“Regions fail to transform
into peaceful communities,” says James McGill
Professor
“Knowing when and how a region transforms into
sustained peaceful or conflictual order is of utmost importance for crafting
appropriate policy initiatives,” says Prof. T. V. Paul, Director of the McGill University Centre for
International Peace and Security Studies (CIPSS) and James McGill Professor, Canada
and the honorary professor at the K.P.S. Menon Chair for Diplomatic Studies,
School of International Relations and Politics (SIRP), Mahatma Gandhi
University. Prof. T.V. Paul was delivering a K.P.S. Menon Chair Special Lecture
on “Regional Transformations,” at SIRP today.
According to Prof. Paul, “from a practical standpoint what is
significant is the failure of many regions and sub-regions to transform into
peaceful communities after the end of the Cold War. In some regions, the earlier
trend toward greater cooperation and peaceful order have not been progressing
all that well, following the initial enthusiasm of the post-Cold War years,”
Prof. Paul said.
Prof. Paul observed “emphasis
on systemic forces can impart some value to an analysis on regional order, but
often international relations scholars neglect the sub-systemic and internal
sources of order.” He said that a good example is the end of the Cold War and
its differing impact on various key regions of the world. For instance, South
Asia and West Asia saw less impact of the demise of the Cold War for regional
peace, while Latin America, Africa, and Southeast Asia witnessed the resolution
of some conflicts and strengthening of regional institutions. This is because
the main sources of regional conflict in South Asia and the West Asia may have
little to do with systemic rivalry, although superpower activism aggravated or
affected the dynamics of conflict and cooperation in these regions. In fact the
processes occurring within these regions themselves seem to affect the larger
international system, often disproportionately. “The regional powers such as
Israel or Pakistan are not simple bystanders of great power politics in their
regions; they attempt to asymmetrically influence the major power system often
in their own distinct ways. In regions such as Southeast Asia, regional states
have actively pursued (and somewhat successfully) strategies of enmeshing great
powers and a “complex balance of influence,” he said.
Prof. Paul also said that “economic links among states
alter the states’ incentives and hence their actions and interactions. National economies may be linked in various
ways, including trade in goods and services, investment, borrowing and
lending, and guest workers. We have many
theoretically grounded reasons to believe the theory that trade causes peace which
has much empirical support. In an era of globalization, “states seem to have
little choice but to continue reducing their external economic barriers.”
Mr. M.V. Bijulal presided the session. Prof. K.M. Seethi,
Prof. A.M. Thomas, Prof. Mathew Kurian, Dr. C. Vinodan, Rajesh, and others spoke. Prof. Paul will continue his special lecture
on 22 December on the theme “Higher Education in North America.”
No comments:
Post a Comment