Home arrow Archives arrow Open Forum arrow Open Forum-2016 arrow Impact Of BREXIT: NATION Vs REGION Vs GLOBAL, By Dr.S.Saraswathi, 8 July, 2016
 
Home
News and Features
INFA Digest
Parliament Spotlight
Dossiers
Publications
Journalism Awards
Archives
RSS
 
 
 
 
 
 
Impact Of BREXIT: NATION Vs REGION Vs GLOBAL, By Dr.S.Saraswathi, 8 July, 2016 Print E-mail

Open Forum

New Delhi, 8 July, 2016

Impact Of BREXIT

NATION Vs REGION Vs GLOBAL

By Dr.S.Saraswathi

(Former Director, ICSSR, New Delhi)

 

The exit of Britain from the European Union by a referendum, Brexit is doubtlessly the biggest development in international relations this decade. Whereby, it is expected to produce multifold effects within and beyond EU countries.  Pertinently, the impact will not be restricted to economic ties.

Undeniably, globalization, regionalism and nationalism are three driving forces which underlie international ties today.   The first treats the world as one economic unit; the second represents union of contiguous and/or common interest groups of countries having some common needs.

And the third signifies the anxiety of individual countries to safeguard its sovereignty and independence against encroachments from regional and global forces.  Notably, the three co-exist, sometimes as cooperating friendly forces and other times as incongruent and even hostile military.

Among these, regionalism is the intermediate form of community between the Nation State and the potential global community of independent States.  It has grown as a post-War development in international relations. 

Starting with security as the prime concern, regionalism has added many other reasons for its growth of which economic prosperity has become foremost under globalization.

Indeed, Britain’s big decision to leave the EU, some believe, will give a jolt to the very concept and practice of regionalism. However, the fact remains that the EU is a very advanced form of regional organization far different and far ahead of many other regional groupings. Hence, EU’s failure to hold together need not discourage other moderate forms of regionalism in developing nations.

Remember, the EU traces its origin to 1951 when five members – Belgium, Germany, France, Luxembourg and the Netherlands joined together to cooperate economically and developed the European Common Market.

The EU in the present form was born in 1993 as a result of Maastricht Treaty by merging three European Communities – European Economic Community (EEC), Economic and Social Committee (ECSC) and the EURATOM (European Atomic Energy Community) to facilitate partial integration of foreign and security policy and internal security aspects along-with immigration policy. Then it had 15 members, now 28.  

Undoubtedly, the experiment of European integration is not a lone example of Nation States coming together institutionally for common benefit.  Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC),  African Union (AU), Union of South American Nations (USAN), Caribbean Community (CARICOM), the Central American Integration System (CAIS), Arab League (AL) and the European Free Trade Association (EFTA).

The Eurasian Economic Community (EAEC), Association of South-East Asian Nations (ASEAN), Central European Free Trade Agreement (CEFTA), North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation (SAARC), Pacific Islands Forum (PIF) and Indian Ocean Rim Association (IORA) are all motivated by a common desire of member countries to jointly promote their common interests.

Certainly, the EU’s decline is not a sudden development.  It is partly economic and partially political.  It might be perceived as resurrection of strong nationalism against weakening of autonomy that is embedded in economic and territorial integration of sovereign States. 

Whereby, even strong welfare States like the Netherlands feel the pinch of financial crisis in other EU States and struggle to cope with the demands of global economy.

Additionally, internal frictions among member countries have intensified due to the massive refugee problem reminiscent of War time exodus.

Perhaps, Brexit is an outcome of the inevitable conflict between the requirements of State sovereignty and the terms governing regional integration. It is a democratic decision.

As history teaches us an international region comprises a number of States linked by geographical relationship and by a degree of mutual inter-dependence. For each State, activities and happenings in other States have some significance due to proximity and historic relationship. 

In this way, European Union, African Union, ASEAN are all natural formations in the context of globalization. However, there are some vital differences between the EU consisting of member countries having different political background and the other two having members with somewhat similar political experiences. 

The concept of “regional organization” has also acquired broader connotation cutting across geographical contiguity. Wherein, it is sometimes used to refer to any non-universal associations from the Commonwealth to the Arab League.  

Interestingly, NATO (North Atlantic Treaty Organization) has members from both sides of the Atlantic and in the Scandinavian and Mediterranean areas. This has led to a modified definition of regionalism as a “voluntary association of sovereign States within certain areas or having common interests in that area for a joint purpose, which should not be of offensive nature, in relation to that area”.

Importantly, the UN Charter deals with regional pacts in a separate chapter and allows States to “resort to regional agencies and arrangements” for pacific settlement of local disputes.  Co-existence of world bodies and regional organizations has been considered possible and in a way helpful to promote UN endeavours to maintain peace.

Started primarily for common defence purpose in the aftermath of World War II, regional organizations have now become mainly economic interest groups under globalization.

What has caused Britain’s exit from the EU is mainly the growing economic influence of this regional organization contravening its domestic opinion and interests. Fear of jobs loss, increasing migration of employment seekers from European countries into this small island nation and a sort of compulsion to change its legal structures and welfare measures to align with European standards are some of the problems pointed out by Brexit supporters.

On the other hand, smaller EU countries are afraid of “EU elephants” like Britain.

In Asia, the ASEAN – the Association of South-East Asian Nations is a successful regional organization which has completed 50 years.  Starting with five, it now has ten members and six dialogue partners.   It is even said that the West is jealous of the rise of Asian regionalism wherein trade across Pacific is over shadowed by trade across Asia promoted by regional unions.

On the contrary, South Asia is not only a late starter in regionalization but is also a reluctant performer. The performance of SAARC (South Asian Association for Regional Cooperation) consisting of Afghanistan, Bangladesh, Bhutan,  India, Maldives,  Nepal,  Pakistan, and Sri Lanka is in no sense admirable as the region is fraught with bilateral problems obstructing unity of purpose and action.  It has neither grand vision nor strong political will for cooperation. Still, it promotes trade agreements.

SAARC is a specimen of nationalism dominating regionalism. The member countries are more inclined to seek solutions to their problems through their associations with countries beyond South Asia than through their neighbouring countries. 

Consequently, such unions of nations are not necessarily bound by geographical proximity but by certain common economic interests. These include BRICS (Brazil, Russia, India, China, and South Africa), and  BIMSTEC ( Bangladesh, India, Myanmar, Sri Lanka, Thailand  Economic Cooperation) which are actively engaged in presenting a united front of some sovereign countries  against the dictates of globalization foisted on the unprepared developing nations.

In this scenario, Brexit has no particular lessons for other regional blocs.  Its decline is EU’s problem.  The economic impact of Brexit is part of the economic risks involved in globalization. --- INFA

(Copyright, India News and Feature Alliance)

                                                               

 

 

< Previous   Next >
 
   
     
 
 
  Mambo powered by Best-IT