Name: Peggie Loh Globalization has enabled the world to be increasingly connected.

People believe that the interconnectedness has resulted in their countries benefitting from trade, free enterprise, and investment by foreign companies (Kohut and Wike, 2008). However, globalization lacks governance because the United States dominance places a constraint on the world. The absence of global governance, which gives rise to complications such as the spread of nuclear power and extensive damage to the environment, causes widespread concern among the other nations (Chanda, 2008). Furthermore, it has caused countries to subsist precariously on the globalized world. The world depends on one superpower, the United States, which is able to consolidate all the power because it was the first country that paved the way for globalization. In addition, globalization integrates the world and promotes the global rules, as well as the formation of the United Nations (Chands, 2008). However, the existence of one and only superpower has disadvantages. It deters the superpower to consider every aspect of the problems. Moreover, it faces difficulties to fix the problems, as it far exceeded their abilities to monitor every issue (Weber, Barma, Kroenig and Ratner, 2007). As a result, this has led to the creation of more problems and the globalizations burden on the superpower grows heavier. Recognizing that The United States dominance has triggered many problems, several measures are available to address the issues. However, two feasible solutions have been identified to tackle the problems effectively. The two solutions are the introduction to a multipolarity world and uni-polarity. The introduction of a multi-polarity world would lessen the burden on the United States. Instead of bearing the burden alone, it could be shared among several great superpowers (Weber, Barma, Kroenig and Ratner, 2007). Therefore, it has helped to diminish the United States power. Uni-polarity would be another effective way to constraint the sole superpower. It neutralizes the dominance by enabling the countries to join force and balance the power (Weber, Barma, Kroenig and Ratner, 2007). Conversely, it is difficult to carry out in a uni-polar world. Instead, It has resulted more problems to be created. These countries do not possess the necessary capabilities to monitor every facet of the globalization and the ways to fix them. It causes countries to employ different methods to facilitate the dark side of globalization, in which can be perceived as ways to inhibit the United States power (Weber, Barma, Kroenig and Ratner, 2007). Thus, incidents such as developing nuclear power, creation of fraudulent US currency and rising uncertainty about oil supplies are created to protest against the superpower (Barma, Kroenig and Ratner, 2007). In addition, several attempts such as the nuclear proliferation in North Korean and all the attacks by Sadden Hussein were made to eradicate the power as well (Barma, Kroenig and Ratner, 2007). This in turn ushered in a new age of American vulnerability.

Page 1 of 3

To sum it up, two ways have been made to suppress the supremacy of the United States. These measures can be alleged as means to prevent the United States from consolidating all the power and dominating the world. Therefore, the most effective approach could be join forces and equalize the power together. In addition, the liability on the United States could be alleviated as it is shared among a few countries. 503 words

Page 2 of 3

References: Chanda, N. (2008). Runaway globalization without governance. In Yale Global Online academic papers: Global governance. Retrieved from http://yaleglobal.yale.edu/sites/default/files/pdf/runawayGlobalization.pdf

Kohut, A., & Wike, R. (2008). Assessing globalization: Benefits and drawbacks of trade and integration. Harvard International Review, 30 (1), 70. Retrieved from Expanded Academic ASAP. Web, http://go.galegroup.com.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/ps/i.do?id=GALE%7CA179742221&v=2.1&u= nuslib&it=r&p=EAIM&sw=w

Weber, S., Barma, N., Kroenig, M., & Ratner, E. (2007, January/February). How globalization went bad. Foreign Policy, (158), 48-54. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org.libproxy1.nus.edu.sg/stable/pdfplus/25462126.pdf?acceptTC=true

Page 3 of 3