Globalization and War [Paperback]

A necessary and frequently impressive introduction to the connections between globalisation and war. Not globalisation as a cause of war, or as some strange pacific beast that will end conflict for all. And certainly not globalisation as a teleological process of technological and economic change that sweeps the ways of the old before its pristine post-modernity. Rather, Barkawi opts for a more precise, and much more enlightening, view of the variable political processes of interconnectedness, and how this has long defined and constituted what we now think of as stable nation-states and their attendant common-sense histories.

Historical illustrations abound, and some will surprise even those who know that the simplistic history of globalisation is irredeemably flawed. A few examples:

As of September 2003 US forces included some 30,000 foreign-born, non-US citizens. 50,000 Indian soldiers died in World War I alone, out of a peak total of almost 600,000 Indian troops who were used by the British Empire to suppress rebellions all around the colonies. The Correlates of War Project does not record the CIA-sponsored overthrow of Jacobo Arbenz in Guatemala in 1954 as a war, because the US 'only' trained, armed and funded the invaders (and provided them with extensive aerial bombardment support) but did not lose a sufficient number of uniformed combat troops. Between 1955 and 1981 some 400,000 Third World officers were brought to the US for training, which does not even capture the extent of US military aid in instructing officers abroad.

All great stuff. All much-needed historical detail and conceptual correctives, especially given the impoverished state of much IR thinking about the lineages of the current global order. And yet there is an overly introductory style to 'Globalization and War' which stultifies its promise and does disservice to the engaging character of Barkawi's academic articles. Chunks of text and facts are sometimes repeated. Some chapters (on empires and democracies and on the colonial Indian army) stand out for their depth and detail, while the others can seem a little superficial. Nor is there a strong enough sense of theoretical or historical engagement to balance out the broad range of examples.

A book of such promise could easily have continued for a hundred or more further pages, drawing its audience in to the multiple historical trajectories of colonial and post-colonial history. It could have been a wider-ranging version of Gabriel Kolko's 'Anatomy Of A War' or Benedict Anderson's 'Under Three Flags', or even the IR/war studies avatar of Edward Said's 'Orientalism'. Instead, details are presented more as illustrations than alternative narratives and the balance between accessibility and depth is occasionally tipped in favour of the former. This is especially galling given the over-attention to the 'war on terror', neoliberalism, the clash of civilizations and cultural meaning, which are not so much 'wrong' (either factually or politically) as so light and non-committal as to be irrelevant to the non-specialist or a frustrating diversion to the expert or advanced student.

Barkawi is an important scholar and perhaps a fuller statement of his work will emerge. Until then, this is a rich source for the critically-engaged student of empire, war and the modern states system, if not the coherent masterpiece it could have been.

This book is fantastic and a must have for any student of International Affairs/Politics (as I am). I even had the good forture of listening to Dr BARKAWI discuss the book in person at one of his student-group seminars.

However, the lack of a 5th star is this -

This book and therfore Dr BARKAWI's opinions in the book came across, to me, as extremely biased and one sided. As a dedicated student of International Affairs I am no fan of the Bush Govt and of American Foreign Policy as it stands today. However, as a student I also know that any such publications and opinions, especially those coming from a professor of International Affair at CAMBRIDGE, have to be unbiased while critical, and explanatory while discriptive and indepth.

Here, I feel that Dr BARKAWI was unable to hold back his emothions and personal feelings against the Bush admionistration while churning out what never-the-less is a remarkable look at the blatant and foolhardy failings of foreign policy initiatives and objectives coming our of the West, based on White House opinion that is unashamedly self-serving, unfounded and dangerously reminiscent of another infamous European administration from the early 1940s.

As mentioned above I was fortunate enough to hear Dr BARKAWI speak about his book -

1. of 'International Interconnection and Mutual Constitution' when discussing overlapping state histories

2. about the 'Clash of Modernity' between the West and Islam;

3. about 'Neoglobalization' which has come to mean 'The threat to the State'

4. the shortcomings of 'Neoliberalism', the 'internationalised power of the state'

5. the growth of modern communications technology and 'Complex Connectivity'

6. illustrations from 'The Sugar trade' and slave labour as well as 'soldiers and armies' from WW2 through to today, on the effects of globalization, and

7. ultimately the relationship between Globalization and War - 'How peaceful is Globalization' (hence the title)

The book finishes with

The conflict between the West and Islam - the presence of West in Iraq, ready to deliver their version of 'Peace and Democracy'; and

An explaination of where the 'Jihadi' originates from.

Here again, though I had a slight problem with Dr BARKAWI's apparent lack of (emotional) bias, especially his dismissive attitude towards other renowned writers and analysts in this field.

Most natable, is his dislike of the HUNTINGTON / B.LEWIS theory of the 'Clash of Civilizations', which to me seems unfounded and rushed, especially if you consider his explainations of the birth of the 'Jihadi' soldier. As I understood him, the origin lies in the historical ever-lasting conflict between Islam and The West. With this he essentially confounds all critisms of HUNTINGTON, which he spends a considerable part of Ch 5 enumerating in detail.

Finally, I was hoping and expecting one last critique from Dr BARKAWI of A.J.BACEVICH's book on the same subject, which I found to so closely mirror this book. However, there was no mention of the theories of the (premature) Western 'export' of Democracy to Iraq, of the forced and rapid transition of a Centrally planned authoritarian govt into a 'democratic' neoliberal open-market economy;

All points, in my opinion, forming the essential basis to the Iraq-debate in GLOBALIZATION & WAR.