To what extent is it correct to argue that globalisation is a threat to the state and to the unique entity that is the European Union?

although certain responsibilities still remain at a lower level of decision

making”. (2) Clearly this is not yet the case in the EU. David Held et al, describe the EU as “neither an international regime nor as a federal state, but as a network of states involving the pooling of sovereignty.”(3)

As globalisation takes many forms I will look at its possible threats to the EU in the following categories; militarily, economically, people and nations. Firstly, is there a global military threat to the EU? Although much of Europe has been at peace for he last fifty years many small-scale conflicts have occurred in recent years which have threatened the security of the EU. The problems in the former Yugoslavia and in particular Bosnia, Serbia and Kosovo have shown that the EU even when operating as a peacekeeper cannot currently support its own military personnel without the aid of the USA and the agreement of Russia. Indeed in the recent NATO bombings of Serbia some eighty-percent of the ordnance and sixty-percent of fuel used was supplied by the USA. However, it is clear that there is no military threat from the USA to the EU but the proliferation of nuclear weapons technology, mainly stolen from former Soviet states does pose a major problem for the EU. The potential for rogue states outside the EU to threaten its borders or major cities is a problem and can be linked to globalisation of technology and communications over the last twenty years. Even the newly proposed EU defence force despite being a step forward for Europe is seen as a threat by both the USA and Russia and by some NATO members as a threat to European stability.

Probably the biggest threat to the EU from globalisation however is economic rather than military. Indeed when the term globalisation is used it is more often than not an economic issue that is being highlighted. Economic globalisation takes many forms. This includes the actions of multi-national corporations (MNCs) and of governments which have a direct or indirect effect on the EU and its members. For example the ownership of the means of production and supply of raw materials often do not lie in the hands of government but in the hands of MNCs. Decisions by these MNCs, where for instance to site factories and where to buy materials directly affect the economy of the EU. Many MNCs are switching production to emerging countries in the second world such as Brazil and India, where labour costs are a fraction of those within the EU thus affecting the manufacturing industry within the EU. Also as can be seen recently when the USA lowered its interest rates to try and re-invigorate its economy many EU states followed suit and this then went on to affect the ASEAN countries in a similar way. The EU’s fledgling currency the Euro is also at the mercy of fluctuations in the global economy and has lost over twenty-percent of its original value due to the strength of the US economy and US dollar. This problem will possibly be improved if and when all member states of the EU are part of the single currency as a trading area when expansion is complete the EU will be an even bigger global economic power than it is currently. Equally when in 1997 a currency crisis emerged in Asia its effects rippled across the world affecting not only the EU but also financial markets globally.  Held and

McGrew describe this growth in global economics as, “transforming the conditions under which the immediate and long-term prosperity of state and peoples across the globe is determined.”(4) Thus, economically globalisation may possibly more of a positive than a threat to the EU. This as the combined economic strength of fifteen nations is surely better equipped to withstand global economic pressures than a single small state such as the UK if as some politicians wish the UK leaves the EU.

Another form of globalisation, which may pose a threat to the EU, is that of people, or more specifically the subject of human migration. With the collapse of the former USSR and as previously mentioned the conflicts in the Balkans, many thousands of refugees and economic migrants have been arriving within the EU and in particular the UK. As the social and welfare conditions in Eastern Europe and Africa are almost negligible by comparison the EU offers many advantages to such migrants. These include improved health care, welfare benefits, higher living standards and political freedom. Under the 1951 UN Declaration of Human Rights, all signatories must provide safe haven for those people under threat of persecution or death in their own country. However, it is clear that a large majority of asylum seekers entering the EU are not in any physical danger in their own country but are simply seeking a better way of life within the EU. Recently highlighted cases including a ship deliberately beached in southern France so that its refugee passengers could

apply for asylum in France has alerted the EU into tightening its border controls. In Spain and Italy the threat comes from North Africa and the Balkans and when Poland enters the EU the borders of the union will stretch from the Ukraine in the east to Portugal in the west. This migration possibly is a threat to the EU as it may bring with it some of the crime and racial tension, which exists in eastern Europe and Africa and may exacerbate the same problems within the EU. However, with countries such as Germany forecasting a drop of some ten million in its population over the next ten years, (5) it could be argued that rather than being a threat, this migration of such a vast natural resource of people could be of benefit rather than a threat to the EU.

Finally, the threat to the EU’s and its individual nations by the advent of globalisation must be addressed. Is the individual political and cultural characteristics of a state and the EU threatened by globalisation? Politically even members of the EU are worried about further political union and integration within the EU. Recently during their presidency the French president Jacques Chirac commented in Cannes that the French identity and culture would not be diminished by the EU integration. Chirac’s contention was that a Frenchman would always be just that, French, and that the EU would never submerge or threaten that identity or culture. However, outside the EU other nations do fear a loss of national and cultural identity as

the process of Americanisation globally continues through the media such as CNN and the Internet, which is based on the English language. Certainly states such as Mexico and Canada feel threatened by the power of the USA and the effects it has on their own national identity, culture and language. Also France has introduced legislation to ensure the purity of its language for example “banning Franglais (a combination of English and French such as “le weekend”) from official and public use.”(6) It could therefore be argued that there is a limited cultural threat from globalisation to the EU.

In conclusion it can be seen that although the whole world will evolve and change due to globalisation, it may not necessarily threaten the unique state and entity which is the EU. Economically all states are somewhat at the mercy of MNCs and the fluctuations which occur in the world’s financial markets and the globalising influences they bring to bear. Militarily the world has been globalised for many years with the existence of Intercontinental Ballistic Missiles (IBMs) but in terms of conventional warfare and peacekeeping the EU will strengthen its position when it eventually establishes its own defence force. This will hopefully compliment the global role of NATO and the UN and not threaten the EU as an entity.  Indeed, the expansion of the EU from its current fifteen members to the projected twenty-five over the next ten years could well protect the EU from the threat globalisation. The problem may arise however that the EU’s expansion may well pose a threat the uniqueness of other states.

References

1. Benyon, J. and Dunkerley, D. Globalisation: The Reader Althon Press, London, UK. 2000: page 4
2. Minschull, G. Europe into the 21st century Redwood, London, UK, 1999: page 418
3. Held, D. McGrew, A. Goldblatt, D. Perraton, J. Global Transformations Polity, Cambridge, UK, 2000: page 74
4. Ibid. page 235
5. BBC Panorama Broadcast 8th February 2001 BBC2
6. Held, D. McGrew, A. Goldblatt, D. Perraton, J. Global Transformations Polity, Cambridge, UK, 2000: page 374

Bibliography

Texts used for background research for this paper.

1. Benyon, J. and Dunkerley, D. Globalisation: The Reader Althon Press, London, UK. 2000
2. Minschull, G. Europe into the 21st century Redwood, London, UK, 1999
3. Held, D. McGrew, A. Goldblatt, D. Perraton, J. Global Transformations Polity, Cambridge, UK, 2000
4. Kenwood, A. and Lougheed, A. The Growth of the international economy 1820-2000 Routledge, London, UK, 1999