one study predicts that as many as half of Malawi’s military will be dead by 2005 (Phillips). AIDS will leave countries crippled and vulnerable to attack from outside and inside the country. Finally, there will almost certainly be reluctance on the part of some nations to deploy forces on peace-keeping duties because of fear of the disease. ‘All available evidence suggests HIV/AIDS will rival war as a major cause of…instablility in the twenty first century’ (Dupont : 10).

Email

Password

Confirm Password

I agree to the terms of service and privacy policy

In multi-ethnic states with corrupt governments, law and order may break down and the citizens may threaten to disintigrate the state—this is what we call a failed state. According to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) ‘State Failure Task Force’ the following factors make state failure more likely: high infant mortality ; poor democracies that fail to improve the living standards ; and large numbers of unemployed youths, who are easily mobilised into action. Poverty and inequality are therefore key to state failure. The CIA ‘State Failure Task Force’ claims state failure caused as many as one hundred and thirteen states to dissolve ...

This is a preview of the whole essay

In multi-ethnic states with corrupt governments, law and order may break down and the citizens may threaten to disintigrate the state—this is what we call a failed state. According to the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) ‘State Failure Task Force’ the following factors make state failure more likely: high infant mortality ; poor democracies that fail to improve the living standards ; and large numbers of unemployed youths, who are easily mobilised into action. Poverty and inequality are therefore key to state failure. The CIA ‘State Failure Task Force’ claims state failure caused as many as one hundred and thirteen states to dissolve or fragment into separate units between 1955 and 1994 (Kegley and Wittkopf : 430). And ‘the potential for failed states in many global south states remains great, which is why many experts predict that by the middle of the twenty-first century there may exist as many as five hundred states’ (Kegley and Wittkopf : 209). There are several states threatening to split today—particularly in sub-Saharan Africa, e.g. Sudan, the democratic republic of Congo and Sri Lanka. Such a dramatic change would clearly change the shape of the international political system.

But there is another side to the inequality/poverty coin—the global north. Does the dominance of the rich states pose a threat to the security of the international political system? The southern states worry that the twenty-first century will witness ‘the reemergence of a more open and explicit form of imperialism, in which national sovererignty is more readily overridden by a hegemonic power pursuing its own self-defined national interests’ (Kegley and Wittkopf : 208). In an anarchical society, where states see themselves as the supreme authority, there is nothing to balance the big powers. Take for example the United States and Britain’s recent intervention in Iraq. The aim was to remove Saddam Hussein from office because it was claimed he was aquiring weapons of mass destruction. The UN Charter just war theory ‘permits a country to defend itself, but only in the event of an armed attack and only as a « last resort »’ (Kegley and Wittkopf : 497). The allies claim to be removing ‘the greatest threat’, but many suspect that economic interests were at the heart of intervention—citing the fact that Iraq has the second largest oil reserves in the world. The fact that the United States are so powerful, and cannot be controled by anyone therefore poses a threat to the international political system because they can act in the way they see fit and no-one has the power to stop them.

As serious a threat as any to global security is that of terrorism. In a July 1997 interview on CNN Osama bin Laden declared Jihad (holy war) against the United States calling for attacks on American targets accross the glob. Libian leader Muammar Qaddafi has also vowed to support ‘any group that caused trouble for the west’ (Kegley : 164). Whereas previously the primary aim of terrorism was to ‘elicit attention and sympathy for the terrorist’s cause’ (Kegley and Wittkopf : 434), the terrorists attacks of September 11th for example highlight a new goal : to annihilate their enemies, terrorist are now ‘acting transnationally to transform the status quo’ (Kegley and Wittkopf :440). The U.S. is portrayed as a symbol of both oppression and arrogance, and these militant Islamist movements that bin Laden is involved in ‘could not have emerged in the absence of social and political conditions that leave many Muslims desparate and aggrieved’ (Kegley : 166). Where the economic system ‘leaves the poor without hope, fudamentalist, extremist and radical religion offers an opportunity for escape’ (Kegley : 178).

However, the idea that poverty and inequality threaten the security of the international political system is in many ways a threat that has yet to be realised. This is particularly true in the case of AIDS ; Dupont concludes that the disease ‘could become a significant source of regional instability’ (Dupont :10). In the same sense failing states have yet to pose a serious threat to the security of the international political system. The primary concern for states in the international system is that of ‘national security’ (Wilkin : 633), so in a state that is failing, the focus will be inward and they are unlikely to threaten their neighbours and destabalise the region. The lack of interdependence of these undeveloped nations will also prevent economic crisis in the region. As Thomas highlights : ‘global governance institutions are awakening to these fault lines (inequality and poverty) as potential threats to the global order’ (Thomas : 3).

With regards to American hegemony, it could be argued that it actually brings and upholds stability in the international system. In the case of Iraq, it could be argued that they are removing someone who could pose a serious threat to the security of the international political system in the future. But this does not change the fact that it is the Americans who define who is and who isn’t a threat to security, and they therefore have the power to remove who they see fit, whether it’s right or wrong it is undoubtedly a threat to the international political system.

The question as to whether inequality and mass poverty pose a threat to security is undeniable, but the extent to which this it threatens the security of the international political system is unclear. On the one hand you have the outbreak of civil wars and AIDS which are threantening national security, and throughout the twenty-first century it is likely that they will pose more of a threat to global security as states become more interdependent and AIDS devastates the south further. As highlighted earlier, poverty and inequality are essential ingredients to the spread of global terrorism. With the goal of annihilating the enemy and transforming the status quo, it is clear that through international terrorism, poverty and inequality also pose a threat to the security of the international political system today. The inequality of American hegemony also threatens the security of the international system as mentioned. Poverty and inequality therefore threaten the security of the international political system today, and as problems deteriorate and states become more interdependent it is likely to become even more of a problem.

Bibliography

Kegley and Wittkopf : ‘World Politics’, Thompson and Wadsworth, 2003
Thomas, Caroline :
Dupont, Alan : ‘HIV/AIDS : a major international security issue’—Asia-Pacific ministerial meeting, 9-10 October 2001.
Kegley, Charles : ‘New Global Terrorism’, Pearson education, 2003
Wilkin, Peter : ‘Global poverty and orthodox security’, Third World Quarterly, August 1st 2002, vol.23, no.4 pp. 633-645.
Holbrooke, Richard C. : ‘Battling the AIDS Pandemic’,