Is the nation state under siege? A common answer is that globalization poses two fundamental threats to state sovereignty. The first concerns the unleashing of centrifugal and centripetal forces - such as increasing market integration and the activities of institutions like the IMF, World Bank, and WTO - that imperil state sovereignty from 'outside' the nation state. The second threat emanates from self-determination movements that jeopardize state sovereignty from 'inside'. Rigorously analyzing popular hypotheses on globalization's effect on state sovereignty from a broad social sciences perspective, the authors use empirical evidence to suggest that globalization's multilevel threats to state sovereignty have been overestimated. In most instances globalization is likely to generate pressure for increased government spending while only one form of market integration - foreign direct investment by multinational enterprises - appears to increase any feeling of economic insecurity. This volume will be invaluable to course instructors at both graduate and undergraduate levels, policy makers and members of the general public who are concerned about the effects of globalization on the nation-state.

The twentieth century witnessed an explosion of new nations carved out of existing ramshackle empires and multiethnic states. Many observers contend that the creation of new states will continue indefinitely, with the two hundred of today becoming the four hundred of tomorrow as more groups seek independence. This provocative and compelling book explores the impact of globalization and terrorism on this trend, arguing convincingly that the era of national self-determination has finally come to an end. Examining the forces that determine the emergence of new nation-states, the distinguished contributors consider a rich array of specific cases from the Middle East, Asia, North America, Europe, and Russia where new states could be created. They contend that globalization, rather than expanding such opportunities, is not as friendly to new weak states with limited resources as it is to established rich nations. Given the vast sums circulating in the world market, few fledgling nations can be financially independent. They find it more prudent to shelter within the protective embrace of existing federations. Equally, governments of federal states can induce restive petitioners—such as Quebec, Scotland, and the Basques—to remain inside the metropolitan boundary through a system of tangible restraints and rewards. Those who reject the benefits, such as rebels in Chechnya and Aceh, will fail in their bids for independence. Taiwan—poised on a knife-edge between integration with China and independence—faces a series of costs and diminished returns if it seeks full statehood. Finally, terrorism has lost its legitimacy as a technique for gaining independence in the eyes of the international community. Despite the stall in new state formation, there has been no sign of successful military or imperial expansion by established countries toward consolidation into fewer, larger national units. Neither aggression by regional states—such as the Iraq invasion of Kuwait in 1990, nor intervention—such as the U.S. occupation

This insightful and timely book analyzes the role of cultural autonomy in advancing minority rights protection on the national and global level. It assesses the historical and legal limits of the right to self-determination and autonomy and draws on Marxist internationalism, liberal nationalism and EU integrationist studies to examine the relationship between cultural autonomy and globalization. As such, emphasis is placed on the sociological and historical value of cultural autonomy, with the aim of working beyond formalistic and utilitarian approaches to cultural autonomy. The volume will appeal primarily to upper-level undergraduate and graduate level students of political science and international law interested in rethinking the role of cultural autonomy in an age of globalization.

Granted formal independence in 1946, the Philippines serves as a battleground between the neoliberal project of capitalist globalization and the enduring aspiration of Filipinos for national self-determination. More than ten million Filipino workers—over one-tenth of the country's total population—work as contract workers in all parts of the world. How did this "model" colony of the United States devolve into an impoverished, war-torn neocolonial hinterland, a provider of cheap labor and raw materials for the rest of the world? In Toward Filipino Self-Determination, E. San Juan Jr. explores the historical, cultural, and political formation of the Filipino diaspora. By focusing on the work of significant Filipino intellectuals and activists, including Carlos Bulosan and Philip Vera Cruz, as well as the issues of gender and language for workers in the United States, San Juan provides a historical-materialist reading of social practices, discourses, and institutions that explain the contradictions characterizing Filipino life in both the United States and in the Philippines.

The authors show that with violent conflict in the developing world as the critical issue for the twenty-first century, and conflict prevention a central security problem for the developed and developing world, self-determination movements can only be understood, and conflict prevented, in the context of global economic and cultural forces

For a century, economists have driven forward the cause of globalization in financial institutions, labour markets, and trade. Yet there have been consistent warning signs that a global economy and free trade might not always be advantageous. Where are the pressure points? What could be done about them?Dani Rodrik examines the back-story from its seventeenth-century origins through the milestones of the gold standard, the Bretton Woods Agreement, and the Washington Consensus, to the present day. Although economic globalization has enabled unprecedented levels of prosperity in advanced countries and has been a boon to hundreds of millions of poor workers in China and elsewhere in Asia, it is a concept that rests on shaky pillars, he contends. Its long-term sustainability is not a given.The heart of Rodrik>'s argument is a fundamental 'trilemma': that we cannot simultaneously pursue democracy, national self-determination, and economic globalization. Give too much power to governments, and you have protectionism. Give markets too much freedom, and you have an unstable world economy with little social and political support from those it is supposed to help. Rodrik argues for smart globalization, not maximum globalization.