Globalization is a process that relies upon strategies internationally with the aim of expanding business operations on the face of the world. This is with the help of global communications, which have been made possible due to advancements in technology, developments in the political front, socioeconomic, and the environment. Another definition to globalization is cross-border interactions being intensified and countries depending on one another. This definition shades light on how the international system has changed. Relationships have changed in individual states due to depending on one another and whatever events are ongoing outside their boundaries are more likely to have an impact within their territories. In this paper, we shall look at the conflicts and how different nations are embracing globalization to help root out these conflicts, (Holm and Sørensen, 1995).
Global change is a rapid process and it is hard to keep track of the new and many developments. Nevertheless, trends are observable and they all add up to globalization. Currently, there is a contradiction in globalization being in full force and the global governance processes that are in existence have insufficient power, the scope and an authority, which ensures that a certain direction is followed, as well as regulations that all lead to beneficial results for all parties involved. Thus, more often than not, globalization does not offer equal effects and it is disruptive. New challenges also have rose in institutions (the public ones), which become less autonomous and are weak in their support. The process of globalization is turbulent, as analysts have found out. In addition, it may be touted as representing a rational economy, however, there is a dark side to it. Critics have always brought out the side of globalization that runs soley on economic power. In addition, it favors the western cultures and their corporations, which puts a lot of communities and jobs at risk. Rich countries have an exploitative nature; they harness cheap labor from countries that are poorer. This creates threats to the environment and does not uphold the principles of democracy and/or social stability. This is through plunging political institutions of the nation into unavoidable forces of change in the economy. Moreover, quite a volume of essays highlight that globalization is uneven, (Holm and Sørensen, 1995). This can be analyzed in terms of its processes as well as its effects. It results in concentrations and deprivations which, on average, encompass a well defined structure of power.
Globalization creates conflicts, which, on one end, focus on cultural issues as well as identity, and on the other, the issues are primarily economic. From historical archives, social change can be closely associated with the ever-rising levels of conflict. Sorokin did a study, which explored this, largely, (1937: 409-475). His study encompassed twelve countries and it showed to what extent what he refers to as social strife was at its greatest in eras when a certain society was involved in a change that was significant (for example, religion). Such a moment of change is transitional and it cannot pass by without it being muddled in conflicts of values and interests.
There is also the paradox of reflectivity. Analysts say that increased reflectivity comes from effects of rapid changes. These changes emanate from societies from all over the world. These rapid changes in turn contribute to incidences of conflict.
There is also the effect of globalization in terms of identity. Basically, globalization seeks to homogenize people but it is also a fact that it increases social heterogeneity as an awareness. There are quite a number of groups whose identity rests upon race and ethnicity, religion, and language. These groups have used media in a global sense to voice their discontent. At the end of cold war, ethnic revival was unleashed. It goes without saying that cold war was a conflict among states and it propagated the primal need for a national identity in a worldwide society. During the 1990s, this notion was weakened by globalization. It was less effective in ensuring that people complied or being able to integrate a society nationwide. This means that minorities are better off in reasserting their identity in reference to cultural forces of hegemony. These minorities therefore identify the state as not being a reliable promoter and protector of their interests (which are domestic in nature). They see the state as collaborating more with external forces (Scholte, 1997). Therefore, in the 1990s, we can argue that conflict is not primarily found between and among states, but rather, the state and its groups. In this case, we can comfortably say that globalization has helped root out conflicts between states but resulted in creating conflicts within the state itself.
In the economic world, globalization compels businesses to embrace diverse strategies in relation to the new trend of ideas so as to bring on average the rights and interests of a person and the entire community. This makes the businesses have a competitive front in the world. This also gives business leaders, management, and labor a significant change. This is through accepting the contribution of workers and that of the government so that company strategies and policies are developed and implemented. In this case, globalization has reduced conflicts. It enables companies from different countries to share ideas, transact business together, make dealerships, et al. however, it should be noted that some companies may decide to undertake competition. Either way, it is healthy. Businesses will be motivated to embrace new ideas, strategies, and policies. The reduction of risks can be done through diversification. Companies will be involved with financial institutions internationally and thus making partnerships with businesses locally and with other nations.
The process of globalization also increases the dire need for knowledge on the differences of culture between countries as well as the culture of the corporate world. Employers from time to time send their experts to other countries so that they can build subsidiaries and/or support the ones that are already in existence, (Beaverstock, 2012). For a successful subsidiary, language skills are fundamental, so are the influences of the sub culture, the styles of communications of which they are different, societal behaviors. This points out to the fact that in terms of economy, globalization does not create a conflict, it deals away with any conflict that is present.
In the economic front, there is what Schumpeter refers to as ‘creative destruction’, (1942: 84). Firms are catapulted into innovation because of competition; surely, a firm cannot just look at its competitors embracing new ideas while it is just stagnant. Innovation here involves both products and the process of production. On the other hand, industries and regions can undergo destruction or marginalization. This is because competitors may become more innovative in a certain area and take lead.
In an economy, that has become globalized, national boundaries and distances have diminished, (Ake, 1995: 26). This is because the many obstacles have been done away with thus ensuring market access. Cost of transaction has been reduced significantly as well as the time and distance being compressed and this refers to the international transactions. Several changes have been brought about by globalization. They include trade dynamics, flow of capital, and technology transfer. Markets and production present in different countries have made these countries depend on one another. International competition, as said earlier, is increasing in intensity and in turn increases the strategic interactions across the border. This further makes the various business enterprises to organize and structure themselves into transnational networks. Globalization is characterized by increasing interdependence on various levels. For example, foreign direct investment goes hand in hand with technology transfer and the knowhow. It also includes the flow of capital, which is in form of international loans, equity, profit repatriation, et al. this facilitates the export of goods and services from countries that are investing.
In this case, also, globalization has brought countries together to a united economic front. The aim is to develop interdependent business across different countries. It is due to globalization that we have trade blocs, (Sorensen, 2004). Members in the same block undertake transactions as it were within their national boundaries. However, we can note that the countries outside this trade bloc suffer from what is called trade diversion. This country will not be able to get the benefits the countries within the bloc are getting. It is from this trade ties that conflicts arise. A country may feel sidelined and thus any ties to the countries in the trade bloc may be severed.
Globalization by definition is a process, which relies on international strategies while aiming to expand businesses globally. The goal of globalization in this case is to give organizations an upper hand in competition through lowering costs, increased number of products as well as services and customers. Globalization has an hand in conflict creation as well as conflict resolution. In the economic arena, globalization has unified various economies and countries. International trade is now a possibility and countries depend on one another. Cross border costs when conducting trade have been lifted and transport and communication between countries conducting trade have been improved. Borrowing of ideas for implementation in other countries has also resulted because of globalization. New businesses have been started in other countries and this is because there are set policies and strategies. In addition, for businesses to be global, knowledge and language skills come in handy to understanding a foreign market and knowing the consumer needs.
Globalization also enhances cultural diversity. People from different ethnic groups, big and small, have a worldwide audience for their cultural values and beliefs. Lastly, international trade may be facilitated by globalization, however, due to the emergence of trade blocs, some countries are left out. This is trade diversion and it may create a conflict between countries in a trade bloc and those without.
This means, therefore, that globalization increases and reduces conflicts in the international system at the same time. However, the larger part it plays is to reduce conflicts or resolve them.
Ake, C. 1995. “The new world order: a view from Africa.” In Holm, Hans-Henrik and Sørensen, Georg Eds., Whose World Order: Uneven Globalization and the End of the Cold War, Boulder: West view.
Beaverstock, J. V. (2012). Highly skilles international labour migration and worldcities:expatriates, executives and entrepreneurs. In B. Derruder, M. Hoyler, P. J. Taylor, & F.Witlox, International Handbook of Globalisation and World cities (pp. 240-249). Cheltenham, Uk: Edward Elgar Publication Ltd.
Scholte, Jan Aart. 1997. “constructions of collective identity in a time of globalisation.”http://nexxus.com.cwru.edu/amjdc/papers/76.
Schumpeter, Joseph. 1942. Capitalism, socialism and democracy. New York: Harper.
Sorensen, G. (2004).The transformation of the state – beyond the myth of retreat;Palgrave Macmillan.
Sorokin, P.A. 1937. Social and cultural dynamics, vol III, fluctuations of social relationships, war and revolution. New York: America Books Co.
Holm, Hans-Henrik and Georg Sørensen. 1995. “Introduction: what has changed.” In Holm and Sørensen, Whose World Order: Uneven Globalization and the End of the Cold War. Boulder: West view.
 Holm, Hans-Henrik and Georg Sørensen. 1995. “Introduction: what has changed.” In Holm and Sørensen, Whose World Order: Uneven Globalization and the End of the Cold War. Boulder: West view.
 Sorokin, P.A. 1937. Social and cultural dynamics, Vol. III, fluctuations of social relationships, war and revolution. New York: America Books Co.
Scholte, Jan Aart. 1997. “Constructions of collective identity in a time of globalization.”http://nexxus.com.cwru.edu/amjdc/papers/76.
 Sorensen, G. (2004).The transformation of the state – beyond the myth of retreat;Palgrave Macmilla