RESTRICTED

EFFECT OF GLOBALIZATION AND HOW IT AFFECTS FORM A

NATIONAL SECURITY PERSPECTIVE.
BY KAPTEN MUHAMMAD YUSRI BIN MOHD YUNOS (3011485)

Something called globalization has become a surging, relentless, and

irreversible force in our era. But what is it? What is new and different about it?
Does it make the world safer or more dangerous? What can Malaysian Armed
Forces do about the new challenges that it poses? What goals, strategies,
tools, and ways of making decisions does Malaysian Armed Forces need in
this new environment? Supporters claim that globalization will eventually force
all governments to pursue peaceful, democratic, rules-based, and marketoriented policies, resulting in a richer, healthier, safer, more educated, and
more stable world population. Critics believe, by contrast, that globalization
feeds corporate profits at the expense of workers, undermines democracy,
accelerates environmental destruction, lowers health and labor standards,
imposes cultural homogeneity, feeds crime, and escalates armed conflict.
From a Malaysia policy perspective, globalization can be a catalyst (if
not a cause) of both outcomes, depending on the specific policies and
attributes of the receiving country. Because of its speed and reach, todays
globalization can be stabilizing or destabilizing, disruptive or enriching, a tool
of peacemakers or racketeers. On balance, globalization benefits the
Malaysia and other democratic and quasi-democratic countries. Sweeping
arguments about whether globalization is good or bad for the rest of the
world, however, shed little light on real-life situations because it can be either.
No government can stop it, but an important goal of Malaysia foreign and
defence policy should be to help channel it in benign directions. This task is
urgent because at present, economic and technological globalization is
outstripping or highlighting the total absence of global and regional
institutional means for coping with the impact of globalization on ordinary
people and on the environment in which they live. This mixed assessment has
important consequences for Malaysia foreign policy and security policy. If
1
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
globalization is making the world uniformly richer and safer, the Malaysia can
gradually wind down its defence spending and reorient its foreign policy away
from security threats. If the world is splitting apart and becoming more violent,
the Malaysia Armed Forces will have to become more security-oriented and
more focused on its limited vital interests, with or without allies. If the world is
reacting unevenly to globalization, then the Malaysian Armed Forces will need
to remain globally engaged on more or less the same scale as it is now, but
with somewhat different priorities and missions.
Globalization, far from being a media buzzword, is real, mostly new,
and quite different from its pre-World War I ancestor. Coming to grips with this
force calls for substantially transforming the way that Malaysian leaders think
about the world and adjusting their policy instruments accordingly. Malaysian
policymakers should forge a strategy based on cross-disciplinary analysis
informed by all aspects of globalization, including not only commercial,
financial, technological, military, political, environmental, and social aspects,
but also cultural, religious, psychological, educational, and historical
perspectives. Holistic thinking has become a national security imperative.
It is now widely accepted by policy-makers and informed publics that
the concept of security has been broadened and deepened beyond its
traditional narrow focus on external and forceful threats to the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of the nation-state. But the idea of protecting and promoting
national security is still a potent, and profoundly democratic, concept: leaders
have a primary responsibility to ensure (and respond to) the security concerns
of their citizens. This brainstorming note provides a set of principles for a
coherent and policy-relevant vision of national security in a globalized and
networked world. It offers guidance for Malaysian Armed Forces policymakers and publics facing potential risks and threats from diverse and distant
sources, and affecting citizens directly and indirectly in diverse ways.

2
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
It first unpacks the main elements of contemporary national security
and then illustrates the implications of these for Malaysia in different issue
areas. It concludes that a forward-looking national security policy for
Malaysia in a globalized world has little to do with traditional geo-political
issues, and should focus on mitigating the potential or actual negative
consequences of the rapid economic and socio-cultural transformations that
could have a direct or indirect impact on Norwegian national security. Three
potential areas for initiatives are identified. It concludes with an analysis of the
importance of promoting national security through niche diplomacy and
flexible multilateralism.
Globalization is a long-term process, not a static condition. It is the
nonstop aftershock of the current explosion of knowledge. It has unleashed a
rapid, ongoing, uneven, and sometimes disruptive process of expansion of
cross-border networks and flows not only of goods, services, money, and
technology, but also of ideas, information, culture, people, and power. It
should not be seen in exclusively linear terms, but rather as a complex
dynamic in which global, regional, national, local, and individual forces are all
in play, often at the same time. It brings into being an elite culture shaped and
colored by information, entertainment, and money the world of cybercafes and
caff latt, Madonna and MTV, Web pages and dot-coms, hedge funds and
derivatives.
Globalization comes in many forms. Of which economic globalization is
only one. Time lags between these different forms make the mix lumpy,
uneven, and occasionally flammable. In a globalizing world, many
contradictory things are true at the same time and will be for the foreseeable
future. States are losing power; states are not losing power. Groups such as
the Kurds and the Chechens dream of nationhood; East Timor has just won it;
and Europeans are moving beyond it. Depending on the site, the rule of law is
rising or breaking down. Local culture is threatened or flowering. Religion is
fading away or undergoing a revival. And so on. Despite these near-term
3
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
contradictions, the definition of globalization as a longterm process implies a
transition to globality a more interconnected world system in which
interdependent networks and flows surmount traditional boundaries (or make
them irrelevant).
Globality as global governance. The idea that the world community
should assume greater collective responsibility in a wide range of areas,
including security. This notion highlights the governance gap, the disparity
between the existence of global rules governing commercial transactions and
the absence or vagueness of such rules in other domains. Finally, globality
suggests the basic unity of the human spirit, expressed through global
awareness, a consciousness of common humanity, concern for the Earth, and
a common set of basic norms. If globalization is a transition to globality, then
the defining characteristic of globalization is movement toward integration.
In a popular book, Thomas Friedman defines globalization in part as a
dynamic, ongoing process involving the inexorable integration of markets,
nation-states, and technologies to a degree never witnessed before.
Economist and globalization analyst Dani Rodrik uses a similar definition. The
National Security Strategy issued by the White House in December 1999
defines globalization as the process of accelerating economic, technological,
cultural, and political integration. The Defence Science Boards report on
globalization and security defines it as the integration of the political,
economic, and cultural activities of geographically and/or nationally separated
peoples. Integration refers to the process of incorporating different elements
into a whole. One meaning of integration implies intensified contact, but not
necessarily common values. High levels of immigration, for example, may
bring people from different cultures together, but they may clash. Recent
violence against immigrants in southern Spain is an example. Another
meaning of integration implies close ties and a sense of distinct identities
among members of ethnic and religious groups.

4
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
Globalization helped to link aggrieved members of a diaspora. A higher
form of integration stands for tolerance, inclusion, and a common identity
based on norms rather than on skin colour or language. Globalization has
facilitated bonding among groups that define themselves in terms of values
(for example, environmentalists and human rights activists). Integration in this
higher sense is the basis of a pluralistic community the opposite of
segregation, exclusion, apartheid, or ethnic cleansing. The way that
globalization fosters integration in any of the three forms that is, intensified
contact, separate identities, or a pluralistic community respecting common
norms embodies a change in the way that people organize themselves, relate
to each other, and exercise power.
Relations among nations. Integration implies movement toward a
global market, a legal and regulatory framework, a sense of political
community, and common standards of governance and justice. At the
moment, the European Union is the only major post World War II example of
comprehensive and durable supranational integration, and many factors
besides globalization contributed to this outcome (centuries of war between
France and Germany, to name an obvious one). Globalization appears to be
fostering norms-based, pluralistic, institutional integration only among
democracies and quasi-democratic states that have put in place a stable
security framework, the rudiments of a market-oriented economy, a rulesbased system of justice, and a certain minimal level of tolerance and civic
trust and only then imperfectly and after decades (if not centuries) of struggle.
Differences in Globalization Today.

Sceptics

argue

that

globalization is not new. It certainly has historical roots. By the end of the 19th
century,

the

global

economy

was

marked

by

high

degree

of

interdependence. Technology had advanced dramatically. There was even a

global culture of sorts. Borders were relatively more open than they are today,
especially within colonial empires. In fact, it was not until the 1970s that trade
as a percentage of global output reached the levels achieved before World
5
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
War I. Several economists have pointed to indicators such as these to argue
that globalization today is not really new. These comparisons, however, are
limited and misleading in at least two respects.
The Integration Of Capital And Commodity Markets. This has
surpassed all previous indicators, and the process is continuing to this day.(9)
A number of historical factors have contributed to this trend. After World War
II, statesmen decided to fashion an institutional framework to promote global
trade and growth and to create and manage the international monetary
system. The post-World War II boom in East Asian economies and
improvements in transportation technology (notably container ships and jet
engines) also contributed greatly to global economic integration.
The Revolution In Information Technology.

Accompanied

by

the

spread of personal computers and the instant availability of information. The

characteristics of this explosion of communication speed, compression,
pervasiveness, global reach, and potential to touch the daily lives of every
human being on this planet are unprecedented. Sceptics may argue that the
invention of the steam engine, the railway, the telegraph, the automobile, and
the telephone were revolutionary as well, and indeed they were. But the story
of globalization in the last quarter of the 20th century illustrates that
differences in degree have added up to a significant, relentless, and
irreversible difference in kind. Globalization should not be enshrined as the
only cause of change. In some cases, it may be marginal, but it should not be
dismissed as an intellectual fad.
Hartland in Buzan (1991), has defined national security as the ability of
a nation to pursue successfully its national interest, as it sees them, any place
in the world. The inclusion of traditional defence policy and also the nonmilitary actions of a state in the national security is introduced by Louw
(Buzan, 1991). US Defence Dictionary has defined national security as a
collective term encompassing both national defence and foreign relation
6
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
specifically the condition provided by a military or defence advantage over any
foreign nation or group of nations or a favourable foreign relations positions or
a defence posture capable of successfully resisting hostile or destructive
action from within or without, overt or covert. In this light, national security
may also means the protection of the political, economic, psychosocial,
military, geo-ecological and techno-scientific environment of the nation.
Based on those definition and todays circumstances, national security
is a very broad concept. It encompasses the internal strength, cohesiveness
and firmness of the purposes of the nation itself. It is the ability of the state to
exist and develop in a rapidly changing international environment. However,
there is no exact and standard definition of national security for it is always
been compared to other states view of security. The perception of security
differs from one state to another.

National security involves protecting citizens from existential and

pervasive threats to their personal safety, physical well-being, and core
values. This vision has two main features. Captures The Central
Responsibilities Of The Modern State. Providing security from the threat of
violence; creating the conditions for economic (and social) well-being; and
representing the aspirations and values of a political community. National
Security And Political Problems. It distinguishes national security issues
from ordinary political problems by their urgent, existential, or pervasive
nature.
From this vantage point, Malaysia faces few (if any) immediate threats
to the physical security and safety of its citizens, and its existing alliance
commitments adequately provide for its national defence. In several key
areas, however, pervasive (and potentially serious) security concerns can be
identified that could have an impact on the well-being and core values of
Malaysian, if not on their physical security. These arise from the two main sets
of consequences of globalization. Effects of contagion and spillover.
7
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
Increasing economic globalization with consequences in the economic,
environmental, and health spheres. Rapid socio-cultural globalization. The
threats to core Malaysian (and Eastern Country) values posed by rapid sociocultural globalization in different regions of the world with consequences for
internal armed violence, development and state-building, and transnational
violence.
There are so many implications cause by globalization towards the
national security. It operated 24/7, while we are in the bed; our enemies are
looking on us by using their satellite. The information is easily searched and
shared with another side of the world. This paper will discuss on seven areas
of globalization influence towards national security. It created globalization
cycle which cordoned the nation national security and the influence time is
24/7 (Rowntree, Lewis, Price, & William, 2008). They are created complexity
and new challenges, wider the scope of national security, national security
becomes more vulnerable, borderless security environment, infected national
culture,

tradition

and

values,

increased

of

international

crime

and

transnational threat.

Economic globalization is a long-term phenomenon, which has seen

the ratio of global trade to GDP increase from 20 percent in 1990 to more than
30 percent today. Improvements in communication and transportation
facilitate the more rapid (and frequent) movement of people, goods and
services around the world. Tighter linkages in the world economy mean states
are increasingly vulnerable to shocks, contagion effects and spillover
consequences of developments in far-flung financial and commodity markets.
Three specific consequences economic, environmental and health thus
ought to be considered as part of national security policy.

Geo-Economics.

Guiding

Assumptions:

Continuing

economic

growth, especially in Asia and China, will have two direct consequences. First,
8
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
it will maintain medium-term pressure on resource and raw material prices a
situation that has already benefited Malaysia through its oil revenues. Second,
it will continue to increase inequality, especially within states, as dual
economies (one part integrated in the world economy, the other highly
localized and relatively backward) become the norm, not the exception.
Increased inequality will also have negative consequences on regional, global
and national security (see below). Implications: Malaysia is an export and
import dependent advanced economy, specializing in a few areas in which it
has a comparative advantage. It is vulnerable to price shocks (in both
directions) in raw materials, and is closely integrated with the ASEAN
economic zone. It thus has a sustained national interest in ensuring access to
markets and resources, and in policies that encourage fairer income
distribution within and between states.

Environment and National Security. Guiding Assumptions: No issue

has captured more recent public attention than global climate change, yet the
appropriate policy responses will continue to lag behind the problem. Even if
effective policies were put in place today, the consequences of previous
practices will have massive regional and local impacts in the next few
decades. Extreme weather events leading to large scale displacement and
economic instability (drought, floods, heat waves, storms) will become more
frequent and devastating. Implications: Small states have very little leadership
to exercise in environmental politics, given the massive economic and political
interests at stake. What they can do, however, is act to deal with the impact of
the current situation. This means implementing national risk mitigation
programmes (in the Arctic and populated coastal areas), and working to
identify global hot spots where the consequences will be the most dramatic
or costly to cope with.

Health Security and Global Health Governance. The 2003 outbreak of

Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome (SARS), which killed more than 662
9
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
people in worldwide and infected more than 7,800 people mostly in
Asia since it emerged in southern China in November. Two people
have died of the disease in Malaysia, which has been chosen as the
venue of a two-day global forum on Sars on 17 June. Highlighted the
potential risks of rapid disease transmission to advanced industrial states.
Transmission risks and outbreaks for diseases such as avian influenza and
extreme

drug

resistant

tuberculosis

will

increase,

with

significant

consequences for advanced industrial economies. Health insecurities are best

dealt with at the source, which implies large-scale cooperative investments
(through development assistance and capacity-building) in improving public
health care and delivery, and health surveillance and monitoring systems,
throughout the developing world. This is an area in which Malaysia could play
a leadership role, and one that will both save lives and safeguard national
security.

National Security and Socio-cultural Globalization. Globalization is

more than an economic phenomenon: it uproots populations, disrupts
traditional social and political relations, exposes people to new (and
sometimes threatening) ideas, creates cultural clashes, and transforms entire
ways of life. Rapid socio-cultural change will continue to provoke alienation
and reaction among vulnerable groups (especially young, educated and
under-employed men). This affects internal armed violence, the stability of
state institutions, and the prospects for transnational violence and terror.

Internal Conflict and Armed Violence. Major inter-state wars have

virtually disappeared, and even the number of violent internal conflicts is
slowly declining. What is more worrying, however, is the increasing fragility of
state institutions, and the erosion of the states monopoly of the legitimate use
of force. In vulnerable or resource-rich states (Sudan, Nigeria, Indonesia,
Philippines, Democratic Republic of Congo, Brazil), weakening of state
institutions will create conditions for large-scale internal violence. Levels of
10
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
internal violence already exceed that of civil conflicts in such places as
Guatemala or Brazil or Nigeria, and will increase. Internal armed violence will
have political and economic spillover effects, affecting political stability,
economic investment, humanitarian relief, development programming, access
to resources and the achievement of the Millennium Development Goals. This
is a key issue in which Malaysia could pursue effective niche diplomacy with
multilateral partners to develop and promote effective violence prevention and
reduction programmes, restrict the circulation and availability of weapons,
mediate and resolve internal conflicts andimprove security sector governance.

State-Building and Development Assistance. Traditional development

policy has been primarily concerned with poverty reduction, infrastructure and
welfare concerns. Development assistance, while enjoying some successes,
has failed to produce stable, viable and legitimate state institutions in many
parts of Africa, Asia and Central America, and has begun to adopt a wider
focus on governance, and on the links between development, security and
state-building. Malaysia can play a lead role in refocusing development
assistance on the development-security nexus, and on building state
capacities to deliver welfare, security and political representation. Long-term
investments in the construction of stable and legitimate state institutions will
enhance security and well-being around the world, and help ease the
economic and socio-cultural tensions produced by globalization.

Transnational

Violence

and

Terror.

The

current

threat

from

transnational terrorism is part of a larger phenomenon of dislocated and

alienated individuals coalescing around millenarian or extremist political
agendas. Easy access to the tools of violence will facilitate episodic attacks
on core Western interests and values, even if the current threat from Islamist
extremism ebbs and flows. Transnational extremist violence is best dealt with
through robust police and intelligence cooperation, in which Malaysia can play
11
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
a specific, but relatively small, part. It is neither a major target nor a haven for
extremism, and is unlikely to become one in the near future.

Of the six issue areas discussed above, the comparative advantage or

potential niche for political and diplomatic initiatives in three of them health
security and global health governance, internal conflict and armed violence
and state-building and development. Within each of these issue areas,
Malaysia can articulate a clear link between foreign policy initiatives and its
national security concerns, to increase the public support for and legitimacy of
specific initiatives. It is beyond the scope of this brainstorming note to identify
specific policies or programmes that can be pursued within these three issue
areas, but two principles should guide policy development: niche diplomacy
and flexible multilateralism.

Successful niche diplomacy in pursuit of national security interests

depends on three conditions policies that safeguard and promote core
national values (democracy, equality, social welfare, human rights, peaceful
resolution of conflicts). Policies that promote multi-level governance and a
nested vision of sovereignty, in which a sharp divide between the domestic
and international spheres becomes increasingly irrelevant for the policies and
decisions that affect peoples daily lives. diplomatic comparative advantage
and sustainable multilateral partnerships, both Northern and Southern.
Flexible multilateralism involves recognizing that formal multilateral
institutions are today less able to resolve inter-state disputes and coordination
problems (economic, geopolitical, or environmental). They are, however, evermore actively engaged in multi-level governance: in the promotion and
implementation of policies and programmes that reach deep into the
sovereign domain of states and reshape the relationships between citizens
and their state. Flexible multilateralism is also driven by cooperation among
smaller groups of states based on shared interests and goals, and a problem12
RESTRICTED

RESTRICTED
solving approach free of the burden of universal and consensus-based
diplomacy.
Malaysia is perfectly placed to embrace niche diplomacy and flexible
multilateralism, and to promote specific policies in the areas identified above,
as part of a coherent strategy for promoting its national security in a
globalized world. (3,400 words)

13
RESTRICTED