Abstract This paper considers the thesis of Tarak Barkawi in his book "Globalization and War" as he finds that war is itself a factor contributing to globalization. In part, Barkawi's discussion of war is a counter to the view of Samuel Huntington that war emerges from a "clash of civilizations." Instead, according to the paper, war is seen more as part of a process of change and as being based on an old image of world geography in a new context.
Abstract This paper compares and contrasts the viewpoints of Tarak Barkawi and Thomas Friedman and their contributions to the study of globalization. It discusses their opinions, as described in their books "Globalization and War" and "The World is Flat," respectively. The paper concludes that Barkawi and Friedman vary greatly in their style and respective viewpoints.
From the Paper "Although they vary greatly in their style and respective viewpoints, both Barkawi and Friedman make valuable contributions to the study of globalization. With regards to globalization and the role of the state, Barkawi view is in certain respects neo-realist in nature, while Friedman is neo-liberal with some restrictions. Barkawi regards war and the state as prominent agents of interconnection in a globalized world, while Friedman feels that they pose a hindrance to the spread of free markets. Friedman's neo-liberal approach is fundamentally flawed, but he makes several relevant, valid points. His book offers an revealing glance at the extent to which the economy has become internationalized, while Barkawi's takes an enlightening look at the formidable role that war and the state have played in forging transnational connections. In addition, he analyzes (and discredits) a number of different paradigms concerning the study of international relations."
