Globalisation and Fragmentation - Essay Example

Nevertheless, certain fundamental questions come to mind regarding globalisation and how it addresses human need in this century. Even more important is the question as to how the world can fair on without the essentials of globalisation. Thomas Friedman in his book “The world is flat” argues on the account that globalisation is the only panacea to address the conflicts often realised in the world. He highlights the important case of the global supply chains through which goods and services reach people across the world irrespective of the manufacturing places (Friedman 586).

It certainly does appear that globalisation has helped solve some of the conflicts that were often realised in the world in the early days. Indeed, the case of China and Taiwan presents a very chilling account of how this interrelatedness can help address conflicts in the world. The problems of this age have made countries across the world to be dependent on one another. As such, no country can efficiently survive on its own devices without support or trade from other countries. Conflicts are known to hinder the process of international relations and trade across the world.

No country wants to lag behind as the whole world gets ahead in development through globalisation. It therefore implies that the global supply chains realised in the manufacturing processes and consumption of goods and services across the world. In the same vein, investment is normally a function of the favourable conditions existing in the country. Investment and business activities have made many countries to be friends on technical grounds. Countries that were once enemies like India and Pakistan have become friends courtesy of the relations brought by trade and investment supply chains.

Friedman is certainly right in the argument that wars and conflicts can substantially be mitigated in the world through the proper management of globalization. Several cases across the world serve to prove this fundamental fact. Many countries have begun to realise the devastating effects of war and how a modern war becomes expensive to fund. In that regard, hitherto sour relations have been transformed into friendship for the benefit of the participating countries. Supply chains across the world have enabled business and production activities to thrive in many places.

For instance, globalisation has enabled Dell to produce computers in many parts of the world which are then shipped across all corners of this world. As such, a country that benefits from globalisation might not want to jeopardise such favours merely by engaging in war with another country. Nevertheless, Friedman never fails to mention the devastating effects of globalisation and how the global supply chains can be used to bring terror and suffering to humanity. Terror gangs across the world basically rely on effective supply chains in different parts of the world from which coordination of terror activities takes place.

These groups rely on efficient networks which are facilitated by the simplicities created by globalisation and the benefits of modern global systems to successfully manage and cause terror across the world while management and organisation is conducted from a centralized location. In a way, it confirms the very fact that globalisation is a double edged sword. William Duiker seems to oppose the views of Friedman regarding the concept of globalisation.