Globalization is
often defined by increasing interdependence among nations and an unprecedented
flow of information across borders and cultures. Although it is important to
acknowledge the benefits of such transnational activity and incomparable
opportunities, it is equally necessary to understand the potentially dangerous consequences
of globalization. Many proponents of globalization tend to overlook the ways in
which globalization can actually exacerbate pre-existing conflicts and
facilitate further violence between ethnic groups.
In his book “How
Soccer Explains the World,” Franklin Foer uses many examples to demonstrate
that seemingly simple events - such as soccer games - are frequently
representative of much broader transnational conflicts, and serve to highlight
cultural differences rather than inspire unity. This theory has unfortunately
been proven true on many occasions, and was recently illustrated by a soccer
match between Serbia and Albania that took place in Belgrade , the Serbian capital city. On
October 14th, 2014, the Serbian and Albanian teams faced off in the
qualifying match for the 2016 UEFA European Championship games. Although a
tournament that aims to bring together hundreds of Europe ’s
best soccer players would appear to be the ideal outcome of globalization, the dearth
of Albanian fans in the stands proved otherwise. Serbian officials made it
clear that Albanian fans were not welcome in Belgrade ,
thereby highlighting the way that soccer has been used as a means of expressing
long-standing tensions between Serbia
and Albania
following a series of ethnic conflicts at the end of the 20th century.
Unfortunately, the
lack of Albanian fans did not ensure that the soccer game progressed
peacefully. In the middle of the game, a drone flew onto the field, carrying
the flag of Greater Albania. The territory
of Greater Albania is a heavily
contested issue and a frequent source of conflict since it includes Kosovo, an
area that was a part of Serbia
until it declared independence in 2008. Kosovo is recognized as an independent
state by many major world powers, such as the EU and the United states ,
but the Serbian government refuses to do the same. A flag at a soccer game may
not appear too threatening at first glance, but as Franklin Foer can attest, soccer
games often mask ethnic nationalism and racist inclinations that frequently
result in violent outcomes.
A Serbian player
removed the offending flag, but it was quickly recovered by the Albanian team,
resulting in a brawl that soon included players from both teams and dozens of
angry Serbian fans. The diplomatic nightmare that ensued in the following weeks
consisted of multiple meetings between Serbian and Albanian leaders, and
several Serbian appeals to the international community for increased support.
The intensity of the tensions that followed the Serbia-Albania game emphasizes
the far-reaching impacts of what Foer refers to as “hooligan warfare.” Although
globalization is lauded for bringing the world’s nations together and generating
an endless flow of innovative ideas, it must also be credited with encouraging
radical nationalism and spreading a global culture of "gangsterism” – inspired
by popular movies and music – that promotes violence and hatred.
The ease of
communication and economic opportunities that result from globalization can
impact society in many positive and beneficial ways. However, the same
international networks that allow for such benefits can also promote crime and violence
in the name of nationalism and pride. The events that transpired at the
Serbia-Albania match demonstrate this dark side of globalization. Increasing numbers of nations and ethnic groups are opting to use the globalization of sports games as a platform with which to express political
statements and strengthen ethnic divisions. As Red Star Belgrade player Perica Ognjenovic
so succinctly put it, “This is not soccer, this is war.”
Sources:
Foer, Franklin. How Soccer
Explains the World: An Unlikely Theory of Globalization. New York
Nicely written blog! I agree that Globalization brings about positive as well negative effects (such as violence between ethnic groups). I guess the real question is whether or not the bad aspects of globalization outweigh the good aspects of it. Personally, I think globalization has connected us to the extent that demonstrations of ethnic divisions at soccer games, as seen between Serbia and Albania, can be viewed as a platform for violence but these demonstrations also help facilitate change because of there ability to rapidly spread of awareness to the problem.
ReplyDeleteYou pose a really good question, Giselle. Although I wrote about the more negative aspects of globalization, I think I would have to say that the positive impacts outweigh the costs. As you pointed out, globalization can definitely facilitate great change and can raise awareness about very important issues. As long as we acknowledge and aim to address the flaws within globalization, I think that globalization will prove to be very beneficial for society in the years to come.
DeleteNice post. I found it cool that you were able to tie it to a super contemporary and fitting example like that soccer game, really cool. As for the substance, I totally agree that that is a negative and often destructive side effect of globalization. And what I found very interesting about that story was the use of the drone to fly the flag over the game. This is just another example of states using technology to mobilize their message. It's kind of funny and mostly unfortunate that soccer can bring out some of these underlying hostilities and to address Giselle's comment, I don't think the negative or positive effects outweigh each other. I view globalization as a broader, more heighten manifestation of a world that already exists. The Serbian-Albanian conflict would still exist even without globalization, but globalization makes it more visible and palpable. Globalization make the world more interconnected for the good and bad. I see these as canceling out and difficult to gauge if the positives outweigh the negatives.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
DeleteKatishi, I really like what you said about globalization being a "heightened manifestation" of our current society. I think that is such a good way of explaining globalization and the various impacts that it can have! And I definitely understand your point that it can be very difficult to determine whether or not the positive impacts outweigh the negative impacts. Globalization affects the world in so many different ways for better and for worse, and that certainly makes it harder to reach any definite conclusions about its value.
DeleteVery well written post! I completely agree that often times the negative aspects of globalization are overlooked. I personally didn't realize how severe some of these negative aspects like radical nationalism were until the Foer reading. I think an important question that we must ask ourselves is if the pros outweigh the cons. Is this incredible flow of innovative ideas worth dealing with the exacerbation of tension between different groups? Do you think there's a way that we could try and resolve this tension between groups without sacrificing the benefits that globalization provides?
ReplyDeleteI also did not realize the extent of the negative impacts of globalization before reading Foer's book, and I was very shocked to learn about the violence and hatred that has occurred as a result. As Katishi pointed out in his comment, it is very difficult to determine whether the pros outweigh the cons. However, I would like to believe that the flow of ideas from globalization will eventually be able to help reduce the tensions between different groups, rather than exacerbating them.
Delete