A World of Regions: Asia and Europe in the American Imperium

Observing the dramatic shift in world politics since the end of the Cold War, Peter J.
Katzenstein argues that regions have become critical to contemporary world politics. This
view is in stark contrast to those who focus on the purportedly stubborn persistence of the
nation-state or the inevitable march of globalization. In detailed studies of technology and
foreign investment, domestic and international security, and cultural diplomacy and popular
culture, Katzenstein examines the changing regional dynamics of Europe and Asia, which
are linked to the United States through Germany and Japan.

Regions, Katzenstein contends, are interacting closely with an American imperium

that combines territorial and non-territorial powers. Katzenstein argues that globalization
and internationalization create open or porous regions. Regions may provide solutions to
the contradictions between states and markets, security, nationalism, and cosmopolitanism.
Embedded in the American imperium, regions are now central to world politics.

North-South Divide
The North-South Divide or Rich-Poor Divide is the socio-economic and political division
between the wealthy developed countries known as “the North,” and the poorer developing
countries or “the South.” Although most of the countries under “the North” are located in the
Northern Hemisphere, the divide is purely not based on geographic location. Some countries
located in the same hemisphere may be qualified for “developed” status. In effect may be
deemed part of “the South.” This divide is recently known as the development gap which puts
greater emphasis on the gap between the economically rich and poor countries.

The Global North mostly encompasses the West and the First World, along with many of
the Second World. It is the home of all the G8 (Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, United
Kingdom, United States and European Union), Global North also includes the outermost regions
of the European Union, Australia, New Zealand, and developed members of Asia (the Four
Asian Tigers -Hongkong, Singapore, Taiwan and South Korea).

In economic terms, the North with one quarter of the world population controls four-fifths
of the income earned anywhere in the world. 90% of the manufacturing industries are owned by
and located in the North. Inversely, the South with three quarters of the world population has
access to one-fifth of the world income. As nations become economically developed, they may
become part of the "North', regardless of geographical location; similarly, any nations that do not
qualify for "developed" status are in effect deemed to be part of the "South".

Global South
The Global South refers to regions of Latin America, Asia, Africa, and Oceania. It
includes the countries belonging to the Third World and Periphery. These are regions outside
Europe and North America. With three-fourth of the world population, only has access to one-
fifth of the world income. Hence, countries that have low-income and often politically or culturally
marginalized. “The use of the phrase Global South marks a shift from a central focus on
development or cultural difference toward an emphasis on geopolitical relations of power,”
(Dados, 2012).
 The Global South is more than the extension of a "metaphor for underdeveloped
countries." In general, it refers to those countries' "interconnected histories of colonialism,
neo-imperialism, and differential economic and social change through which large
inequalities in living standards, life expectancy, and access to resources are maintained.

The Brandt Line proposed by Willy Brandt in the 1980s attempted to show growing
income inequality between countries. Above the line are the rich countries, whereas below the
line are the poor countries. However, this theory is no longer considered as valid since in
today’s context some of the world’s strongest economies lie below the Brandt line.

Global South versus Third World

"There is no Third World; There is no global south" - Martin Lewis. IN the 1960s, "70s and '80s,
scholars divided the earth into three parts: The First World, the Second World, and the Third
World. The reigning "three worlds theory," however, was conceptually incoherent, combining
incommensurate geopolitical and socio-economic features.

The "First World" encompassed all industrialized, democratic countries, which were assumed to
be allied with the United States in its struggle against the Soviet Union. Yet, not all were:
Finland and Switzerland, among others, maintained strict neutrality.

The Second World" was anchored on the industrialized, communist realm of the Soviet Union
and its eastern European satellites, yet it often included poor communist states located
elsewhere.

The "Third World," was defined simultaneously as the non-aligned world and as the global realm
of poverty and under-developed. poor Soviet allies - Mongolia, Cuba, North Korea, and North
Vietnam (after 1975, Vietnam) - were thus counted as Third World in economic terms and as
Second World in political terms. China's Cold War situation was even more ambiguous; a non-
industrialized country at the time, it ceased to be a Soviet ally in 1961, and by the 1980s was no
longer an enemy of the United States. Yet it continued to be commonly mapped as part
of the Second World.

How the "Third World" became the Global South": The Origins of the Third World
As published in the International Encyclopedia of the Social Sciences edited by A.
Heelblod (2007), the world was largely divided into several empires in the 19th century.
Each empire possessed a "civilized central and peripheries that were more or less primitive
or even "barbaric". It is unlikely the citizens of what is now often called the "Global North"
("developed" or high-income countries) would have given much thought to the inhabitants
of what was to become known as the Third World, and now, the Global South, also called
"developing" or low-income countries. When they did, most would have considered these
peoples to be inferior in some way, by virtue of being non-white, less educated, or even
"primitive."
 "Third World" was coined in 1952 by Alfred Sauvy, a French demographer,
anthropologist, and economic historian who compared it with the Third Estate, a concept
that emerged in the context of the French Revolution. (First Estate refers to the clergy and
the monarch, Second Estate to the nobility, and Third Estate to the balance of the
eighteenth-century).

French population contrasted the poor countries to the First World (the non-
Communist, high-income, "developed" countries) and the Second World (Communist
countries, which though not as wealthy as those of the First World, were then characterized
by greater order, higher incomes; and longer life expectancies.)

Most people in the Third World, though rules by European colonies, lived far from
global sources of economic, political, and military power. Until very recently, most were
subjugated, most illiterate, and few may have been aware that, even then, they formed a
majority of the world population. But such awareness was growing among leaders within
these poor countriés, many of whom had been educated, at least partly, in Europe or
America. This awareness and exposure to Western culture raised expectations and hopes
and inspired many Third World leaders to try to improve colonial living conditions and win
political independence.

Opposition to domination by the First World (colonization) also grew through

increasing migration and travel, including that stimulated by the two World Wars. Many
troops who had participated in these wars, particularly on the allied side, were from what
soon to be called the Third World.

Global Conception Emerged from the Experiences of Latin American Countries

The growth rate in some Latin American countries has surprised many. They have
been continuously high for some years and promise to be so in the next period as well.

Latin America's contributions are especially visible and relevant such as regionalism,
security management, and Latin America's relations with the outside world.

Asian Regionalism
Asian regionalism is the product of economic interaction, not political planning. As a
result of successful, outward oriented growth strategies, Asian economies have grown not
only richer, but also closer together. In recent years, new technological trends have further
strengthened ties among them, as have the rise of the PRC and India and the region's
growing weight in the global economy. But adversity also played a role. The 1997/98
financial crisis dealt a severe setback to much of the region, highlighting Asia's shared
interests and common vulnerabilities and providing an impetus for regional cooperation. The
challenge now facing Asia's policy makers is simply put yet incredibly complex:
 In the early stages of Asia's economic takeoff, regional integration proceeded slowly.
East Asian economies, in particular, focused on exporting to developed country markets
rather than selling to each other. Initially; they specialized in simple, labor-intensive
manufactures. As the more advanced among them graduated to more sophisticated
products, less developed economies filled the gap that they left behind. The Japanese
economist Akamatsu (1962) famously compared this pattern of development to flying
geese. In this model, economies moved in formation not because they were directly linked
to each other, but because they followed similar paths. Sincethese development paths
hinged on sequential - and sometimes competing-ties to markets outside the region, they
did not initially yield strong economic links within Asia itself.

Now, though, Asian economies are becoming closely intertwined. This is not
because the region's development strategy has changed; it remains predominantly
nondiscriminatory and outward-oriented. Rather, interdependence is deepening because
Asia's economies have grown large and prosperous enough to become important to each
other and because their patterns of production increasingly depend on networks that span
several Asian economies and involve wide-ranging exchanges of parts and components
among them.

Regionalism versus Globalization

Regionalism is the process of dividing an area into smaller segments called regions.
An example is the division of the nation into states or provinces. Businesses use
regionalization as a total in management.

On the other hand, globalization is the process of international integration arising

from the interchange of world views, products, ideas, and other aspects, such as
technology, etc.

As to nature, globalization promotes the integration of economics across state borders

all around the world but regionalization is precisely the opposite because it is dividing an area
into smaller segments.

As to market, globalization allows many companies to trade on international level so it

allows free market but in regionalized system, monopolies are likely to develop.

As to cultural and societal relations, globalization accelerate to multiculturalism by

free and inexpensive movement of people but, regionalization does not support this.

As to aid, the globalized international community is also more willing to come to the aid
of a country stricken by a natural disaster but, a regionalized system does not get involved in
the affairs of other areas.
 As to technological advances, globalization has driven great advances in technology
but advanced technology is rarely available in one country or region.

Factors Leading to the Greater Integration of the Asian Regions

Regional integration is a process in which neighboring states enter into an
agreement in order to upgrade cooperation through common institutions and rules. The
objectives of the agreement could range from economic to political to environmental,
although it has typically taken the form of a political economy initiative where commercial
interests are the focus for achieving broader socio-political and security objectives, as
defined by national governments. Regional integration has been organized either via
supranational institutional structures or through intergovernmental decision-making, or a
combination of both.

Past efforts at regional integration have often focused on removing barriers to free
trade in the region, increasing the free movement of people, labor, goods, and capital
across national borders, reducing the possibility of regional armed conflict (for example,
through Confidence and Security-Building Measures), and adopting cohesive regional
stances on policy issues, such as the environment, climate change and migration.

Intra-regional trade refers to trade which focuses on economic exchange primarily

between countries of the same region or economic zone. In recent years countries within
economic-trade regimes such as ASEAN in Southeast Asia for example have increased the
level of trade and commodity exchange between themselves which reduces the inflation
and tariff barriers associated with foreign markets resulting in growing prosperity.