1.What does regional integration mean?

 Regional integration is the process by which two or more nation-states agree to

co-operate and work closely together to achieve peace, stability and wealth.
 This means that the integrating states would actually become a new country in
other words, total integration.
 Regional integration is the process by which two or more nation-states agree to
co-operate and work closely together to achieve peace, stability and wealth
 The state also participates in a growing network of economic, cultural, scientific,
diplomatic, political, and military interactions.

 Regional Integration is a process in which neighboring countries enter into an

agreement in order to upgrade cooperation through common institutions and
rules.
 The objectives of the agreement could range from economic to political to
environmental, although it has typically taken the form of a political economy
initiative where commercial interests are the focus for achieving broader socio-
political and security objectives, as defined by national governments.
 Regional integration has been organized either via supranational institutional
structures or through intergovernmental decision-making, or a combination of
both.
2.What are the major differences between old regionalism and new
regionalism?
New Regionalism is an outgrowth of the process of globalization “based on the idea that one cannot
isolate trade and economy from the rest of society…” The thesis that social development must
accompany economic development for integration efforts to succeed stands in contrast to “Old”
Regionalism, (also known as “first generation” regionalism, or “classic” regionalism) which was primarily
seen as a process of economic integration. According to De Lombardi, this movement began to gather
speed in the late 1980s and is associated with changes in Eastern Europe and the end of the Cold War.

New regionalism, shift in national systems of administration and cultural, economic, and political
organization following the Cold War. New regionalist projects, which began about the mid-1980s,
differed in substance from the earlier rise in regionalist developments, which had begun about the
1950s and later became known by the term old regionalism. The emergence of new regionalism
coincided with the end of the Cold War and a period of increasing global economic integration. Its
development ultimately led to regional organizations that were more open with respect to trade than
those that had formed in the era of old regionalism.

A key difference between the two theories is who is considered a relevant actor. As mentioned, in classic
regionalism the Nation-State is the preeminent actor, while new regionalism proponents hold that non-
state actors like multinational corporations, non-governmental organizations, and other interested
social groups, must be considered when analyzing how and why regions choose to integrate. With this
claim, new regionalists also challenge the traditional theories of realpolitik in international relations by
recognizing new, multidimensional actors, with varied and complex interests, on whom the threat of
coercion has little effect.
3.Discuss the different theories of regional integration. Like, Functionalism, Neo-
functionalism, etc.
Neofunctionalism is a theory of regional integration which downplays globalisation and
reintroduces territory into its governance. ... Neofunctionalism describes and explains the process
of regional integration with reference to how three causal factors interact: Growing economic
interdependence between nations.

Neofunctionalism is a theory of regional integration which downplays globalisation and

reintroduces territory into its governance. Jean Monnet's approach to European integration,
which aimed at integrating individual sectors in hopes of achieving spillover effects to further the
process of integration, is said to have followed the nonfunctional school's tack. The founder of
the term, Ernst B. Haas, later declared the theory of neofunctionalism obsolete, a statement he
revoked in his final book,[1] after the process of European integration started stalling in the 1960s,
when Charles de Gaulle's "empty chair" politics paralyzed the institutions of the European Coal
and Steel Community, European Economic Community, and European Atomic Energy
Community.[2] The theory was updated and further specified namely by Wayne Sandholtz, Alec
Stone Sweet, and their collaborators in the 1990s and in the 2000s (references below). The main
contributions of these authors was an employment of empiricism.

Neofunctionalism describes and explains the process of regional integration with reference to
how three causal factors interact:[3][4]

 Growing economic interdependence between nations

 Organizational capacity to resolve disputes and build international legal regimes
 Supranational market rules that replace national regulatory regimes

Early neofunctionalism theory assumed a decline in importance of nationalism and the nation-
state; it predicted that, gradually, elected officials, interest groups, and large commercial interests
within states would see it in their interests to pursue welfarist objectives best satisfied by the
political and market integration at a higher, supranational level. Haas theorized three
mechanisms that he thought would drive the integration forward: positive spillover, the transfer
of domestic allegiances and technocratic automaticity.[5]

Functionalism, in social sciences, theory based on the premise that all aspects of a society—
institutions, roles, norms, etc. —serve a purpose and that all are indispensable for the long-term
survival of the society.
Functionalism, in social sciences, theory based on the premise that all aspects of a society—
institutions, roles, norms, etc.—serve a purpose and that all are indispensable for the long-term
survival of the society. The approach gained prominence in the works of 19th-century
sociologists, particularly those who viewed societies as organisms. The French sociologist Émile
Durkheim argued that it was necessary to understand the “needs” of the social organism to
which social phenomena correspond. Other writers have used the concept of function to mean
the interrelationships of parts within a system, the adaptive aspect of a phenomenon, or its
observable consequences. In sociology, functionalism met the need for a method of analysis; in
anthropology it provided an alternative to evolutionary theory and trait-diffusion analysis.

Functionalism is a theory of international relations that arose during the interwar period
principally from the strong concern about the obsolescence of the state as a form of social
organization. Rather than the self-interest of nation states that realists see as a motivating
factor, functionalists focus on common interests and needs shared by states (but also by non-
state actors) in a process of global integration triggered by the erosion of state sovereignty and
the increasing weight of knowledge and hence of scientists and experts in the process of policy-
making (Rosamond, 2000). Its roots can be traced back to the liberal/idealist tradition that
started with Kant and goes as far as Woodrow Wilson's "Fourteen Points" speech (Rosamond,
2000).
4. What major reasons could define the development of EU, AU and ASEAN?

The European Union began as European Economic Community underwent changes and
transformation creating common market, currency, institutional and policy harmonization that at
last became the European Union as one consolidated regional organization. It continued to
influence the experiment of regionalism in the rest of the world.

The AU imitating EU was established to realize the unification of African markets towards eventual
political unification. Since its establishment in 2002, the AU have achieved a lot in terms of opening
African Free trade Areas, the issuance of visas on arrival and the strengthening of regional
organizations like SADC, ECOWAS, COMESA and the EAC. The ASEAN was founded in 1967 and
established a preference area in 1977, and the Asian Free Trade Area in 1992.

The main motive was not economic goal rather than political and security motives for regional
solidarity. The economic achievements in the region was not induced by the integration, though.
After the economic crisis of 1997, the region has advanced its economic goals and created APFTA in
the region.

The EU represents one in a series of efforts to integrate Europe since World War II. At the end
of the war, several western European countries sought closer economic, social, and political ties
to achieve economic growth and military security and to promote a lasting reconciliation
between France and Germany.
The European Union is set up with the aim of ending the frequent and bloody wars between
neighbours, which culminated in the Second World War. As of 1950, the European Coal and
Steel Community begins to unite European countries economically and politically in order to
secure lasting peace

major reasons why development of au ?

The bloc was founded on 26 May 2001 in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, and launched on 9 July 2002 in
Durban, South Africa. The intention of the AU was to replace the Organisation of African Unity
(OAU), established on 25 May 1963 in Addis Ababa by 32 signatory governments; the OAU was
disbanded on 9 July 2002.

 To promote the unity and solidarity of the African States;

 To coordinate and intensify their cooperation and efforts to achieve a better life for the
peoples of Africa;
  To defend their sovereignty, their territorial integrity and independence;

 To eradicate all forms of colonialism from Africa.

What major reasons would define the development of ASEAN's?

ASEAN's purpose is to promote economic and cultural exchange among its member countries,
maintain peace and stability in Southeast Asia, and establish relationships with foreign powers
with similar aims. ASEAN formed during the Cold War to promote stability and cooperation in a
politically turbulent region.

The ASEAN Declaration states that the aims and purposes of the Association are: (1) to
accelerate the economic growth, social progress and cultural development in the region
through joint endeavors in the spirit of equality and partnership in order to strengthen the
foundation for a prosperous and peaceful community

 https://au.int.com

5.What does Globalization mean? Critically examine the Globalization Debates such
as The Hyper-globalists, The Skeptics & The Transformationalists etc.
The Hyper-globalists

hyper-globalists, globalization today defines a new epoch in human history in which nation states
become obsolete to regulate their economy and boundary. This view of globalization privileges the
economic over the political, the market over the state, and prefigures the decline of states.
Advocates of this view argue that economic globalization is bringing about a de-nationalization/ de-
territorialization of economies through the establishment of transitional networks of production,
trade and finance.

hyper-globalists share a conviction that economic globalization bringing about the decline of states.

hyper globalists, the authority and legitimacy of states thereby is undermined as the national
governments become increasingly unable to control the Transboundary movements and flows of goods,
services, ideas and different socio-economic activities inside their borders.

the hyper globalists claim that economic globalization is generating a new pattern of losers as well as
winners in the international economy.

Hyper-globalist further argue that globalization is imparting new liberal ideas and implant culture of
modernization replacing the traditional culture having an impetus towards creating a new global
order marked by uniform cultural values or way of life.

The Skeptics
The skeptics rejected the view of super- globalist as a myth, flawed and politically naïve since it
fundamentally underestimate the enormous power of national governments to regulate international
economic activities. For them, rather than being out of control, the force of globalization, which is
synonymous to internationalization, very much dependent on the regulatory power of the state to
ensure the continuation of economic liberalism.

Skeptics also undermine the view that the world is interconnected and moving into a village where
by there exists a free flow of goods and services, investment and circulation of money from one
corner of the world in to another. For them, the so called globalization is not more than
regionalization that is being manifested in the emergence of financial and trading blocs in Western
countries, North America, in Asia and to some extent in Africa.

Skeptics argues that there is no free flow of goods, resources, technology and finance at the global
level; instead we have regional based globalization.

it has become evident that the Western region is more intergraded and globalized than the other
part of the world such as Africa and Asia. In fact these countries are in one way or another
interconnected in terms of trade; yet we have seen less instantaneous flow of technology financial
capital from the west to Africa and other developing countries.

The Sceptics thus do not believe that globalization would help to narrow the economic and
technological gap that is still prevailing between the Global North(developed Countries) and
The Global South(Developing countries). So, for the Skeptics, globalization brings nothing new,
rather it is just the crystallization the already existing realities of the world which has been
marked by the North-South gap reflected in terms of the deeply rooted patterns of in equality
and hierarchy.

4.2.3. The Transformationalist

Central to the transformationalist perspective is the conviction that globalization is a critical
driving force behind the rapid social, political and economic changes which are reshaping
societies and international politics.

the contemporary process of globalization are historically unprecedented such that

governments and societies across the globe are having to adapt to a world in which there is no
longer a clear distinction between the international and domestic affairs.

transformists view is the belief that globalization is reconstituting or reengineering the power,
function and the authority of the state, Even though the state has ultimate legal power to
control events inside its boundary, it can’t command sole control over trans-boundary issues,
actors, resource movements.
In arguing that globalization is transforming or reconstituting the power and authority of
national governments, they however reject both the hyper globalist view of the end of the
sovereign state as well as the Sceptics claim that nothing much has changed. Instead, they
assert that a new sovereignty regime is displacing traditional conception of state power as an
absolute, indivisible, territorially exclusive power.