Fall of the Berlin Wall: globalisation and the future of Europe: Michael Zurn assesses the place of Europe in world politics following the end of the Cold War.

• Author: Zurn, Michael
• Position: Essay

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The three big issues alluded to in the title of this contribution represent three big historical phenomena, though each of them of a different sort. The fall of the Berlin Wall marks the breakdown of Soviet-type socialism, and the end of the East-West conflict. It is the symbol for the end of an historical epoch. Consequently, the event to be analysed lies in the past. Globalisation, on the other hand, constitutes a societal process indicating the rise of the relative share of trans-border transactions as compared to within-border transactions. It is an on-going social process which substantially changes the context of all kinds of political processes. Finally, when I refer to the future of Europe, it is about expectations of future developments of the European Union and their role in world politics against the background of the fall of the Berlin Wall and globalisation. All of these phenomena are macro-historical developments or events. In this article, I aim to juxtapose these macro-developments in order to show their relationship to one another, and to put forward some hypotheses about this relationship. Although it would be a worthy endeavour, spatial constraints preclude my being able to give these hypotheses a micro-theoretical foundation in the present context.

The following three propositions about the relationship between these three phenomena are put forward:

* Globalisation is a cause for the breakdown of the Soviet Union and the fall of the Berlin Wall rather than the converse, as seems to be the general belief.

* In this way, globalisation, via the fall of the wall, has shaped the development of the European Union from a single-market economy to a political community which since that pivotal event has deepened and widened significantly.

* With the end of the Cold War, Europe entered a new phase of its role in the international system: the centre of world politics shifted away from it so that its only chance to remain influential has been to push for deeper integration and to exercise a new form of power.

Globalisation process

Globalisation goes further than inter-dependence. It describes a process in which the world moves towards an integrated global society and away from merely internationalised societies. Accordingly, globalisation can also be seen as a process in which the significance of national societies decreases. This notion of globalisation refers to a measurable process of social change which, in turn, may or may not have causal effects on political developments. Globalisation is thus neither identical with nor does it necessarily lead to the extension of political space and governance beyond the nation state.

What indicates a transition from inter-dependence to globalisation or societal denationalisation? The interconnectedness of societies in general can be measured by the rise of trans-boundary transactions relative to transactions that take place within a national territory. While the increased ratio of trans-boundary transactions on a low level is assumed to indicate a rise in inter-dependence between different units, the notion of globalisation refers to societal connectedness at a level at which societal borders lose importance or even dissolve, indicating the merging of units. In the words of K.W. Deutsch, 'societal borders dissolve when there is no more critical reduction in the frequency of social transactions.' (1)

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

The most direct effect of globalisation is best conceived as a challenge regarding the capacity of the nation state to unilaterally reach its governance targets. Effective governance depends upon the spatial congruence of political regulations with socially integrated areas and the absence of significant externalities. As societal inter-connectedness increases, national governments are increasingly confronted with difficulties in the implementation of their policies. At least, policies are strongly affected by externalities, as they are still only valid within their own national borders and do not extend over the whole socially integrated territory. In western Europe, this challenge led in effect to a deepening and widening of political integration. For the former Soviet empire, the challenge led to a breakdown. In this sense, globalisation is a macro-structural condition that helps to explain the fall of the Soviet empire, but cannot, of course, explain it sufficiently.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

According to this position, the socialist system did not founder 'accidentally' on Ronald Reagan's military build-up policy, nor did it collapse 'inevitably' because of its inherent contradictions; rather, its demise was most likely due to its inability to cope with the unforeseeable challenges imposed on that system by the globalisation of social transactions. Detente policy helped to strengthen the effects of globalisation and prevented violent transformation.

Two aspects

An analysis of why the socialist system collapsed must address two distinct aspects of that process: first, it must explain why the post-Stalinist systems fell into such a deep crisis at the beginning of the 1980s, and, second, why perestroika, the attempt to respond to this crisis, failed and ultimately led to the breakdown of the system as a whole.

The answer to the second query points initially to problems inherent in the Soviet system and not to global processes. As a reaction to the crisis (which became apparent in the early 1980s), Mikhail Gorbachev's government tried to introduce elements of the market economy--assumed to be the more productive system--into the Soviet-style planned economy. These efforts failed for a number of structurally related reasons. On the economic side, the most severe problems included the lack of a legal framework governing contractual arrangements and property rights, the passive role of money, the concentration of capital in one hand--viz, the state--and state-controlled access to international markets. At the same time, the reforms opened up the opportunity for regional and local elites to gain greater independence from the central power. The ability of the state to implement directives and maintain controls began to dwindle; the incentive grew to work for one's own personal benefit and against the interests of the system.

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

[ILLUSTRATION OMITTED]

In other words, the reforms destroyed the functional mechanisms that acted as the social adhesive. Without a...