The creation of a globalized world, where there is an increased interdependence, has made it incumbent on nations to be accountable for their actions so as to maintain their power dynamics in global politics. Amidst such power politics at a global level, nations often try to suppress their internal conflicts by unconstitutional and unfair means. The conflicts within these nations therefore, don’t seem to reach an international arena and even if they manage to get discussed in transnational institutions like United Nations the symbiotic nature of globalization helps the country to brush them under the carpet with the help of its economic or political allies. Further, the control of the state over the factors that have led to globalization (e.g. media) seems starkly contrasting to the very idea of globalization where information is said to perforate freely and accurately. This hegemony of state over different sources of information has clearly favored the state and thus, failed to provide a true image of the on- going conflicts to the world. One of the greatest questions then remains whether the globe has truly shrunk or is there a further increase in disparity within the nations though not overtly visible.
The immediate consequence of globalization is the international organizations with the same draft of solutions for every conflict in any region of the world. This ends up drawing extremism in certain sections of the population as a reaction to the impractical implementations. The homogeneity of these policies results in worldwide violence which ironically is left to these organizations to resolve.
Given the restricted portrayal of conflict by the state in international sphere, one can thus argue that the resolving of conflicts inside the territorial boundaries of the nation remains secondary to its sovereignty and the growing violence around the globe is somewhat a result of the globalization.