By: Khushbu Ahlawat, Counsulting Editor, GSDN
Introduction
In the heady days of the 1990s, as globalization took its initial steps, scholars were both hopeful and wary of this emerging trend. They foresaw globalization’s viral qualities – its swiftness, ability to transcend borders, and transformative power. At the time, many believed globalization would bring about positive change, fostering economic growth, cultural exchange, and global cooperation. However, they did not anticipate that such interconnectedness could also become so dangerous, infectious, and difficult to control. Fast forward to today, and we find ourselves amid a global pandemic, COVID-19, the most globalized scourge in the human history. This pandemic has disrupted the world in unprecedented ways, exposing vulnerabilities in supply chains, healthcare systems, and governance structures, and its impact on globalization and the nation-state system has been profound. While some argue for a pause on globalization, seeing COVID-19 as a cautionary signal, others contend that globalization is irreversible and will continue to shape economies, societies, and international relations. Understanding this complex interplay requires examining the multifaceted interactions between global integration, state sovereignty, public health, and technological cooperation, as well as the social and political implications that have emerged during this crisis.
The Viral Nature of Globalization
Globalization has long exhibited a viral character, enabling the rapid movement of ideas, technology, capital, and people across borders. Early proponents viewed this interconnectedness as a force for economic growth, innovation, and global cooperation. However, the COVID-19 pandemic starkly exposed the vulnerabilities embedded within this system. What once symbolized efficiency and integration became a conduit for crisis, as global mobility accelerated the spread of the virus and disrupted tightly knit international networks.
Recent examples underscore this fragility. The global semiconductor shortage (2020–2022) revealed how overreliance on a few production hubs—particularly in East Asia—could paralyze industries worldwide, from automobiles to consumer electronics. Similarly, vaccine supply chain disruptions and “vaccine nationalism” during COVID-19 highlighted the tension between global interdependence and national self-interest, as wealthy states secured doses while developing countries faced severe shortages. The Ever Given blockage of the Suez Canal in 2021 further demonstrated how a single chokepoint in global trade could disrupt nearly 12 percent of world commerce within days.
These developments have fueled criticism that globalization prioritizes efficiency and profit over resilience and public welfare. Consequently, calls for reshoring, diversification of supply chains, and strategic autonomy have intensified. Yet, rather than signaling the end of globalization, these crises point to the need for a more balanced and resilient form of global integration—one that tempers speed with safeguards and cooperation with preparedness.
The Irreversibility of Globalization
Despite renewed debates triggered by the COVID-19 pandemic, globalization remains fundamentally irreversible. Its foundations were laid in the post–Cold War era, marked by the collapse of the Soviet Union, the global embrace of market-oriented reforms, and the growing dominance of financial capitalism. Over the decades, globalization has become embedded in production systems, technological innovation, and political influence, making reversal both impractical and costly.
Recent developments reinforce this reality. Even amid geopolitical tensions, global trade volumes rebounded strongly in 2021–22, demonstrating the resilience of international economic interdependence. China’s continued expansion of the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI), the United States’ leadership in shaping digital trade, semiconductor alliances, and climate technology partnerships, and Russia’s efforts to redirect its energy exports toward Asian and Global South markets following the Ukraine war all reflect sustained global engagement rather than retreat. Moreover, the rapid growth of digital globalization—through cross-border data flows, remote work, fintech, and e-commerce platforms—has intensified interdependence beyond physical borders.
Calls to “pause” globalization overlook these structural realities. Much like the Industrial Revolution or the digital age, globalization has reshaped economic and social life in irreversible ways. What is unfolding is not de-globalization, but recalibrated globalization—one that seeks diversification, strategic autonomy, and resilience without dismantling the interconnected global order that now defines contemporary international relations.
The Revival of the Nation-State
Although globalization remains irreversible, the COVID-19 pandemic triggered a notable—though temporary—revival of the nation-state. Governments across the world reasserted authority by imposing lockdowns, sealing borders, regulating movement, and expanding executive powers in the name of public health. Citizens, in turn, turned to the state for protection, healthcare provision, and economic relief, reaffirming the centrality of national governments in times of crisis.
Recent examples illustrate this resurgence. In India, the invocation of the Disaster Management Act centralized decision-making and reinforced federal authority. The European Union’s initial border closures and export restrictions on medical equipment revealed a reversion to national priorities over supranational coordination. Similarly, the United States’ use of the Defense Production Act to boost domestic production of ventilators and vaccines reflected renewed emphasis on national capacity and self-reliance.
However, this revival has clear limits. Global finance, production networks, and labor markets remain deeply interconnected. Efforts to seal borders or reshore industries have exposed the high economic costs of isolation, including inflation, labor shortages, and supply bottlenecks. Moreover, the pandemic fostered greater civic awareness, with citizens increasingly demanding accountability, welfare provision, and competent governance. This renewed state–citizen engagement may have lasting implications, reshaping governance expectations in the post-pandemic era. Yet, the nation-state’s resurgence does not signal the decline of globalization; rather, it highlights the need for stronger states capable of managing global interdependence without retreating from it.
Science, Technology, and Globalization
The COVID-19 pandemic powerfully demonstrated the deep interdependence between science, technology, and globalization. Modern scientific innovation, particularly in public health and medicine, is inherently transnational, relying on shared knowledge, cross-border funding, and globally distributed expertise. The rapid identification and sequencing of the SARS-CoV-2 virus in China in January 2020, followed by its immediate sharing on global scientific databases, enabled researchers worldwide to begin vaccine development within days—an unprecedented scientific response made possible only through global collaboration.
Vaccine development provides the clearest example. The Pfizer–BioNTech vaccine emerged from cooperation between an American pharmaceutical giant and a German biotech firm, while Oxford–AstraZeneca combined British research, Swedish-British manufacturing, and global clinical trials across Brazil, South Africa, and India. Similarly, India’s Serum Institute, the world’s largest vaccine producer, became central to global supply through the COVAX initiative, supplying doses to low- and middle-income countries. The pandemic also highlighted tensions between nationalism and global science. The Trump administration’s reported attempt to secure exclusive access to a German vaccine developer, alongside widespread vaccine nationalism, revealed how national interests can clash with collective global needs. Yet, multinational clinical trials, shared epidemiological modeling, and coordinated WHO-led research efforts reaffirmed the indispensability of global scientific cooperation.
Overall, COVID-19 has reaffirmed that scientific progress cannot be fully confined within national borders. The rapid development of vaccines, global clinical trials, and shared epidemiological data demonstrated that breakthroughs rely on transnational collaboration, collective expertise, and integrated research networks. While political pressures and nationalist agendas may encourage countries to pursue strategic autonomy in areas such as vaccine production or medical technology, the pandemic has shown that no nation can respond effectively to global health crises in isolation. Moving forward, the globalized framework of scientific research and pharmaceutical innovation is likely to endure, emphasizing shared knowledge, coordinated efforts, and international cooperation.
Xenophobia and Vulnerable Groups
While globalization has expanded economic opportunities and cross-cultural exchange, it has neither eliminated xenophobia nor reduced the structural marginalization of vulnerable groups. The COVID-19 pandemic exposed and, in many cases, intensified these fault lines. Political leaders and populist movements in several countries instrumentalized the crisis to reinforce exclusionary narratives. In the United States, references to COVID-19 as the “China virus” by President Trump contributed to a sharp rise in anti-Asian hate crimes, while Brazil’s leadership downplayed the pandemic, disproportionately endangering indigenous and low-income communities.
In Europe, migrants and refugees faced heightened border restrictions and limited access to healthcare, reinforcing their precarious status. In India, the pandemic was accompanied by Islamophobic narratives following the Tablighi Jamaat incident, alongside widespread neglect of migrant workers, millions of whom were forced into hazardous journeys during sudden lockdowns. Globally, women, informal workers, and ethnic minorities bore the brunt of job losses, health risks, and social exclusion.
These developments underscore that globalization, without adequate social safeguards, can exacerbate inequality and prejudice during crises. Addressing these challenges requires not a retreat from globalization, but the construction of a more inclusive global order—one that prioritizes social protection, human rights, and equitable access to healthcare in times of global emergency.
The Future of the Nation-State System
As the world transitions into the post-pandemic phase, it has become increasingly clear that while globalization remains an enduring and irreversible reality, the traditional nation-state system must undergo significant adaptation. Originally designed for an era in which borders, sovereignty, and territorial control were more clearly demarcated, the existing system is ill-equipped to manage complex transnational challenges such as pandemics, climate change, cyber insecurity, financial volatility, and large-scale migration. The COVID-19 crisis starkly exposed the limitations of unilateral state action, demonstrating that even the most powerful states lacked the capacity to respond effectively in isolation.
Rather than signaling the decline of the nation-state, these developments point toward its transformation. States will continue to function as a central political and administrative actors, particularly in areas of welfare provision, public health, and crisis management. However, their effectiveness will increasingly depend on their ability to cooperate within multilateral frameworks and coordinate policies with regional and global institutions. The mixed performance of organizations such as the World Health Organization during the pandemic has not diminished their relevance but has instead intensified calls for institutional reform, greater transparency, and enhanced enforcement capabilities within global governance structures.
Simultaneously, the pandemic has reshaped the social contract between states and citizens. Public expectations regarding state responsibility, accountability, and preparedness have risen sharply, with greater emphasis on social protection, inclusive policymaking, and evidence-based governance. This shift has reinforced the idea that state legitimacy in the post-pandemic world will be measured not solely by economic growth or military strength, but by resilience and responsiveness to systemic risks.
These evolving dynamics suggest the emergence of a hybrid international order in which sovereignty is exercised through cooperation rather than isolation. The ability of states to reconcile national interests with collective global responsibilities—while maintaining democratic legitimacy—will play a decisive role in shaping the future trajectory of international politics and governance in an increasingly interconnected world. Success in this hybrid order will depend on effective multilateral institutions, transparent policy coordination, and the capacity to address transnational challenges such as pandemics, climate change, cyber threats, and global inequality, ensuring that both national resilience and global stability are mutually reinforced.
Conclusion
In conclusion, the intricate dance between globalization, the nation-state, and the COVID-19 pandemic reflects the evolving landscape of our world. While COVID-19 has disrupted the status quo and prompted a temporary revival of the nation-state, the irrevocable forces of globalization persist. Science and technology remain inherently global endeavors, and sustained international cooperation continues to be indispensable in addressing shared challenges. At the same time, the persistence of xenophobia, inequality, and uneven access to resources underscores the urgent need for a more inclusive and just global order.
Looking ahead, the post-pandemic world is unlikely to witness a binary choice between globalization and sovereignty. Instead, it will require a recalibration of global integration that prioritizes resilience, equity, and collective security. Nation-states must strengthen domestic capacities while actively engaging in multilateral frameworks capable of managing transnational risks. Ultimately, the ability to harmonize global interdependence with effective and accountable state governance will determine how societies respond to future crises, shaping both global stability and human well-being in the decades to come.
About the Author
Khushbu Ahlawat is a research analyst with a strong academic background in International Relations and Political Science. She has undertaken research projects at Jawaharlal Nehru University, contributing to analytical work on international and regional security issues. Alongside her research experience, she has professional exposure to Human Resources, with involvement in talent acquisition and organizational operations. She holds a Master’s degree in International Relations from Christ University, Bangalore, and a Bachelor’s degree in Political Science from the University of Delhi.
Lucid read with good insights