COMBATING THREATS OF THE GLOBALIZATION ERA

Assoc. Prof. Çağrı ERHAN
Ankara University
The Faculty of Political Sciences
Department of International Relations

The Changing International Arena

Globalization, is usually defined as the spread of all - but especially political and economic -- structures and values of the West around the world. Even though there is no agreement on this definition, it has caused the revision of classical definitions on political, economic, socio-cultural fields used until the last decade of the 20th century, in a fundamental way. This process is still continuing and resulted in nearly the disappearance of all the parameters used in explaining the international system for 45 years beginning with 1945.

The decade of 1990-2000, described by some writers very rightly as the "longest decade" (1), was a transition period during which globalization was observed in all fields and at the same time it was a decade during which the economic and social models, defended by the United States which represented the West as expressed in the definition of globalization, as well as their social extensions, started influencing the whole world. In those years, the US intervened in the tensions and conflicts in various places of the world, especially in Iraq, Bosnia and Kosovo, on its own or as the leader of coalitions. The US intervened in Afghanistan in October 2001 within the context of its anti-terror campaign following September 11 attacks in 2001, and toppled the Taliban regime in this country. After completing this operation successfully, the US started preparations of an attack on Iraq. The Iraq operation by the US and Britain in 2003 resulted in Saddam Hussein's removal from power who had ruled Iraq since 1979.

In the same period, people have witnessed that some groups have emerged that try to challenge US leadership and the globalization wave sweeping the world. These groups started making preparations for their worldwide activities and their number will greatly increase in the early 21st century.

Apart from economic and social developments, the most visible change in international politics in 1990s was the emergence of the newly independent countries in strategically important regions and the constant re-shaping of the world map. Disintegration of the Soviet Union, unification of Germany, division of Czechoslovakia and Yugoslavia's dissolution into five parts have caused the creation of more than 21 new states in Eurasia. Some of these developments occurred silently, but some others went on under the shadow of conflicts in which hundred of thousands of people were killed or displaced, and the ethnic, religious or tribal conflicts at a scale unprecedented during the Cold War years put its mark on early years of globalization. In parallel with this, new types of threats, which were ignored by the states that structured their security solely according to the military threats of their enemies, became established with the emergence of these countries. The activities carried out by non-governmental units, terrorists and organized criminal networks, which drew support by same states in compliance with their self-interests, became the main problem of the international security system of the globalization period.

Some probable developments that might arise in the next 15 years show that combating these new threats will not be easy. It is estimated that world population in 2000 currently standing at 6.1-billion could reach 7.2 billion by 2015. It is reported that 95 percent of the total population growth will come from the developing world, and the population migrating to the cities due to hunger and unemployment will worsen living conditions in the cities of developing countries and give rise to political-economic instability. It is predicted that mass immigration from developing countries to the developed countries will also continue at an increased pace in the coming years. At the same time, lower birth rates in developed countries and higher life expectancy in line with high-quality living conditions will cause crises in the work force, and create social and economic tensions because working people will not want to finance retired people.

Food production in the next fifteen years will be sufficient enough to feed the world population. However, mass starvation is very likely in some regions due to insufficient infrastructure and food distribution, political instability, and chronic poverty.

Despite the 50 percent increase in energy demand, world energy reserves will continue to meet this demand. Although new energy sources will emerge, world energy supply will mostly be coming from the Middle East. This will cause a struggle between the powers trying to take control of this region.

While on the one hand new innovations in technology in the coming years will make international trade easier, on the other hand it will cause some states to utilize terrorists and international crime organizations for their own benefit.

Nation states will continue to be dominant units in the future. However, their influence in information and technology flow, prevention of endemic diseases and mass immigrations, arms and drug smuggling will diminish. The role of multinational companies, representing international capital, in national and international affairs will rise. (2)

As the world is entering a new millennium, globalist approaches that see disappearance of economic orders as their final goal, and separatist actions that argue for ethnic or religious division, and localist approaches that work for regional economic and/or political integration are living side by side in a way that is unprecedented in history. This clear situation, as new threats, which have emerged at the intersection of these three tendencies, gain momentum, has begun to transform itself into a complicated structure that is very hard to comprehend. The states, trying to eliminate new threats, especially mass terror attacks that can come unexpectedly at any place at varying violence, created by this turbulent environment, have started taking new measures on their own or with others.

However, while this process is continuing, the policies that United States, which rose to the position of unrivaled hegemonic power after the Cold War, has started to pursue after George W. Bush's taking power in November 2000 elections, have drawn reactions from other states, as everyone witnessed in the process leading to the Iraq War. Although no decisions were taken for the intervention in Iraq in United Nations, the highest center of the global cooperation, "the Coalition of the Willing", led by the US, conducted a military operation in Iraq. No matter what the reason is, the Iraq operation, conducted against the existing international legal system, caused criticisms such as "the hegemonic power sees itself above the international law and the international community." Thus, existence of a hegemonic power that does not need a large consensus in the international platform and it makes foreign policy decisions whether it has UN backing or not, which declares that it would do its actions on its own, and having the necessary political, economic and military capacity for making progress on this path and which never accepts supervision by the institutions of the international system has given rise to the assumption that multilateral cooperation in the struggle against global and regional threats could work only within the scope allowed by this power.

Threats of the Globalization Era

Proliferation of Conventional Weapons and Weapons of Mass Destruction

As the balance between blocs has disappeared, it also has caused the leaders of the blocs to lose their control mechanism on states within their own bloc or on those states under their sphere of influence. Thus, armament that could be limited to some regions during the Cold War years has started spreading to the whole world with the end of the Cold War. Regional conflicts with ethnic and religious characteristics in this new era; border and land disagreements stemming from political disintegration has given rise to mutual armament of the nations that perceive a possible threat from each other.

Money spent for armament in the last year of the 20th century was $780 billion, and the figure was $839 billion for the first year of the 21st century. This number represents a 2% increase from last year. This upward trend continued in 2002 as well, and 2.6 percent of the world gross product is allocated for armament. As much as countries like the USA, China, Russian Federation and France rank high in armaments spending just like in the Cold War years, rapid armament by countries with profound economic and political problems in regions like Africa, South Asia, Balkans and the Caucasus is striking. (3)

The money allocated to armament expenses in the world between 1992-2001 is $7,625 billion (4). An additional point that should be emphasized here is the spread of mass destruction weapons and the boom in the number of countries that are trying to find or produce mass destruction weapons in the globalization era. Although conventional armament is a global threat on its own, the scope of the threat caused by the spread of weapons of mass destruction poses an even greater threat. It is known that nearly 30 countries have biological and chemical weapons or they are trying to produce them. (5) The majority of the states concerned are located in crisis regions that could be engulfed in a conflict at any time.

Along with these weapons, which inflict massive damage, the threat of proliferation of nuclear weapons has also emerged after the end of the Cold War. Some nations other than the nuclear powers in the UN Security Council, the US, Russia, Britain, France and China, such as Israel, India and Pakistan have nuclear weapons or trying to possess them. Among the nations that are trying to produce nuclear weapons are Algeria, Belarus, Iran, Kazakhstan, North Korea, Serbia (Yugoslavia), South Africa and Ukraine. (6)

The development that has made weapons of mass destruction an even bigger threat is that some countries are developing ballistic missile systems for delivering these weapons to perceived enemies far away. Among the countries that have accelerated their ballistic missile development projects after the end of the Cold War are China, India, Pakistan, Iran and Syria. China's DF-31 and JL-2, North Korea's Taepo Dong-2, Iran's Shahab-3, Scud and SS-21. India's Prithvi-1-2 and Pakistan's Ghauri and Shahin-1-2 missile systems have the qualities to be used in a possible crisis. (7) These countries' closing their ballistic missile programs to international inspections causes this threat to become greater.

International Terrorism

Terrorist organizations, which had operated in narrow regions, although they had international contacts before 1990s, started operating globally by taking advantage of the environment brought by globalization and using the adversities stemming from globalization for recruiting members and justifying their causes. Serious measures by international actors against terrorism, which has affected several countries including Turkey for many years, could be implemented after September 11 terrorist attacks. Still it is hard to say whether some powers, especially the European Union, can show the necessary sensitivity on anti-terror measures.

On the other hand, although important steps have been taken against international terrorism since September 11, 2001, it is apparent that terrorism will continue to be a global problem for a long time whose time, scale and target cannot be predicted. Indeed, the mass terrorist attack on the island of Bali on 13 October 2002 which killed 200, the bomb attacks in the subsequent days in the Philippines and the terrorist attack in the Saudi city of Riyadh in May 2003 attest to this.

The most striking difference of terrorist attacks of the globalization era is the evolution of the methods put into use. Nerve gas attack in Tokyo in 1980s, the use of civilian airliners as bombs on September 11, prove that unimaginable methods in addition to the traditional methods will be used by terrorist organizations. Of course in this case, traditional methods to combat terrorism prove insufficient. This has created a new type of threat that is called "asymmetrical threat".

At the basis of asymmetrical threat concept lays the superiority of the attacker against its target despite its relative weakness. Asymmetrical attacks are usually materialized by taking advantage of the weakness of the target. In this method, attackers use the fears of civilians and try to reduce their support to the governmental mechanisms and create political and economic instability with asymmetrical attacks, in which mass destruction weapons, which are easily accessed with globalization, can be used. Again, with the help of information technologies, a very small terrorist organization can attack causing heavy destruction totally out of sync with their number.

The number of terrorist attacks, counted as 489 in 1980, rose to 666 in 1987, and varied between 400 and 500 in the following years. The number of terrorist attacks in 2001 was 348. The numerical fall in terrorist attacks does not mean that the damage they caused has also fallen. The loss of lives and wealth caused by terrorist attacks by one single attack is rising each year. The terrorist attacks, seen more often in only certain regions previously, has spread to the whole world with globalization. (8)

Efforts for international cooperation for fighting terrorism, that has become a big threat for the security of nations, have also increased. However, there is no consensus on even the definition of terrorism and the difficulties in judging the terrorists caught in third countries or their surrender to the countries subject to the attack are among the biggest weaknesses of international struggle against terrorism.

International Organized Crimes

The possibilities and easiness provided by globalization caused organized crime to spread from the streets and suburbs to beyond the borders and global scale. All countries in the world feel the damage given by international criminal organizations on their national security. A basic reason for the rise of organized crime during globalization is the disappearance of political geography after the Cold War. Complete or partial disappearance of the barriers in front of free circulation of the goods, people and the capital did not only pave the way for easier international trade,but also for more mobile criminal organizations. By taking advantage of the conditions brought by the free market economy, they could find legal grounds for laundering their illegal earnings, and transfer their revenues earned from international crime to business. The bodies such as the EU and the NAFTA that predicate free trade order and the liberal policies imposed by the World Trade Organization increase international trade volume, and also create an environment in which international crime organizations hide themselves in this expanded volume. Corruption that gained momentum in some countries with globalization has also benefited international criminal organizations.

Additionally, extraordinary developments in information technologies together with globalization enabled money transfer via Internet and made illegal activities of international criminal organizations easier. (9)

Traditional organized crimes such as drug trade, prostitution, illegal immigration, illegal gambling, credit card frauds, are also continuing in the globalization era. What is new about the globalization era is that discovery of the crimes has become more difficult with the use of "cyber space", easy cooperation of very distant criminal organizations, higher education level of the people working for criminal organizations or the companies working for these organizations, compared to the past.

The number of criminal organizations in Eastern Bloc countries skyrocketed with the end of the Cold War. It is known that there are 5,000 criminal organizations with at least 10,000 members in the Russian Federation. These organizations are controlling 25-40 percent of the Russian gross national product. Organized crime is also on the rise in Asia, especially in Hong-Kong, China, Vietnam and Japan. Sun Yee On, a Hong-Kong based criminal organization, has 47,000-60,000 members carrying out criminal activities across the world, and the number of people working for Yakuza in Japan is 80,000. The organizations are mostly active in Nigeria and South Africa in the African continent and in Colombia, Brazil, Argentina and Peru in Latin America. There is an increase in organized crime, traditionally controlled by Italian families, in the US. Illegal groups, gathered together under La Cosa Nostra, are working across the world from their bases in the US. (10)

A close relationship has been formed between international crime organizations and terrorist organizations with the coming of globalization, and terrorist organizations have either entered the work field of international criminal organizations or cooperated with them for raising funds for themselves. Within this context, the governments are trying to strengthen cross-border fighting methods against the organizations working beyond their national borders and trying to make the organizations such as Interpol and Europol more effective. In parallel with this, development of the mechanisms for controlling "cyber space" has been examined.

Threat of Global Epidemic Diseases

The gap between the rich and the poor parts of the world had widened further with globalization. While globalization brought a rise in welfare and higher standards of living of developed nations, life quality of the people living in developing or underdeveloped countries has declined. Despite poverty alleviation programs by the United Nations, epidemic diseases started threatening populations of poor countries and their political stability due to bad living conditions, lack of education, and lack of funds for health and social services.

Since mid-1970s, twenty epidemic diseases, especially tuberculosis, malaria and cholera, has began to rise rapidly, and at the same time nearly thirty epidemic diseases, which had not been known before such as HIV (AIDS), Ebola, Hepatit C has started spreading. It is estimated that tuberculosis and AIDS will cause a great majority of deaths in developing and underdeveloped countries in 2020. The number of AIDS carriers in the world in 2001 was around 40 million, and 28.1 million of this is in sub-Saharan Africa, and 2.7 million are children. The number of AIDS deaths in 2001 was three million. The number of people that caught AIDS in 2000-2001 is five million (11). In the world, 63 percent of children deaths and 48 percent of premature deaths stem from epidemic diseases. (12)

Meanwhile, epidemic diseases spreading both among humans and animals are damaging the economies of developing countries as well as developed countries. For example, it is estimated that the cost of food and mouth disease to Britain is above $10 billion for 1990-2000. The cost of plague epidemic in India in 1995 was $1.7 billion, and the cost of "chicken cold" in Hong Kong was to termination of all chickens in the country and the cost of cholera epidemic in Peru was $770 million. (13)

Ethnic- and Religious-Based Conflicts

The number of ethnic-religious conflicts and the number of people suffered from these conflicts have greatly increased since the early 1990s. A part of the problems in Rwanda, Bosnia, Kosovo, Northern Ireland, Palestine, Sri Lanka, Kashmir, Chechnya ended with the intervention of international community, but most are continuing.

Such conflicts damage the political, social and economic cohesion of the country or countries in question, but also cause regional and global threats. Although the thesis of Samuel Huntington in his famous the Clash of Civilizations that ethnic and religious conflicts would intensify at intersection points of different civilizations have been confirmed with the conflicts going in since 1990, but the risk that the move of such conflicts from the localities to the globe together with globalization and putting post-modern methods on top of classical conflict in an unstoppable way, exists. Especially after September 11 attacks, those who view these attacks as the beginning of a Muslim-Christian conflict and the US' anti-terror campaign as a crusade actually point out bigger disasters that might await in the future.

Environmental Threats

The damage given to environment can also be included among the most important threats that have been brought to surface during globalization, because the whole humanity is subject to this danger. Pollution in the seas and shrinking fresh water resources, problems arising from chemical, biological and nuclear wastes, climatic changes and the shrinkage in arable land due to global warming and erosion, are also threatening the world.

Excess carbon dioxide together with industrialization has thinned the ozone layer in the atmosphere, and average temperatures in the northern hemisphere increased by five degrees in the last century. It is estimated that the average temperatures will rise by 1.4-5.8 degrees in the next 100 years. Great glaciers have started to melt down as a result of global warming and this has given rise to thick rainfall, floods, great typhoons (El Nino etc), large-scaled erosion and flooding of coastal areas. At the same time, global warming has had adverse impact on vegetables and animal species in the world and has established the basis for global food scarcities in the future. (14)

Environmental problems, malnutrition and respiratory problems cause spread of some diseases, in particular cancer, lungs diseases and osteolysis. Although this kind of adverse effects of globalization is felt across the world, the damage felt in developing or underdeveloped countries is greater compared to the others. (15) Other than this, the efforts for international cooperation against environmental threats such as global warming have intensified.

However, reluctant attitudes of some industrialized nations, the US in particular, leaves no room for reducing environmental threats. George W. Bush withdrawing US participation in Kyoto protocol after he took office with the claim that the US national industry would be damaged from the protocol's conditions made international cooperation meaningless because nearly 70 percent of harmful gases released to the atmosphere come from the US. (16)

Development of Reciprocation Methods for Global Threats

The Work Carried Out under the United Nations Auspices

The United Nations is the leading multi-lateral cooperation organization in the fight against the major global threats, listed above. However, it is obvious that the works carried out under the UN cannot eliminate all of the threats in question.

Important steps have been taken against production and proliferation of weapons of mass destruction as the result of the efforts under the Department of Disarmament Affairs. The Contract of Biological Weapons signed in 1972 lacked an efficient inspection mechanism and although more than 30 years passed since this agreement was signed, this prevented the complete destruction of biological weapons. In the third conference for reviewing functioning of the contract in 1991, a group of experts was formed for developing possible inspection mechanism. In the conference held in Geneva in 1994 for the nations that have signed the contract, it was decided that the countries work jointly for effective implementation of the contract. However, many countries thought to have biological weapons have not signed the contract yet and this delays the success of the UN efforts for destruction of biological weapons. (17)

A similar process is underway concerning chemical weapons. At the end of long negotiations, the Disarmament Conference could reach a consensus in 1992 on the wording of the Chemical Weapons Contract and the United Nations General Assembly accepted this text on November 30, 1992. This contract is the first international document, accepted in a multilateral platform after discussions, for destruction of chemical weapons. The convention took effect after enough many member states gave their approval in 1997, and the Organization for the Prohibition of Chemical Weapons (OPCW) was founded for supervising the implementation of the convention. Unfortunately, these efforts have not resulted in complete elimination of chemical weapons from the world stage. (18)

The UN efforts for preventing proliferation of nuclear weapons resulted in an important achievement as the Nuclear Disarmament Convention took effect in 1970. The International Atomic Energy Agency inspects the obligations brought by the agreement signed by 187 countries in March 2002. However, some nations, which have nuclear weapons, did not sign this agreement and some countries having not opened their programs to the inspection of the International Atomic Energy Agency results in the proliferation of nuclear weapons remaining a great danger for the world. (19)

The UN is also spending intense efforts on the struggle against terrorism, another serious global threat. The UN pioneered preparation of several conventions for prevention of terrorism since early 1970s, when terrorism started to be used in international arena frequently. Among these, there are the Convention on the Prevention and Punishment of Crimes against Internationally Protected Persons, including Diplomatic Agents, dated December 14, 1973; the International Convention against the Taking of Hostages, dated December 17, 1979; International Convention for the Suppression of Terrorist Bombings, dated December 15, 1997; and the International Convention for the Suppression of the Financing of Terrorism, dated December 9, 1999. Unfortunately, these conventions could not succeed in complete disappearance of terrorist activities.

Anti-terrorist struggle efforts in the UN were given speed after September 11 terrorist attacks, and the UN Security Council considered anti-terrorism struggle within the scope of the UN convention's seventh chapter under the heading of "The Measures Against Threat to Peace, Violation of Peace and Attacks", and took the decisions with resolutions number 1368 and 1373 for the UN's complete support to efforts against terrorism. "Workshop on Policy" was founded in October 2001 in the UN concerning terrorism. This group is examining international tools for carrying out efficient and effective struggle against terrorism, and is also trying to protect human rights during this struggle. (20).

Works carried out under the UN are influential in ending terrorist activities across the world, but the degree of this influence is far from meeting expectations. It is thought provoking that an inclusive definition of terrorism has no place in any of the contracts prepared by the UN or in the reports of the working groups.

The Works of the Organization for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE)

The Commission on Security and Cooperation in Europe (CSCE), founded for developing dialog between Western and Eastern blocs during the Cold War, was turned into the OSCE with the Paris Agreement signed in 1990, and became a permanent platform for dialog. The organization has 55 members today, and it has worked actively during the Cold War to eliminate tensions.

The OSCE is working on the basis that a single organization or country cannot cope with the threats and risks of the globalization period without multilateral cooperation, and it is working for strengthening the relations and climate of solidarity between its members and between the OSCE and other international organizations. Human rights, basic freedoms, democracy and the rule of law are at the center of the OSCE's inclusive security concept. The OSCE takes fighting violations of human rights and basic freedoms, including freedom of thought and religion, intolerance, aggressive nationalism, racism, terrorism, chauvinism, xenophobia, and anti-Semitism, and set up an Urgent Expert Aid and Cooperation Teams, a civil initiative, for prevention of conflicts, crisis management and post-conflict rehabilitation. One of the most important working fields of the OSCE is to monitor implementation of the European Conventional Forces Agreement. (21)

The European Security Agreement, accepted in the OSCE summit on November 19, 1999 in Istanbul by 54 member nations reveals the OSCE's priorities during globalization and multi-lateral cooperation's dynamics, targeted by the OSCE.

In the European Security Agreement, it is stressed that important successes were witnessed in the last ten years of the 20th century, previously-existing tensions were replaced by cooperation, but the danger of conflict between the states could not be eliminated altogether, and new risks and threats emerged in Europe as the divisions of the past are left behind. In the agreement, it is stated that these tensions stem from discord within the societies as well as disagreements between the states. The agreement says that security and peace could be sustained only through restoring confidence between citizens and development of cooperation between the states.

The agreement says that international terrorism, violent extremism, organized crime and drug smuggling have risen as growing threats against security, and adds that terrorism is unacceptable no matter what the reason is and what shape it takes, and the nations pledge that the efforts for preventing preparation of all kinds of terrorist activities and finding financial support, and they would never permit terrorist basis on their soil.

The issue continuously emphasized in OSCE documents is to strengthen multilateral cooperation against new threats. In the Istanbul Convention, it is stated that the OSCE members would be careful that other organizations and institutions they work with should be compliant with the OSCE's Security Platform based on Cooperation. (22)

It is not possible to say that this cooperation has reached satisfactory levels despite multilateral cooperation calls. Sometimes, 55 member nations of the OSCE give priority to their regional interests and priorities and act and behave in a way not compliant with the general priorities of the OSCE. Lack of satisfactory preventative mechanisms for obstructing such actions and also some organizations' undertaking the job of the OSCE causes decreasing influence of OSCE. It is possible that the OSCE might be the basic platform of peace, stability, security and cooperation in the region extending from Vancouver to Vladivostok by speeding up the OSCE work with a new understanding.

The Works of the NATO and the US

Great difficulties have been faced in the early years following the end of the Cold War in predicting and taking necessary precautions against new ways of threats. The hesitation of the West, which won a struggle of 45 years, in this new environment or the new world order, was observed most obviously in the transformation efforts of the Western bloc's most effective defense organization, NATO.

"Strategic Concept" document, accepted in the NATO summit in Rome on November 7-8, 1991, showed that the alliance had difficulty in describing its mission after the Cold War. In the Strategic Concept, four working fields concerning provision of security for member countries, basic goals of the NATO, were emphasized (23):
1 - Establishment of the environment of stability and security in Europe in a way to allow development of democratic institutions and prevent that any nation threatens any European country or put pressure with the threat of coercion;
2 - Formation of a trans-Atlantic forum for an appropriate coordination of the efforts concerning the member nations' interests including the risk-posing possible developments, expressed in the fourth provision of the North Atlantic Treaty;
3 - Deterring threats and attacks towards member nations and defending them;
4 - Protection of strategic balance in Europe.

The definition of threat stated in the first provision was based on the understanding that the threat would continue to come from other states. However, the new international order during globalization includes the threats coming from the states, but danger arose mostly from non-state entities.

New definitions of threat, agreed with "the New Strategic Concept" (24), accepted in Washington summit in April 1999 at the 50th anniversary for the alliance showed that many things had changed in eight years. In this New Strategic Concept, it was emphasized that the NATO would defend its members not only against direct attacks but also from the risk factors, causing instability in Europe, which might have direct or indirect adverse impact on alliance members. These risk factors are listed in the New Strategic Concept's 20th-24th provisions as ethnic and religious rivalry, regional discords, insufficient or unsuccessful reform efforts, human rights violations, and disintegration of the states, proliferation of mass destruction weapons, terrorism, sabotage and organized crimes.

The NATO's taking action to help the US for the first time in its history after September 11 attacks showed the importance attached by the alliance to anti-terrorism struggle.

However, the disagreements that came to surface before and the during the Iraq War, between the leadership of the US and the alliance members, indicated that similar difficulties might be experienced in the future regarding determination of the attitude allies in similar cases.

Like the NATO, which had difficulty in perceiving and assessing the threats of the new period, the US, which gained the status of the world's only super power after the end of Soviet Union, had difficulties in predicting possible new threats against its national security.

It is possible to see the traces of surprise felt by a new order while the rise in confidence stemming from defeating the archrival of the US in the US National Security Strategy, released in August 1991, just after the Gulf War in August 1990 - April 1991, when the USSR still existed. (25)

"The great struggle dividing the world into two for two generations ended. Disappearance of the Soviet rule in Eastern Europe means that the Cold War has ended and the most important problem was solved. The world has entered a period that could not be imagined only three years ago. This new period includes great expectations and uncertainties", the new strategy text says at the beginning, and then it described the instability following the Cold War as follows:

"Shaping security strategies for the new period necessitates the examination of the extraordinary trends that continue to develop today. We should clearly see what has changed and what has not. We should make use of the opportunities presented to us by history and should not ignore continuing dangers."

In 1991's strategy, the necessity of taking cautious steps in a transformation of the military structure was emphasized. The strategy pointed out restructuring of the US army and the NATO for fighting diversified threat factors instead of a single and concrete enemy. It was underlined that new enemies might damage US interests as the nation reduces conventional arms stock after the disappearance of the Soviet threat. Just like the NATO strategy, the US strategy also speaks of possible new threats but makes no analyses on what these new enemies could be.

A National Security Strategy for a New Century (26), announced by Bill Clinton in 1997, repeated previously stated goals and basic principles and classified the threats against US interests. Under the heading "Regional or State-centered Threats", the report said that some states still had the intention and capacity to threaten the vital interests of the US, and these countries were trying to strengthen their capacity including nuclear, biological and chemical weapons and sometimes cause regional tensions. Under the heading "Trans-national Threats", the report states that terrorism, illegal drug smuggling, arms smuggling, international organized crimes, uncontrolled illegal immigration, and environmental pollution were mentioned as damaging to the US interests. Under the heading "The Threat Stemming from the Weapons of Mass Destruction", the report underlined that these weapons posed the biggest threat for global security, and stressed that it was unacceptable that nations hostile to the US and the world security own these weapons. In 1997 strategy, it is indicated that no country could fight the afore-mentioned threats on its own, and it was expressed that the US wanted to cooperate with major countries against these threats.

A National Security Strategy for a New Century (27), made public by Clinton administration in 1999, is written with an approach putting emphasis on the whole of globalization process, also stated in 1998 strategy, and nearly resting the whole strategy on globalization. Why the globalization is given so much importance is understood from the concept's definition by the US administration. According to the US, "(…) globalization is a process making people from all continents closer, accelerating economic, technological, cultural and political integration, allowing the share of their ideas, goods and knowledge." In the paragraph following this general definition, what the US understands from globalization is stated: "Increased number of people from all sides of the world embrace basic values of the US such as democratic administration, free market economy, respect to human rights and the rule of law, creation of new opportunities for peace, welfare and cooperation between the countries. Many of our former enemies are now in cooperation with the US for common goals. The dynamism of the global economy is transforming trade, culture, communication and global relations, and is creating new jobs and opportunities for Americans." (28)

This strategy stated that the globalization brought new risk factors with itself and rogue states and ethnic conflicts are threatening the regional stability and development in several places of the world, and the international crimes such as weapons of mass destruction, terrorism, drug smuggling are source of concern for all states. (29)

In the strategy, it is stated that the US was interested in developments all around the world in order to preserve its own interests: "If the global economy gets into an economic instability, and overseas markets collapse or are closed to the Americans, then our business would be damaged. If we cannot have other countries establish some standards in environmental protection, then national laws might not be able to protect the US. In brief, US citizens are closely interested in the rise of welfare and stability for other nations, their support of international norms and human rights, their ability in the struggle against international crimes, commitment to the free market and efforts for conservation of the environment." (30)

Another new point in 1999 strategy was to give a significant place to the "national missile defense" system. This had been stated in 1998 report only in brief under the "missile defense" heading, but in 1999 report it is discussed in detail. The report emphasized that the US received threats from the states developing long-range weapons of mass destruction, and the possibility of intercontinental ballistic missile attack on the US from the rogue states (31) was increasing every day. The US had the intention of developing a limited missile defense system, starting from 2000 in order to eliminate this threat, and to make this possible, the US would focus on diplomatic negotiations for making necessary changes in the Anti-Ballistic Missile Agreement, dated 1972. (32)

Surely, all of these US strategies stated that terrorism was an increasingly stronger threat factor. But despite all precautions, September 11 attacks could not be prevented. George W. Bush administration, believing that the measures planned against terrorism that was evolving, would be insufficient and more effective methods were needed. He focused on pre-emptive strike in its National Security Strategy (33), announced in September 20002. The US was convinced that preventing the aggressor before the aggression materializes was the most successful method of fighting terrorism. The war against Iraq in 2003 was based on pre-emptive strike concept with the argument that Iraq's alleged weapons of mass destruction might damage the US and its allies. However, the principles of international law regarding the use of force does not provide the basis for legitimate defense as the US understands it, and this caused legitimacy controversy on US's possible actions.

Conclusion

Globalization brought to a part of humanity a high level of welfare, supported by technology, making people's lives easier. However, the majority of the world population in developing and underdeveloped countries are facing more and more serious problems such as hunger, epidemics, lack of education, environmental disasters etc. At the same time, the risks are becoming more dangerous every day due to the more advanced methods they are exercising, as terrorism, proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and international organized crime has entered the center stage.

Against the threats of the new period no country, either a hegemonic power or an underdeveloped country, can be successful on its own. Humanity needs cooperation and solidarity more than ever. However, existing international dynamics do not have the qualities to make such cooperation easier in the short term.

Cooperative environments, aimed only at eliminating the threats perceived by the hegemonic power and serving its interests, without taking into account the priorities of the majority of the humanity cannot be long lasting and permanent. Fighting current reflections of the risks and threats without destroying the environment, which creates and develops these global threats and risks, will not prevent re-emergence of these risks and threats in a stronger fashion after a while.

Hegemonic power ignoring existing international legal norms and international platforms, and especially the United Nations, during its fighting the perceived threats, makes these institutions less credible. Damaging these institutions, the basic pillars of the international system, might cause chaos in the world system.

The steps for giving back the United Nations its credibility should be a priority in the combat strategies against existing and possible risks and threats. Otherwise, it will not be possible to unite on a global platform in fighting global problems. Multilateral cooperation is possible only under the roof of multilateral institutions. The coalitions of the willing are far from meeting the necessity for true multilateral cooperation.

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

1. Şule Kut and Gencer Özcan (Ed.) En Uzun Onyıl, İstanbul, Boyut, 1999.
2. Global Trends 2015: A Dialogue About the Future with Nongovernment Experts, National Intelligence Council, Washington DC, 2000.
3. "Military Expenditure", SIPRI Yearbook 2002: Armaments, Disarmament and International Security, Oxford, Oxford University Press, 2002.
4. Ibid., Table 6.1.
5. Aforementioned countries are: USA, England, France, Italy, Germany, Canada, Morocco, China, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, India, Iran, Iraq, Israel, Japan, Libya, Burma, N. Korea, S. Korea, Pakistan, Russia, S. Africa, Sudan, Syria, Taiwan, Vietnam, Yugoslavia. Monterey Institute of International Studies, http://cns.miis.edu/research/cbw/possess.htm
6. States Possessing, Pursuing or Capable of Acquiring Weapons of Mass Destruction,
http://www.fas.org/irp/threat/wmd_state.htm
7. Foreign Missile Developments and the Ballistic Missile Threat Through 2015, Washington D.C., National Intelligence Council, 2001, p. 1-14.
8. Patterns of Global Terrorism 2001, http://www.state.gov/s/ct/rls/pgtrpt/2001/pdf/.
9. International Crime Threat Assessment,
http://www.terrorism.com/documents/pub45270/pub45270chap1.html
10. Transnational Criminal Activity: A Global Context,
http://www.csis-scrs.gc.ca/eng/miscdocs/200007_e.html.
11. Global Summary of HIV / AIDS Epidemic December 2001,
http://www.unaids.org/worldaidsday/2001/EPIgraphics2001/EPIgraphic1_en.gif
12. Global Epidemic Detection and Response, http://www.who.int/emc/surveill/index.html
13. Ibid.
14. Environmental Threats, http://www.wwf-uk.org/core/wildlife/environmentalthreats.asp
15. Environmental Risks to Human Health, http://www.wri.org/wr-98-99/indictrs.htm
16. Catherine Hagern, "Kyoto Protocol Without the United States: with no teeth", Cicerone, http://www.cicero.uio.no/media/1342.pdf.
17. Michael Crowley, "Combating Biological Weapons", UN Chronicle, Vol: XXXIX, No: 2 (2002).
18. UN Department for Disarmament Affairs, "The Chemical Weapons Convention",
http://www.un.org/Depts/dda/WMD/cwc/.
19. UN and Disarmament, http://www.un.org/Depts/dda/WMD/treaty/.
20. "Report of the Policy Working Group on the United Nations and Terrorism", UN Action Against Terrorism, http://www.un.org/terrorism/a57273.htm.
21. Turkish Republic of Ministry of Foreign Affairs, "Türkiye ve AGİT", www.mfa.gov.ter/Turkce/grupa/sart.htm.
22. Ibid.
23. "İttifak'ın Yeni Stratejik Kavramı" NATO Review, Vol:1 (1992), p.5.
24. "The Alliance's New Strategic Concept", NATO Review, Vol:2 (1999), p: D7-D13.
25. National Strategy of the United States, August 1991, < http://www.fas.org/man/docs/918015-nss.htm>, (25.06.2001).
26. A National Security Strategy for A New Century, Washington D.C., The White House, May 1997, http://www.fas.org/man/docs/strategy97.htm, (21.06.2001).
27. A National Security Strategy for A New Century, Washington DC, The White House, December, 1999.
28. Ibid. ,p.1.
29. Idem.
30. Idem.
31. The "Rogue State" definition had been used for the states of North Korea, Libya, Iran, Iraq and Cuba, which were in conflict with the USA and accused of supporting international terrorism during Clinton administration. In the middle of the year 2000, the US Presidency declared that this definition would no more be pronounced.
32. A National Security... (1999), op.cit.,p.16.
33. National Security Strategy, Washington DC, The White House, September, 2002.