Impact of Globalization and Bangladesh

That this was also the decade in which globalization came into full swing is more than a minor inconvenience for its advocates” (Rodrick). If globalization is supposed to present an advantage to developing countries, why have there been so many setbacks? Indeed, both sides will have its winners and losers regardless of which side of the development coin they live on, but for the most part globalization has lifted millions out of poverty, improved the standard of living, and increased life expectancy rates all while keeping developed nations relatively competitive to their developing counterparts. Globalization’s value is that it seeks to create an economic equilibrium in the world, where parties are free from barriers and can benefit from one another through a more efficient allocation of resources. This allows all participating nations to contribute to an integrated economy and where all nations willing to embrace globalization have the potential to benefit. Regardless, the path to successful integration to the global economy has not always been easy. There is contention towards globalization as some argue that it is detrimental to developed nations, while many developing countries that were forced to hastily open up their markets and integrate failed. However, if implemented properly, globalization has proven that it can benefit all parties involved and that the potential gains outweigh the losses.

IMF Announces Sale of 10 Metric Tons of Gold to the Bangladesh Bank. (2010). Retrieved from

The contents of this paper reflect my own personal views and are not necessarily endorsed by the Navy War College or the Department of the Navy

The views expressed in this student academic research paper are those of the author and do not reflect the official policy or position of the Department of the Army, Department of Defense, or the United States

The increase in technology and intelligence will play a crucial role in the development of the Army. Gen. Milley hit on some important notes in regards to unit effectiveness with these changes. The most difficult question discussed revolves around the how to ease armed conflict. The delivery methods of conflict are evolving and have the potential to completely transform warfare. Also discussed within the same context was the standards of national interest. Furthermore, the implementation of robotics creates a potential for warfare to completely be redefined.

After reviewing The AOC, TP 525-3-1, which describes how the United States Army will employ forces and capabilities in complex

Force management, or what is really otherwise known as planned comprehensive change, is in reality a complex and interwoven process. Though it was designed within the confines of a systemic approach referred to as the DOTMLPF (Doctrine, Organization, Training, Materiel, Leadership & Education, Personnel and Facilities), in reality it is meant to enable both dutiful and well-thought out change as well as faster, more urgent adjustments in accordance with the evolving nature of war and information gathering tactics. The Army, as one branch involved in this initiative, focuses most of its attention in this regard on the organizational sector because of the way it facilitates an adequate and democratic step-by-step system of review (Student Reader, F102:2). But the fact is that even this initiative remains multi-faceted and appears to be rather bureaucratic in nature (it has five phases, which seems antithetical to an urgent change process), which might not be surprising since implementing the type of changes that are demanded can have major implications of all sorts. Still, it does appear that this concentration is being well received and that it will eventually serve its goal even if it does not appear that way when detailed on a point by point basis.

While the United States Army is dedicated to promoting peace, stability and security throughout the world, there are challenges that are necessary to address. Russia, North Korea, China, Iran, the rising of non state actors in the Middle East, and future strategic campaigns all present issues that face the Army. Coupled with budget sequestration, these challenges are amplified.

During the last decade of the twentieth century, the word ‘globalization’ has become an increasingly prominent feature of political, social, and economic discussion in academic and policymaking circles, as well as in the media. The processes and outcomes of globalization drew attention and debates that had one thing in common. The research shows that nearly everyone agrees that globalization is a trend that is changing the face of the world, and as a result the world society lives in a more ‘globalized’ world. Nearly two and a half decades passed since 1990s, and studies have been conducted to examine the causes and consequences of globalization. Moreover, nearly every person experiences some type of globalization and can testify firsthand the effects it has on their life, society, and the state. The analysis of the effects that globalization dynamics have on the world society indicates that globalization has a significant positive impact via spreading opportunities and wealth across nations, stimulating innovation and productivity, enhancing the economic development of poorer countries, and helping to improve living standards.

Clausewitz defines war as an “act of force to compel our enemy to do our will.” The nature of war is enduring yet the character of war changes over time. Current US strategic guidance is advancing the point of view that since the character of war has changed to focus on irregular wars then the US military should prepare for a future of irregular wars. This shift in focus forgets that the nature of war is enduring and in order to be successful, we must prepare for all types of conflict. This paper will define the types of conflict and the likelihood of each followed by a discussion of US strategic guidance and ending with an analysis of the training resources and force structure requirements needed to achieve success for all types of

There are many ways to look at and understand modern globalization. In general terms, globalization means that the world, as a whole, is leading to a more utopian society, meaning that the globe is become very interconnected and similarities are growing between different regions and cultures of the world. Globalization is a phenomenon that has been evolving since before 10,000 B.C. This constant evolution can cause many problems, but it can also solve many issues positively as well. Development of any country, however, seems to be a key issue when discussing globalization. Globalization and development present two different factors in the world today. Many countries are lacking in their own development while the world around them is becoming more developed and globalized. Globalization hinders development because with globalization, less developed countries depend on more developed countries to help them to sustainability and self-reliance.

As military members we are educated to think very linearly about strategy. For many years we have been trained to have a strategic thought process based on the use of a methodology that espouses three major steps: Ends (Objectives), Ways (Strategic Concepts), and Means (Resources). (Barber 1997)

Globalization is defined as a worldwide development, the process of spreading ideas. More recently, globalization has become more focused on economics, the spreading of capitalism and opening international trade. Globalization through the past 50 years has developed a bad reputation, one that does not benefit countries the way people thought it would. Joseph E. Stiglitz, in his book, Globalization and Its Discontents, stresses that modern globalization is a good thing, but has not been done correctly in the past few decades. The ideas behind globalization have the potential to benefit the world, specifically developing countries. Stiglitz goes into detail about how the problem falls with the misguided attempts of the international economic institutions to solve developing countries’ economic problems. Something has gone very wrong with globalization, and the purpose of this book is to shed some light on where it went wrong. Stiglitz presents the problems with the international economic institutions’ damaging policies and their effects using ethnographic field work and historically comparative methods.

“Globalization is not just one impact of the new technologies that are reshaping the economies of the third millennium” (Thurow 19-31). When speaking of globalization, most people will not have a complete understanding as of what it actually means or what aspects of the world it affects. Globalization promotes free trade and creates jobs. The capital markets attract investors, resort cheap labor, and leads to job losses in some areas of higher wage. While all of this is happening, the world economy is being effected: economically, culturally, socially, and politically.

Global stratification can be defined that globe countries and areas are not on an equal footing in the process of economic, political and cultural globalization (Andersen & Taylor, 2006). The economic globalization has exacerbated the imbalance of world economy and has widened the wealth gap. Globalization has brought unfair relationships between developing countries and developed countries. Gao (2000) noted that economic globalization has expanded the gap between South and North. And it has brought huge shocks to national economy of developing countries. The international economic organizations like the Word Bank, IMF and WTO are in the hand of developed countries (El-Ojeili, C. & Hayden, P., 2006.). All the principles, institutions and sequences for the world economic operation are made by them. (Sklair, 2002)What’s more, the economic, technical and management advantages that is owned by Western countries cannot be easily and fully surpassed by developing countries.