Globalization has become one of the most (hotly) debated issues eliciting both great enthusiasm and deep concern. On the one hand, it is argued that it leads to economic growth and prosperity for nations while on the other side, many argue that it only increases the “disparity between the rich and the poor,” [456] and diminishes the power of the states. In this essay, I will analyze the question: how globalization challenges the liberal and realist assumptions regarding the state and what new security concerns globalization brings with it? In other words, I will argue that globalization challenges the liberal and realist assumption of the state as being the main actor because in this era, neo liberal economic policies are being implemented …show more content…

What has changed is the nature of control, which as a result, is creating new pressures for states: economic forces being one of them.
It is a well known fact that globalization is tied directly to neo liberal economic policies which put emphasis on the reduction of the role of the state, and economic liberalization. Meaning that globalization is identified as the rise in trade and international economic institutions such as the IMF, World Bank and etc. This in turn it is argued, has lead to interconnectness and interdependence amongst states because today, national economies of every state are connected into one (big) global economy, in which international financial market and transnational companies dominate. As already noted, capital is more mobile today than it was 50 years back and thus, locates wherever economic advantage dictates. As a result, states are no longer considered to be the major players in international relations instead the multinational corporations (MNC’s) are. This significantly challenges the realist view of the state as being the main actor in international relations.
In other words, realists believe that in the international system, the states make their own decisions and are free to do as they wish. The motivating goal behind a states action is self-interest and that the states do whatever they believe “serves their interest.” [7] Thus, they are unitary actors. However,