NAME DAMBUZA TANATSIWA

COURSE INTERNATIONAL CONFLICT STUDIES

REG NUMBER R177727S

QUESTION Examine the implications of the unipolar system

characteristic of the immediate post-Cold War order on conflict formation on the basis of the
following:

1. Proliferation of Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMDs)

2. Rapid Globalization
3. Fragmentation
4. Democratization
The end of the cold war in 1990 marked the end of the five decade ideological contestations
between the United States of America (USA) and the Soviet Union (USSR). USA‟s democracy
was triumphant over Soviet‟s communism which left the former as the sole power. This saw the
world turning from the bipolar system to a unipolar system where US assumed the role of an
overarching authority. This had both positive and negative implications on conflict formation
since countries took this differently. This is because since the end of the cold war, US has been
trying to impose a universal empire (New World Order) which has resulted in the formation of
the revisionist, pariah, rogue, and status quo states. The theories that undergird the characteristics
of the unipolar system after the cold war include the hegemonic stability theory and power
transition theory. This essay is going to examine the implication of unipolarity on conflict
formation on the basis of proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, rapid globalization,
fragmentation and democratization.

1. Proliferation of WMDs

Proliferation of weapons of mass destruction is basically the attainment, acquiring, manufacture

and spread of weapons of mass destruction. Proliferation can also include illegal smuggle of
WMDs or any related materials, technology and equipment. The phrase WMD is amorphous
which means that it does not have a single definition. WMDs can be defined as any weapon or
device that is intended, or has the capability, to cause death or serious bodily injury to a
significant number of people through the release, dissemination, or impact of toxic or poisonous
chemicals or their precursors; a disease organism; radiation or radioactivity (Galamis and Garcia
2004: 1). According to General Intelligence and Security Service (2003: 9), “weapons of mass
destruction can kill or eliminate large numbers of people in a short time.” These weapons include
nuclear, biological, chemical and radiological weapons among others. States have tried to avoid
the implications of these weapons by signing proliferation prevention mechanisms such as
Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT), the Biological and Toxin Weapons Convention (BTWC)
and the Chemical Weapons Convention (CWC) among other treaties. However, other non-state
actors now possess these weapons and it has become a new threat to international peace and
security.

Proliferation of WMDs became a source of conflict in the post-cold war unipolar system because
many countries are now pursuing it. In the post-cold war era the threat of WMDs has become
multidimensional and unpredictable. States which do not trust the US dominance in the
international system have developed and stockpiled weapons of mass destruction such as nuclear
and ballistic weapons as a way of securitization. So despite various relevant treaties against
proliferation there are still countries that seek to possess weapons of mass destruction. These
countries include Iran, Iraq, Syria, Israel, Pakistan and India. Iran which is an enemy of US since
the revolution in 1979 tested two ballistic missiles between 1998 and 2002 although it is part of
nonproliferation treaties such as NPT. In the 1990s Libya and Iraq claimed their possession and
intentions to build nuclear weapons which resulted in the great conflicts between US and the two
Arabic nations. In 2003, the US invaded Iraq and overthrow Saddam Hussein because it thought
he was a sponsor of terrorism. However, the US had ignored the stockpiling and proliferation of
WMDs by its allies such as Israel, India and Saudi Arabia. This unfaithful act of double
standards has resulted into conflict formation.

In addition, according to the power transition theory, US dominance and its possession of nuclear
weapons causes non-nuclear states to feel like their security is threatened so they seek to revise
the global polar system by any means. This has resulted in the rise of revisionist and rejectionist
states such as North Korea which withdrew from the NPT in 2003 after the brutal killing of
Saddam Hussein. This saw the country restarting its nuclear reactors that were closed under the
1994 treaty. North Korea‟s possession of nuclear weapons means that US ally, South Korea‟s
security is under threat and it has the duty to protect it which has been the major cause of conflict
in the Asian Pacific during the cold war and beyond. Thus, revisionism and lack of compliance
to the nonproliferation agreements have been the major cause of conflicts in the post-cold war
unipolar system.

However, the post-cold war era under the US dominance saw many countries voluntarily
dismantling their nuclear proliferation programs and placed their nuclear programs and materials
under IAEA safeguards. According to IPA report the Newly Independent States of the former
Soviet Union agreed to transfer inherited arsenals to Russia and signed the NPT as non-nuclear
weapons states. Libya was applauded by Bush in 2004 for dismantle its proliferation programs
under the International Atomic Energy Agency and the Organization for the Prohibition of
Chemical Weapons. This brought a sense of understanding rather than conflict in the post-cold
war unipolar system.
 2. Rapid Globalization

Globalization is a term in heavy current usage but one whose meaning remains obscure, vague
and contested. According to IMF (2008), “globalization refers to an extension beyond national
borders of the same market forces that have operated for centuries at all levels of human
economic activity-village markets, urban industries, or financial centers.” The Organization for
Economic Cooperation and Development defines it as a process "by which markets and
production in different countries are becoming increasingly interdependent due to dynamics of
trade in goods and services, and then flows of capital and technology." International relations
have become truly global in the post-Cold War world. Communications are instantaneous and
the world economy operates on all continents simultaneously. A whole set of issues has surfaced
that can only be dealt with on a worldwide basis, such as nuclear proliferation, the environment,
the population explosion, and economic interdependence. Therefore, globalization is implies the
worldwide movement towards economic, financial, trade and communication integration. This
has become more popular after the end of the cold war and has caused both positive and negative
implication in conflict formation in the post-cold war era or the era of globalization. This is
going to be discussed below.

Globalization in the post-cold war unipolar world has been the source of cultural conflicts and
religious fundamentalism. Soon after the cold war, Americanization became the dominant
culture in which USA tried to spread it to every country destroying other cultures in the process
which might have caused the rise of cultural determinism and religious fundamentalism.
Culturally-speaking, Ritzer (1983) views globalization as „globalization of nothing‟ that destroys
cultures to create cultureless consumerism of „Big Macs‟ and homogenization of societies
through global corporations, most of which are Western such as the McDonald‟s. The rise of
religious militancy has been the main cause of conflict between the North and the South. It
seems that religiously-driven conflicts have replaced the ideological zone of the Cold War as a
serious source of international conflict. This is supported by Huntington (1993: 45) who argues
that religion and ethnicity discriminates sharply and exclusively among people because as people
define their identity in ethnic and religious terms, they are likely to see an “us” versus “them”
relation existing between themselves and people of different ethnicity and religion. This has been
seen in Iran, Sudan and other Islam movements such as Boko Haram and ISIS which are against
globalization and this has seen the rise of the clash of civilizations and conflicts between the
Muslim and non-Muslim states. Therefore, globalization has led to religious fundamentalism
which has become a source of conflict in the post-cold war era.

Globalization in the post-cold war unipolar system has been the major cause of conflict because
it undermines state sovereignty. Since the 1648 treaty of Westphalia t states have been enjoying
and unchallenged sovereignty. However, the idea of states as autonomous or independent entities
is collapsing under the combined onslaught of monetary unions, global television CNN, the
Internet, governmental and non-governmental organizations. Sovereignty is the central attribute
of the state as a form of political organization so anything that affects state sovereignty
inevitably becomes a security threat hence, conflict is bound to happen. Globalization since the
coining of the Washington Consensus in 1989 has been spread by NGOs, INGOs and MNCs.
These institutions especially the World Bank and IMF have failed to solve the problems in the
south but rather, they have left these states worse off (Stiglitz 2002). This has caused conflicts
between the south and the North because the South has been greatly underdeveloped due to
globalization whereas the North has gotten richer in the period. So the South keeps blaming the
North for its misfortunes which has resulted in the intense relationships between the two fronts.
Thus, globalization in the post-cold war era has been the source of conflict due to its contribution
in the undermining of state sovereignty.

Furthermore, terrorism is a child of globalization that has been notoriously known as the source
of conflict in the post-cold war unipolar system. Globalization is responsible for the increase of
terrorism because technologies associated with it have improved terrorist capabilities. This
allows terrorists to operate in a highly distributed global „network‟ that shares information and
allows small cells to conduct highly coordinated, lethal attacks (Baylis 2006). According to Haas
(2008), the world is now under threat of terrorists who use the Internet to recruit and train, the
international banking system to move resources, and the global transport system to move people.
thus, due to globalization terrorism has also become internationalized as evidenced by existence
of terror groups such as Al-Qaeda, ISIS and Hamas all over the world. According to Garcia
(2014), shifts in the international system after the end of the Cold War made it increasingly
difficult to control the flow of people, technology, money and material which became the
gateway for terrorisms. Due to globalization which makes communication and transportation
easy, transnational terrorists have a variety of new tactics and strategies to wreak havoc at their
targets. The 9/11 terror attack is a clear evidence that now terrorist can reach anywhere in a short
period of time due to porous borders. This has created great tensions between US and the Middle
Eastern countries which are still there up to date especially with countries such as Iran, Iraq and
Afghanistan which it views as the sponsors of terror. Therefore, globalization has greatly
contributed to the conflicts around the world in the post-cold war era.

However, globalization has its positive impacts in the post-cold war era which includes
cooperation among states necessitated by INGOs such as WTO for peaceful trading and the UN
which has been involved in many peacekeeping and peacemaking missions in Darfur, Rwanda,
Somalia, Yemen, Sudan and many other countries. This has seen reduction in trade and
conventional wars around the world. Free trade and openness of borders has brought also
positive effects in global stability although it has its weaknesses. Hence, globalization has also
contributed positively in the post-cold war period.

3. Fragmentation

According to Kaufman 1997 (174) fragmentation is the splintering of states into many units with
no poles at all. The collapse of the USSR saw many countries being formed moving away from
the Soviet as the pole state. Fragmentation can involve the division of states due to their different
ideologies and political views. It is responsible for the rise of revisionist and status quo states.
The implications of fragmentation are going to be discussed below.

Fragmentation is another cause of conflict in the post-cold war era because it has resulted in the
division of the world into the status quo and revisionist states. After the cold war United States
became the dominant power which means according to the hegemonic stability theory, US
became the overarching authority in the world system thus countering anarchism. However, the
power transition theorists such as Gilpin believe that this led to the rise of revisionist or
rejectionist states. The US established a status quo of which was satisfactory to other powers but
also, dissatisfactory to others on historical, ideological, religious, territorial, personal, or cultural
factors. On these basis fragments were created and dissatisfied states wanted to change the rules
of the game. This has seen states such as such as China, North Korea, Russia, and Iran acting in
the exact opposite of the status quo dictated policies in the early 1990s. for example Iran, Iraq
and North Korea were labeled by Bush as axis of evil which were bound to be destroyed because
of their pursuant in the proliferation of WMDs, and their ideologies against democratization.
Russian invasion of Ukraine, Georgia and Crimea has been a clear challenge to the status quo.
China‟s persistence control over Hong Kong, Taiwan and the North China sea has been seen as
the challenge to global hegemony. This is why there are continuous conflicts among these
nations. Therefore, fragmentation has been a recipe of conflict in the post-cold war unipolar
system. This has made the world unpredictable since it also formulated new fragments such as
non-state actors such as terrorist groups and International Organizations such as BRICS.

However, the US has also been one of the countries against the status quo which has also caused
conflicts. For example, its withdrawal from NAFTA and its threat to withdraw from WHO,
WTO and NATO. This has made US to become the enemy of globalization its own brainchild in
favor of protectionism. However, China has been the key supporter of globalization recently
through it vibrant support of WHO during the C OVID-19 pandemic when US withdrew its
funds. China has also been in support of the WTO although US is claiming that it is no longer
functional. So this is evident that there must be an eventual transition of power in the globe
where US is incrementally losing its economic prowess.

4. Democratization

Democratization is defined as a change in political regime within a sovereign state from

nondemocracy to democracy. Rummel defines democratization as the process through which a
political system becomes democratic or a transition of a system to a more democratic system.
The end of cold war saw the victory of democracy and most authoritarian states began to
democratize. Fukuyama‟s triumphant philosophy of history which predicted the dominance of
democracy became more vibrant in this period. Most states held elections, amended
constitutions, dictators were overthrown and people gained their freedoms. Thus, the post-cold
war period saw the reemergence of yet another democratization wave which brought new hopes
and also conflicts all over the world, this is going to be discussed below.

Democratization is another characteristic of the post-cold war unipolar system that has
implications on the conflict formation and prevention because of the way US has enforced it.
USA since 1990 has used forced democratization on nondemocracies has become the recipe for
conflicts between the North and the South. The fall of the Berlin Wall marked the beginning of
the application of the democratic peace theory. US started to force other countries to become
democracies through military invasions, humanitarian intervention and through the Bretton
Wood Institutions. Lynn-Jones (1998) argues that democracy abroad should be one of the central
foreign-policy goals for the United States because democracies will not go to war with the
United States, democracies do not support terrorism against the United States, democracies
produce fewer refuges; democracies will ally with the United States; American ideals flourish
when others adopt them; and democracies make better economic partners. Therefore, this means
that democratization has avoided major wars and conflicts in the post-cold war era because of its
basic beliefs in peace with each other.

However, democratization has also caused conflicts in the post-cold war unipolar world with
America trying to impose democracy on other countries. This is because other countries cultures
are totally the opposed of democracy which creates the iron curtain between the North and the
South. Blaugh (1999), “first of all, nobody can tell a people or a culture how to be democratic”.
Any trial to force democracy on other countries through military interventions or donor aid can
result in what Huntington (1993) referred to as the clash of civilizations. This is supported by
Aksenyonok (2004) who argues that, the Middle East has a civilization of “special peculiarities,
ages-long history, a deep rooted mentality, and governance and public life traditions that are
different than that of the West”. So by trying to impose democratic cultures on these countries
can result in conflicts within these countries and outside.

This is evidenced by the consequences of military invasion in Iraq and Afghanistan. Husain
(2013) states, “barricades, bullets, blood, and bombastic statements will not restore democracy”.
Democracy doesn‟t flow from the barrel of a gun but rather, a barrel of gun breeds more hate and
conflict among nation states. Military intervention in Libya resulted in the formation of armed
militias and insurgences in the country where peace has been unimaginable. Neighboring
countries have been affected devastatingly because most of the militias undertake their activities
there. According Donnley (2002), democratization does not guarantee social justice any more
than it guarantees economic growth, harmony, free markets, or the end of ideology. Activities of
the US in the Middle East had seen the rise of terror groups such as Hamas, Hezbollah and Al-
Qaeda against the US and its allies. Countries such as Iran has been involved in proxy wars with
US allies such as Israel and Saudi Arabia due to the US military activities in the region. Military
intervention in Yemen has been persistent the late 1990s which clearly shows that forced
democracy is a recipe for conflict in the world since it leads to the rise of nationalism, religious
fundamentalism and terrorism.

Conclusion

Conflicts in the immediate post-cold war unipolar system have been the major cause of conflicts
around the world. The US has tried to dominate the whole world imposing its policies which
have been received with mixed feelings around the world. Unipolarity has proven that the world
will hardly become stable because with the defeat of one problem, new challenges emerge. Thus,
it is hard to find the best recipe of conflict resolve around the world is still guided by realism.
BIBLIOGRAPHY

Chapel, K. 1999. Democracy by force: US military intervention in the post-Cold War world.
Cambridge: Cambridge University Press

Cohen, S. 2009. Beyond America’s grasp: A century of failed diplomacy in the Middle Easter.
New York: Giroux

Dahl, R. (2000). On democracy. New Haven: Yale University Press.

Everts, P. 2002. Democracy and military force. London: Palgrave Macmillan

.Ghalib, J. 1995. The cost of dictatorship: The Somalia experience. New York: Lillian Barber
Press

Phillips, K. 2006. American theocracy: The peril and politics of radical religion, oil, and
borrowed money in the 21st century. London, UK: Penguin Books.

Shapiro, R. 2005. The meaning of American democracy. New York: The Academy of Political
Science Stevenson, J. 1995. Losing Mogadishu: Testing U.S. policy in Somalia. Annapolis:
Naval Institute Press.

Walker, S. 2011. Does forced democratization work? Taiwan Journal of Democracy,

7(1), 73-94.