“Identity is the theft of the self” Estee Martin
Within society people are perceived in different ways based on various factors which include but are not limited to their religions, social class, age and ethnicity. Arguably, there is a strong case that if the concept of identity did not exist then individuals would truly know one self. The aforementioned quote provides a rather negative connotation to identity alluding that there are undesirable aspects in having an identity due largely to society, given that there is a notion of conformity to adhere to societal norms and values. Identity is the main source of conflict in global politics today and has been for a considerable amount of time in the world since globally the world has become more globalised. Globalisation refers to the process of increasing interconnectedness among societies such that events in one part of the world increasingly have effects on peoples and societies far away. (Baylis, Smith and Owens, 2017) Identity and globalisation are largely connected and has a large impact on contributing to global conflict apparent today. Identity is so broad in meaning and can translate to mean different things for one another. One can seek identity within a country, a political entity, social group, religion and more. This essay will address and present the way in which identity is the main contributor to conflict in global politics but also address other sources which also have an impact such as trade, poverty and inequality.
To commence, it is vital that identity be explored from in different lenses such as a realist and liberal view. The realist view assumes ‘that identity is forged through the overlapping ties of nationality and citizenship’ this can be interpreted to mean that identity is established through one’s nationality and a lack thereof can result being the largest factor in global politics today resulting in conflict. (Heywood, 2011) A liberal view assumes that identity is both ‘unique and universal’ and that ‘all human beings share the sane status’ therefore ‘are entitled to the same rights and opportunities. (Heywood, 2011) The liberal view of identity connotes a sense of individualism whereby one’s differences whether that be in age, race, religion, social class etc make up who we are. The liberal view of identity rejects the aforementioned statement and instead praises individuality. The contrasting views of identity from the liberal to the realist view demonstrates the multicomplexes of it and how a lack of identity that can cause conflict in global politics today.
Conflict on several scales, can be looked at from a local, national, regional, and international scale. Identity and conflict link heavily as a lack of identity and understanding results in conflict. This is evident on several scales and instances. On a national scale conflict arised through the EU Referendum in the United Kingdom in 2016 whereby the results amounted that 51% voted to leave and 49% voted to remain within the European Union. The results presented that in London, the capital city that the overall consensus was to remain within the EU compared to more northern and rural areas of the country such as Norwich whereby there was an overwhelming consensus to leave the EU. The differing opinions from the capital to the rural areas in one respect demonstrates how intertwined identity is with conflict. There is a sense of disconnection between the capital and more rural parts in Great Britain this is due to differing religions, cultures, job prospects, ages and social groups. A failure in understanding different identities within one nation can cause conflict which in turn suggests that it can equally cause conflict on a global scale. More economically developed regions of the world will more of the time fail to understand and empathise with less economically developed regions of the world, which can in turn result in conflict due to the failure of understanding differing identities. History presents the pattern of exploitation between developed and developing countries, for example the Kyoto Protocol 1992 initially, there was a consensus from the 192 parties that there would be a commitment made to reduce emissions. The bigger offenders being from developed countries and they failed to understand or sympathise with the developing countries where the consequences are graver, even for instance, the United States did not sign the agreement which demonstrates a self-interest as opposed to working with and having a regard for other countries. The COP 21 agreement further demonstrates this in 2015 whereby the current President on the United States, Donald Trump removed the United States from the agreement. This presents how offences can be continued to be made from developed countries whom are able to dump waste onto developing countries. Failure to understand differing identities can result in the exploitation of developing countries which ultimately is the largest contributing factor creating conflict in global politics today.
To add, the devastating attack on the World Trade building from the terrorist group Al Qaeda demonstrates how identity is the main source of conflict in global politics today. Seen as an attack on the West, western beliefs and culture, 9/11 demonstrates the extent to which identity is the lead contributor to conflict. Differences exist between the capitalist driven West and Islam and perhaps a lack of understanding about differing views is what creates conflict between them. At times it can feel that due to clashes in ideologies that different groups in society are the enemy however if there was an attempt to try and understand what contrasting views and opinions it could perhaps prevent tension. In the case of 9/11, Al Qaeda’s political standings were extremist but supports the case of how complex identity is and the different layers that exist; in this case religious identity. Failure to acknowledge different identities can result in conflict. In some cases, conflict can be internalised within a country and at times it can be several countries at war within another.
While the case is presented that identity is the main source of conflict in global politics today, there are other factors such as poverty. Poverty is a source of conflict in global politics due to unprecedented rate of acceleration that has occurred in recent years. Poverty is closely linked to identity as a failure to understand how different groups perceive themselves results can in turn result in conflict arising. ‘Poverty curtain’ is an accurate term to describe how globally today the world is divided ‘into two different worlds, two unequal humanities’. (Haq, 1976) Although, the world is continuing to become increasingly more globalised, it remains that there is a divide between developing and developed countries. The ‘poverty curtain’ is one way of presenting this. At large if there is not sufficient media coverage, developed nations are unaware of the deprivation levels in developing countries such as Rwanda.
Although at large it remains that when conflict arises as a result of poverty it is not on such a global scale, the conflict and tension at most times remains on local and national scales. The East African country Rwanda demonstrates this in the Rwandan genocide in 1994. With a population of 11.2 million and the GDP per capita equivalent to 6% of the world’s average. (Monitoring, 2018)It is an extremely impoverished nation and there is a positive correlation that the more impoverished a country is the higher likelihood of conflict and tension between the people. The violence between the Hutus and Tutsis demonstrates this and presents how the outbreak of violence only occurred within the nation. It is arguable that poverty in this respect cannot be a main source of conflict in global politics as it remains internalised within a country, it does not transcend globally. However, it is plausible that due to clashes of identities and the existing presence of poverty that it created conflict which further supports that identity is the main source of conflict in global politics today.
Another source of conflict in global politics involves inequality. The term global inequality refers to ‘the level of inequality between all inhabitants of the world, thus combining rich and poor people in Latin America as well as in Europe or in the Unites States.’ (Bourguignon, 2015) This statement can be applied on different scales as inequality is experienced at different levels, regionally for example. In the UK’s capital London, inequality disparities are substantial. In some cases, boroughs such as the London Borough of Newham and the London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea are 12 miles apart in one of the most thriving and wealthiest cities in the world and yet the inequality differences are enormous. Newham’s crime rate is 90.8 which is considerably higher than the London average, it also has the lowest employment rate of all the London boroughs in comparison to the borough of Kensington and Chelsea with the highest life expectancy at 82.6.(Corporation, 2015) In this instance, the differences shown here are inequalities from two boroughs in one of the wealthiest cities in the world with a 40-minute driving distance from one another. In this case, supporting the argument that inequalities are apparent on different scales. If such disparities lie in inequality within the same city, this surely suggests that it occurs globally, and that inequality is a global issue. Nonetheless, it does not now suggest that because inequality is a global issue that equally it is the main source of conflict as it can cause tension between different classes in society: the richer and poorer; the leading factor is due to lack of understanding and sometimes awareness of different groups which is linked heavily to identity.
Trade is another conceivable source which creates conflict in global politics. It can result in countries pulling out of agreements which would have otherwise largely benefited their country. It can also result in the separation of zones between two entities and the start of a war. No doubt the two largest economies in the world today: The United States and China are in a trade war. Differences in values and beliefs and the failure to try and understand opposing beliefs is what has led to this trade war. Opposing ideas of capitalism versus communism is at large the greatest difference between China and the United States. In the ongoing trade war both parties have imposed tariffs on the imports of goods largely due to the fact that neither side wants to appear weaker and less powerful. Arguably it can get to the stage whereby physical action is the next stage and a war amount. It can be said that trade is perhaps the only other source that has the possibility to create war due to severed relations between countries and yet even, so it can be said that having sense of commonplace and understanding of another country’s identity could be deterrent to an outbreak of conflict.
After investigating the various sources which create conflict in global politics today, there is a strong case which illustrates that identity is the main source of conflict and will continue to prevail as the main source of conflict if there is not a greater effort to understand and sympathise with different types of people. First and foremost, the fact that the term ‘identity’ is so broad and multifaceted implies that it means different things to different groups, ages, religions, cultures etc. A failure to acknowledge differing beliefs and values is failing to understand different identities and by doing so creates conflict in global politics. In conclusion, globalisation has a large impact on identity, it establishes several aspects which can make up one’s identity for example the spread of languages and cultures. Conflict can occur on all scales: locally, regionally, nationally and internationally and a lack of understanding of identities at each scale can cause conflict. It cannot be said that identity is the sole cause of conflict in global politics today as there are other factors such as inequality and poverty however, they operate in accordance with identity which further demonstrates that identity is the main source of conflict.