To explain how globalization rebuilt public policy and social behavior, we study the different political, economic, and social actors - public or private, individual or collective - and the exchanges and interactions between them that are remaking international relations. This course is inspired by a French sociological and historical approach to international relations. This course is also available in french version: www.coursera.org/learn/espace-mondial-fr/
Questioning Regionalism Today
Loading...
來自 Sciences Po 的課程
Espace mondial：法国视角下的国际研究
個評分
從本節課中
Regionalism
The nation-state territory is challenged by new kinds of integration, and particularly by fragile regional constructions.
與講師見面
Bertrand BadieProfessor
Marie-Françoise DurandProfessor
We are now in a very strange moment.
Are we blocked in the third step
of regional integration,
of post-war regional integration?
After traditional regionalism, neoregionalism
we are now blocked
when neoregionalism doesn’t work
as it was expected
and traditional regionalism
is more and more faddy.
We can say that
we meet a real crisis of regional integration
and this crisis is not only affected Europe.
Of course Europe is more affected
than all the other parts of the world
because Europe was really bearing
this new regional project
and was in the first time the motor
of this regional integration,
an example for all the world.
But all the regional items
are now questioned.
In one hand it’s questioned
through main kind of crises
that we will take into account together;
on the other hand,
regionalism is now overcome by transregionalism
and by this new vision by which
is much more important to cooperate
when countries share the same visions,
even if they are not neighbors
than among neighboring countries
which are not sharing the same values
and the same targets.
This crisis of the regional order
and regional integration
is first of all a conceptual crisis.
Now there is a kind of anarchy about regionalism
as we are observing in the world
different kinds of regional integration
which are not similar
but which are oriented
toward different perspectives.
For instance by now in the present world
we can observe traditional interstate cooperation
through for instance continental integration.
This integration is not very deep,
is not very important,
it’s much more an intergovernmental cooperation.
It’s the case for instance
with the organization of American states
or with the African Union, or the Arab League,
it’s only a political cooperation
and a limited cooperation
which is not really threatening
the national sovereignties.
The second one is a little bit different.
That’s to say interstate cooperation
with precise economic target.
That’s to say no political integration
but the willing to promote
an economic integration
which is mainly based on trade
and intra-zone trade.
It’s the case for instance of SADC,
which is growing among the Southern countries of Africa.
It’s also the case of NAFTA in Northern America.
It’s the case of the SAARC in South Asia.
All these organizations are promoting
this economic cooperation
without really being concerned
by political cooperation
and specially political integration.
The third one is an inter-state cooperation
which is based on economy
but which is targeting the spillover
of economy to politics.
This is the case of European Union,
which started with economic cooperation
and which is promoting more and more
a political cooperation,
with the idea that this economic cooperation
as it is more and more intensified
will spillover economics to politics.
And it’s also the case of many regional cooperation
in Latin and in South America.
And we have also a fourth category,
which is quite different from all the others,
which is called openregionalism,
which is not organized through institutions,
which does not target overcoming national sovereignty,
but which is protecting national sovereignty,
but which is promoting an active but a free cooperation,
bilateral cooperation inside the arena.
It’s for instance the case for APEC.
It’s very difficult now to define
how these four models are able to coexist
when they are competing,
but it’s also very difficult to say
which one is the winner.
The first one is an old-fashion one
and probably not able to develop
now in the global world,
but it’s not quite clear
that the three others are really efficient.
And this is my second point:
beyond the conceptual crisis,
a real political and social crisis,
which is dramatically affecting
the regional integration process.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
I think that regional integration is now in crisis
everywhere around the world,
and I will discriminate between
three dimensions of this crisis.
The first one is an institutional crisis.
Regional institutions don’t work anymore,
everywhere around the world.
The second crisis is an economic crisis,
that’s to say all these regional organizations
are no more able to deal with
the present economic crisis.
And the third one
is a kind of rebirth of nationalism,
what I would call a neo-nationalism,
which is probably collapsing,
which is attacking the heart of the process
of regional integration.
First one, we observe everywhere
around the world a kind of failure
of the regional institutions,
this is particularly important in Europe.
You remember that Europe invested
on its institutions rather than Asian countries
which were much more promoting
their own integration
through economic and social dynamic.
But Europe is probably trapped
by its institutional culture.
European Union tries to promote new institutions,
new treaties are succeeding
but are not successful.
Many of these new institutions
were even rejected by the people sovereignty
when they voted through referendum,
like it was the case in France.
And this is triggering in Europe
a lack of confidence among people,
that’s to say a gap,
bigger and bigger gap between societies,
European societies and institutions.
Now European institutions are
more and more working for themselves,
for their own agents,
for their own actors.
And so this gap is dangerously blocking
the process of regional integration.
This gap between social and politics
is probably the worst pathology
in political development.
The second crisis now is affecting economies.
You remember that European Union
was created for reaching economic targets
and for reconstructing the old continent.
Now, as Europe is meeting this very strong crisis,
which started around 2007-2008,
we observe that Europe is no more able
to face this crisis,
for a very simple reason
which is very important in my mind
is that European integration
was considered as a kind of stake holding,
that’s to say addition of interests.
When the context is good,
when the situation is positive,
this stake holding is working
and is working positively,
but when the crisis is strong,
stake holding is not working
and must be replaced by a real sharing.
But sharing implies to question national sovereignty,
and now Europe is confronted to this opposition
between stake holding and sharing.
A stake holding, which is promoted by
national sovereignties,
competing national sovereignties
and sharing which implies a kind of solidarity,
which would overcome national sovereignties.
And the third level of this crisis
must be found in this new nationalism
which is now growing in all the European countries.
In a recent poll made by
Eurobarometer in May 2014,
59% of European people don’t trust in Europe.
And they are 81% in Greece precisely
where the economic crisis is severe,
and they are 67% in Spain
and even in Germany 59%.
And that’s why
this gap between public opinion
and European institutions
creates a kind of new coming back to nations
and which is fueling this free riding strategy
among the European governments
which are playing their own cards, more and more.
And this is also resulting in a new sovereignism
in which regional integration
is no more conceived as a solution,
but is more and more built up
as a kind of scape-goat for taking
into account all the failures
and difficulties met by people and public opinion.
Ladies and Gentlemen,
we don’t know how the future is made,
but we are now in a crucial moment:
either people in the world
are able to invent a new kind
of regional integration
and they will overcome this crisis,
or they are not able to do that,
and people will escape
either to this trans regionalism
that I mentioned
or to a new nationalism,
which is probably the main threat of the world,
because there is no compatibility between
national sovereignty and a global order.
It’s exactly what we will
take into account in the next lecture.
