Globalization can be traced to 1980s onwards when it gained global prominence, it has generally been debated in terms of its effects on states. The most accepted understanding of the term globalization is that it is manifestation of an interconnected and interdependent world in terms of economic, business, culture and political interactions transcending national boundaries. More significantly, it has gained relevance in terms of economic globalization for movement of goods and services and financial transactions for wellbeing and prosperity of relevant countries and the regions. However, the critics of globalization argue that it has benefited only few individual and corporations and has thus created a class difference and monopoly at massive scale. While the negative effects of globalization have been felt across the developing countries as the income distribution have remained inequitable, therefore, the envisaged benefits of development and prosperity is far from realization. On account of national security, as globalization has transcended the national boundaries, it has been argued that national security and state sovereignty has been compromised.

Significance

This research article explores various definitions and terms used to describe the notion of globalization and national security. Thereafter, a comprehensive debate has been articulated to analyze their facets, dimensions and interrelationship to establish the context of globalization as it affects national security. The article concludes with optimism giving the positive effects of globalization with due cognizance to its negative side as well. This will help in capitalizing on the strengths for common development and prosperity of citizens and also means for ensuring national security by establishing a wider connection to the interdependent world.

Globalization and its Paradigms

Globalization is generally understood as the intimate integration of the people and the countries across the continents resulting into facilitation of trade and investment, reduction in the cost of shipping and eventually breaking the artificial barriers for smooth and efficient flow of goods, knowledge, services and capital including the people across traditional nation state borders. The introduction of term globalization appeared on the international scene during 1980s, highlighting innovations, technological advancements which paved the way for speedy financial flows and transactions. Globalization manifests in extension beyond national borders of nation states. According to Robertson, the globalization means “compression of the world and magnification of awareness of the world as a whole...both concrete world-

wide interdependence and cognizance of the global whole in the twentieth century” (Robertson, 1992).Joseph Stiglitz the Nobel laureate describes phenomena of globalization as “the process of economic integration of countries, through the increasing flow of goods, services, capital and labour” (Stiglitz & Joseph, 2003). Anthony Giddens, outlines globalization as “the growing interdependence between different peoples, regions and countries in the world” (Giddens Anthony, 1990). The International Monetary Fund’s (IMF) perspective on globalization suggests that as the countries from different regions and of different size open up their markets to global economic forces, their countries eventually benefit. It also opines that as the countries globalize, their inhabitants benefit through unhindered access to variety of things, lower prices, more job market, improvement in health facilities and overall rise in the living standards. Additionally, it defines the phenomena of economic globalization “as a historical process, which is the outcome of human innovations and technological advancements”. More specifically, it mentions to the intensified incorporation of economies throughout the globe by way of movement of goods and services and capital beyond traditional borders on nation states. As globalization is manifested in various forms, therefore, “in broader sense, it has political, cultural and environmental dimensions as well” (IMF Report, 2008). Another renowned scholar Attali opines about globalization that the world in which we all live and grow is paradoxical in its progress. More significantly, “it is concurrently dwindling and growing closer and farther apart, therefore, the borders of countries are becoming increasingly irrelevant. And yet globalism is by no means glorious” (Attali, 1991). Presently, there appears to be inconsistency felt between two dimensions often appearing contradictory to the assumption that globalization is in full swipe and the way that predominant techniques for universal administration needs adequate power and expertise to control and leads this process towards sustainable direction. Therefore, as a consequence, the process of globalization is generally unsettling and discriminatory in its manifestation and resultant outcome. It has also postured novel difficulties for prevailing establishments, while concurrently waning their support and independence. A renowned analyst Holm describes that the “globalization is the phenomenal shift towards a global economic system that is no longer based on sovereign national economies but on amalgamated international souk for manufacture, delivery, and ingestion” (Holm and Sorensen, 1995). Another connotation describes “distinctive state economies are incorporated and reshaped into the structure by fundamentally international procedures and transactions” (Hirst & Thompson, 1992). The principal mechanism for this progress has been the cumulative trans-nationalization of manufactured goods, produce and the consequential growth in inspiration of international initiatives, more significantly, the outburst in the size and latitude of transactions on global fiscal markets.

Globalization and Challenges of Identity

The significant effect felt around the globe is waning identity of nation states and increasing role of multinational corporations, which are destined to take a lead role in driving the global events underpinning their business interests. Additionally, the enigmatic value of accelerating globalization is that it professes to create harmony in the society and the nation states, consequentially, it is resulting in enhanced awareness that is causing societal heterogeneity due to uneven distribution of its benefits across the countries, regions and the globe at large.

Various segments of networks whose peculiarity and shared trait depends on language, ethnicity, race and religion have step by step turned out to be vocal in voicing their discontent and disappointment enlisted by utilizing worldwide media. This current "ethnic revitalisation" to some extent was "unbridled" by the outcome of end of the Cold War. The past war was categorized as struggle among the states and adversary squares of East and West to safeguard the transcendence of national personality in any case, in the 1990's the state's customary sway to a great extent influenced by the globalization is far less viable in either convincing passive consent or absorbing national society. Hence, the minorities are currently ready to adequately reaffirm their peculiarity in light of authoritative social forces. These minority parts typically observe the state as "no longer the supporter and watchman of national interests, however rather a fellow with outside powers" (Scholte, 1997). Accordingly, after the end of cold war amid 1990's, it tends to be discussed that the main accentuation of contention may never again be built up "between and among states, yet between the state and subnational gatherings" (Gurr, 1994). The general results of these progressions have been the upsurge in the proliferation of social arrangement matters, both inside and over the fringes for all the fundamental on-screen characters in worldwide political field.

Nationally if one observes, the human beings need a feeling of security and of distinctiveness. As all individuals have a basic ambition to learn, therefore, each requires unswerving answer from the situation without which knowledge is difficult to achieve. From their social framework, the people need both appreciation and esteemed associations or connection. And in-fact most importantly, “the people want a degree of flexibility to regulate their surroundings in order to ensure that their desires are satisfied” (Burton, 1990).

Globalization and Inequality

While the paradoxical nature of globalization has been much appreciated and debated in the wider academic circles and business community, one thing aptly comes out as a result of analyses of evolving trends that the income distribution and poverty level has been uneven and unparalleled. As certain countries have embraced and adopted the tenants of globalization, they have eventually enjoyed the benefits in the form of substantial income intensifications and welfare of inhabitants in the form of high living standards and more job opportunities resulting in sharp increase in per capita income, while those countries who have demonstrated tepid response or have excluded themselves from globalization have been left behind by the rapid pace of progression. A similar phenomenon is at work within the nation states where some people and corporations have been bigger beneficiaries while some have been excluded from wider economic benefits.

Therefore, it is significant to make sure that the advantages and benefits from globalization are largely shared through wider spectrum of inhabitants. It is essentially, the responsibility of academia, think tanks and the respective national governments to educate people through policy transformations to support training and education that would assist and provide the workers with suitable abilities for positive contributions in developing the world-wide economy. Policies that expand and guarantee the provision of capitals to the poor would help in poverty alleviation and eventual lifting of their living standards at par with rising economic development. Correspondingly significant factor to consider is that the globalization should never be forbidden due to the fact that its impression has resulted into unemployment of some segments. The displacement may probably be an outcome of those factors which have diminutive concerns with globalization and more to do with unavoidable advancement in technology. It can, therefore, be assumed that the “number of people who lose under globalization is likely to be overshadowed by the number of people who eventually win".

Key Drivers of Globalization

Chief drivers of globalization as per the key note paper presented by Doctor Ishrat Hussain, ex-Governor State bank of Pakistan are the “speed of technology dissemination and assimilation, explosion in information access, demographic transition, projected shift in balance of economic power, social and environmental concerns and financial integration” (Hussain, 2011).

Classical Realism

This theory is predicated on the nature of people who are said to be “greedy, insecure and aggressive; hence, the states they govern will have the same characteristics” (John, Steve & Patricia, 2011). Realists view globalization as “not having changed the territorial division of the world into nation states”. Hence, states still retain their sovereignty and struggle for achieving power more than their adversaries.

Neo Realism

For neo-realists, the process of globalization is a “reflection of great power’s struggle for supremacy” (Gilpin, 2000; Mearsheimer, 2003). It helps to exploit “great power’s advantages and is being promoted by those which benefit more than others. As a result, globalization is just another context for everlasting struggle for hegemony” (Kapitonenko & Mykola, 2001).

Liberalism

The liberalists see multinational corporations, transnational actors and international organizations as central actors in some areas of world politics. “Order emerges not from balance of power but due to interactions between various governing arrangements”. Liberalists see globalization “as the result of a long cycle of transformation of world politics which prove that states are no longer such central actors as they were previously” (Gilpin, 2000; Mearsheimer, 2003).

Neo Liberalism

Neo-liberals lay strong emphasis on the role of international organizations like the United Nations (UNO), World Trade Organization (WTO) and other like bodies in shaping the foreign policy leaning and general behaviour of states. They believe that the “globalization is a positive force and that eventually all states will benefit from economic growth promoted by the forces of globalization”

Constructivism

Constructivists argue that globalization is an external force acting on the states which leaders often argue is a reality that they cannot be challenged. They assume that globalization can be moulded in variety of ways as it offers real chances to generate cross national social movements supported by the technological advancements.

Meanings of National Security

Barry Buzan has defined national security as “the ability of a nation to pursue successfully its national interest, as it sees them, anywhere in the world” (Buzan, 2000). However, the United States Defence Dictionary has defined national security as a “collective term encompassing both national defence and foreign relation specifically the conditions provided by a military or defence the advantages over any foreign nation or group of nations or a favourable foreign relations or a favourable defence posture which is capable of successfully resisting hostile or destructive actions from within or without both overt and covert” (Defence Dictionary. Com, 2005). It is significant to highlight that the military’s hard power dimension is not the only component which illustrate the level of national security. The other elements include internal security, border security, economic security, demographic security, resource security, disaster security, energy security, informational security, geostrategic security, health security, food security, ethnic security, environmental security, cyber security to name some significant ones.

The conceptual understanding of both globalisation and national security built in previous part leads us to three fundamental questions i.e. “Security from What? Security by Whom? Security achieved through which means?”, we arrive at this comparative table of “Security Concepts” explained by Peter Liotta, which is impacted differently by globalization and interdependence (Liotta & Peter, 2002)

If above categorization is assumed, “the impact of globalization at different levels of interaction on the facets of national security, can be tabulated as under” (Liotta & Peter, 2002)

The Level of Impact on Aspects of National Security

Following table, amplify the effects on the facets of national security.

Table 2. Level of Impact

Globalization does impact sovereignty which becomes relative to the perspective. While interdependence complicates external sovereignty in order to conscious and ratified accommodation between two states, globalization is a spatial reorganization of production, finance, industry, and other expanses which results in the local decisions to have global consequences and routine life to be moved by global happenings. Thus, sovereignty, the fundamental pillar of traditional approach to national security and taken as the “monopoly of legitimate authority over citizen and subjects within a given territory” is affected both internally and externally. Another impact is the increasing inclination towards collectivism for cooperation. Different states have sought different security and economic umbrellas thus trading in their absolute sovereignty for a relatively greater security and economic space, therefore, the nation states are increasingly becoming members of a number of overlapping organisations. It is anticipated that, while globalisation should have resulted in a more homogenous world but despite the end of ‘Cold War’ there are growing difference on the approaches of counter terrorism, which is affecting the entire globe today. Therefore, it can be inferred that the impact of globalisation on sovereignty is hybrid.

In the prevailing environment, there is visible transformation in the prosecution of wars from “Clausewitzian interstate wars to wars of a third kind civil ethnic wars and wars between small states” (Echevarria & Joseph, 2003). Comprehensive national security now is all encompassing, covering wider subjects affecting human security like ecology, health, education and trade to name a few, as threats are manifested in economic, environmental, and disease-related domains. “The dimensions and the size of the military instruments are diminishing, Defence spending is also comparatively decreasing and state’s military doctrines are ending offense in the favour of defence” (Ripsman, Norrin, & Paul, 2005). The impact of globalisation on military security in traditional security paradigm can be gauged on four factors as tabulated at Table 3 ( Ripsman, Norrin, & Paul, 2005). From here, it can be inferred that the global phenomena affect the states differently conditional to their comparative power and status within the global system.

It is the capability of states to adopt policies for economic growth in the progressive manner. “In today's multifaceted structure of international trade, categorized by multi-national agreements, inter-dependence and accessibility of resources etc., the economic security guarantees the most important element of national security” (Buzan, 2000). Globalization though has led to perceptible weakening of conventional frontiers with economics supposed to be the new currency of national security. A struggling economy leads to poverty and desolation for the inhabitants. “In today’s world, countries do not aim to conquer lands but to dominate and control markets” (Flanagan, Stephen J., Ellen L. Frost, Richard L & Kugler, 2001). We infer that globalization has mixed effects on the countries depending upon their national power, location and international standing.

In 1993 a group of researchers, called Copenhagen School, articulated the notion of societal security as “the ability of a society to persist in its essential character under changing conditions and possible or actual threats.” Societal security may become a prominent issue as it relates to the “threats and vulnerabilities that affect patterns of communal identity and culture”. Migration is an important reason to changing demographic patterns, therefore, beyond a certain number, migration creates societal tensions (Adamson, & Fiona, 2006).

Environmental security is the viability for life sustenance with three significant elements i.e.; “preventing or repairing military damage to the environment, preventing or responding to environmentally caused conflicts and protecting the environment due to its inherent moral value” (Dreher, Axel, Gaston, Martens & Martens, 2008).

The expression of natural security started from numerous establishments, however the conspicuous among these were associations like World Resources Institute and the World Watch Institute in Washington DC. The USSR, in its 'new logic on security' in the late 1980s, likewise proposed that the criticalness of ecological security as vital national security challenge. The mishap at Chernobyl atomic reactor in 1986 is a valid example. Deforestation in Brazil and the sweltering summer of 1988 in the USA when the Mississippi stream was decreased to the point that the business route was upset, assembled their consideration also as supporting argument in this case.

Similarly, the hazy sky in China and excessive flooding in most parts of South Asia and severe drought in African continent are some of the issues whose impact has been created by the environment.

Globalization raises new threats and vulnerabilities to traditional and human security approaches.

Varied examples of worldwide exchange, assembling and fund change into new connections which if not legitimately managed is probably going to additionally devastate the world's poor with horrible social costs, which is clear in the zone of network wellbeing. There is rising affirmation that the weakening dimensions of wellbeing and endemic sicknesses, for example, AIDS are pulverizing a few creating nations, modestly implanted in the components of the worldwide economy and remotely sanctioned authoritative troubling territorial sub-frameworks established by the sub-Saharan Africa. "Threats related to Cyber misuse, trafficking, relocation, fear mongering and multiplication of savagery are being distinguished as significant dangers" (Echevarria & Joseph, 2003). While there is mounting signs that transnational systematized violations (particularly in opiates, human dealing, and falsifying) worldwide fear mongering and cross-country movements have upsetting ramifications for the nations.

The term national security comprehensively covers all facets of external and internal threats as well as all dimensions of human security. Globalization though has generally benefitted the world; however, its impact is not uniform. The degree and direction of impact is directly related to a nation state’s capacity to cope with various security threats, risks and vulnerabilities. Therefore, a hybrid approach considering both traditional and liberal approaches to security will be best suitable option taking into account comprehensive national power of a country. In the contemporary times, the globalization is perceived as an unrelenting occurrence. However, its impetus can be impacted by multiple factors like determination, political will and accessibility of infrastructure to name a few. Indeed, the world is considered to be on constant road to peace and affluence albeit on a roller coaster ride due to changing often conflicting geo- strategic and geo- political national interests of major powers. That brittleness of almost a century ago still occurs as the world is transiting through the aftershocks of 9/11. The current mayhem in financial markets postures distinct strain on the global economy because of aftershocks and economic slowdown of global economy. Credit market stresses have deepened across affluent classes and banks, triggering a fiscal tremor which has been branded as the gravest since the days of great depression of 1930s. These occurrences are recaps that are aimed at the interruption in the process of globalization would eventually manifest in slowing down of flow of capital, services, goods and the people which are certainly not encouraging for international economy and may result in adversarial consequences.