Globalization in Egypt - Coursework Example

Globalization in Egypt Introduction The standard definition of globalization would that it is the process through which international integration arises through interchanging of ideas, products, world views, and other cultural aspects. This definition encompasses cultural and economic activities which are composed of advancements in information technology, telecommunications, and transportation to mention but a few. However, there is one factor of globalization, which is not overly recognized, but which, according to Parenti, author of the book Tropic of Chaos, is the causal factor of almost everything that happens in the world today; climate change. Parenti implies and believes that the globalization which shot up after the industrial revolution has fostered climate change which is now acting as a threat multiplier globally whenever any crisis such as poverty, drought, violence, or inequality emerges. For instance, he feels that contemporary civil wars may be orchestrated by climatic factors such as low rainfall, floods, tsunamis, and other climate-related catastrophes. While it may appear like Parenti’s statements are true that globalization has been fostering climate change (for the worse) that has in turn been contributing to economic, political, social, and climatic problems, there are factors of contemporary globalization which he overlooks. To counter his expressions, the following research study will analyze globalization in Egypt and highlight its noticeable elements which overly contrast with Parenti that it contributes to climate change and violence. Violence is indicated as one of the biggest implications of climate change being fostered by globalization in contemporary times. Egypt is listed as one of the nations affected by, or which took part in the Arab Spring. According to the witnessed flow of events, Egypt was cast into bouts of violence only one year after Tunisia paved the way into the Arab Spring. The violence, mostly between anti-government elements and the military peaked between 2011 and 2013 and in estimation claimed over 4,500 lives. The Arab Spring qualifies as a factor of globalization in that it was a wave that emerged in 2010 in the Arab world and was aimed at raising awareness, organizing, and communicating against internet censorship and repression by their states (Brown 46). As per Parenti’s claims, globalization had caused violence, yes, but it was not connected to climate change in any way. To counter his claims, it is important to understand the cause of Egypt’s version of the Arab Spring. Egypt had existed for over 30 years under DictatorHosni Mubarak’s leadership without a vice president, had an overly-opposed constitution, and was defined by “emergency laws”. Egyptians were also fed up with the thirty-year parliament. In addition, Mubarak’s attempt to have his son succeed him failed as more uprisings emerged. In short, Egypt wanted a new, free and fair elected government- which is a (political) requirement in contemporary globalization. Collectively, these factors contributed to the uprisings during the Arab Spring, and it is sufficient to state that the violence was aimed at installing better governance and was in no way related to climate. In fact, Muslims came together with Christians to elect a new president meaning that rather than cause violence, globalization is a factor that fosters unity. Better still, the occurrence showed that climate change is not necessarily the cause of all violence as Parenti puts it. Climate change again escapes Parenti’s blame that it is the cause of immigration which in turn contributes to instability and potential ethnic and political clashes. “… Extreme weather events and growing evidence of inundation will motivate many to move sooner than later…”(Parenti 13). In short, he means that immigration is likely to be out of bad reasons and prepares the globe for future conflicts. This is not the only obvious case as is seen in Egypt’s popularity as a pilgrimage destination. Egypt acts as a holy land to both Christians and Muslims. Millions of Christians tour Ebu Mina annually as Muslims tour Masjid Ras al-Husayn, Sit Zainab, and the grave of Malik al- Ashtar which are pilgrim sites. Pilgrimage acts as an aspect of globalization and apart from just annual visits, many Muslims and Christians alike immigrate permanently to Egypt (Bianchi 72).Perceiving this from Parenti’s statement that immigration would cause potential conflict, Egypt’s case promises cohesion since it acts as holy land for both religions as well as fostering the economic aspect of globalization through tourism. Concisely, climate change is not a factor in pilgrimage, and will not in any way contribute to instability or violence in Egypt’s future. In fact, tourism as a factor that fosters globalization in Egypt would unite the Muslims and Christians further as they seek to apply the “adaptation methods” of countering with, or adjusting to the effects of climate change. Rather than fight, they would be better of discussing issues such as protecting their shrines from climatic effects such as weathering or soil erosion. Ekaru Loruman was killed by Pokot raiders as he sought to protect his herd. The Pokot-Turkana conflict is fuelled by competition for resources. This competition is caused by climate change. This flow of events made Parenti to assert that globalization has detrimental effects on climate change, and not just the environmental climate, but also the climate of the world as a whole. In short, he asserts that Loruman was killed because of climate change (Parenti 4). Globalization on its part promotes, rather than discourage, the sharing of resources. After all, globalization is about coming together and sharing of interests, technologies, resources, and other necessities required for human existence. In 1973, Egypt attacked Israel as they sought to recover their territory in the Sinai Peninsula, a war over oil. The United States was not happy with this and backed the Israeli, forcing other gulf oil-producing nations to join in the war. The result was global shortage of, and skyrocketing of oil prices (Schaeffer 245). The rule of sharing as defined by globalization was breached, and that caused problems all over the world. Back to Parenti’s assertion that sharing of resources caused by climate change is a disaster awaiting the world in future, he seems misplaced. Prior to the Egypt-Israel conflict (in 1945), President Franklin Roosevelt met Saudi Arabia’s founding Monarch ‘Abd al- ‘Aziz on the Great Bitter Lake in Egypt aboard the USS Quincy. They came up with an agreement that was termed as one of the twentieth century’s most important strategic relationship; America would protect the gulf’s oil-producers and the Gulf States would reciprocate by supplying the international market with fairly-priced oil (Jones 208).In the ensuing relationship, American and the Gulf States (including Egypt) ensured that cheap oil was available and that further exploration for natural resources would reduce. In the light of these, climate change had been reduced to some extent. As such, sharing resources is a positive factor of globalization unlike Parenti’s thoughts that Loruman died because climate change had forced their communities into fighting for, or sharing resources. In yet another instance, Parenti states that Cold War-era militarism such as American intervention in warring or conflicting states is an irrational, self-destructive, and shortsighted measure of combating violence caused by climate change. It may be acknowledged that climate change has negative effects on the globe such as humanitarian crises but pointing at intervention (as part of globalization) as a destructive factor is wrong. Parenti blames the US for Somalia’s destruction saying, “Somalia was destroyed by Cold War Military interventions” and that the World Bank and IMF are responsible for permanent crises and inequality being experienced in the Third World (Parenti 8). However, the Arab Spring came to advocate for the very same issues that the US had been trying to impose on the Egyptians since the early 1980s such as women’s rights, human rights, democracy, and religious freedom. At the beginning of the early 1990s, Christians and tourists were being targeted in Egypt by terrorist activities which the US attributed to religious reasons. Seven years later, Congress passed the Freedom from Religious Persecution Act aimed at resolving such atrocities across religions (Grafton, Duggan & Harris 43). The intervention was rejected by both Egyptian Muslims and Christians. Little did they know that a great drift was about to ensue between them as was evidenced in the religious conflict between them during the Egyptian Revolution.The same Act was to be later adopted after the Revolution and is the reason why Christians and Muslims can finally live in harmony.Intervention by states when another is in need is part of globalization’s international integration and this sufficiently justifies Parenti’s statement that intervention during crises such as climatic catastrophes or other crises is what keeps some states stuck in the Third World as wrong. Conclusion Parenti’s literature blames globalization for fostering climate change, and further blames climate change for most of the negativities being experienced in the world today. For instance, he blames cattle rustling, ethnic clashes, World Wars, international disintegration, economic depressions, andstate repressions on climate change. However, the above research text provides a mutual and more-positive relationship between globalization and climate change. It justifies that climate change can actually foster globalization such as when one nation hit by drought may receive aid from others. In analyzing globalization in Egypt, the study proves that climate change was not responsible for the Arab Spring. It also proves that America’s intervention in Egyptian affairs was not for self-gains, and that in sharing resources as forced by climate change, nations do not have to necessarily go to war. Finally, it shows that immigration is an element of globalization and unlike Parenti’s assertion; it must not be necessarily inspired by the search for greener pastures. Concisely, the mutuality between globalization and climate change is not wholly negative as in supporting economic, political, social, and climatic problems. Therefore, the mutuality does not necessarily pose off as potential factor for future violence. Works Cited Bianchi, Robert. Islamic Globalization: Pilgrimage, Capitalism, Democracy, and Diplomacy. World Scientific Publishing Company, 2013. Print. Brown, Nathan. “Tracking the Arab Spring”, Journal of Democracy, 24. 4 (2013): 46-58. Grafton, David, Duggan, Joseph, & Harris, Jason.Christian-Muslim Relations in the Anglican and Lutheran Communions: Historical Encounters and Contemporary Projects. Palgrave McMillan, 2013. Print. Jones, Toby. “America, Oil, and War in the Middle East.”Journal of American History 99. 1 (2012): 208-218. Parenti, Christian. Tropic Chaos: Climate Change and the New Geography of Violence. Nation Books, 2012. Print. Schaeffer, Robert. Understanding Globalization: The Social Consequences of Political, Economic, and Environmental Change.Rowman& Littlefield, 2005. Print. Read More