The importance of the city protected by the walls has faded at the present time and has replaced by military bases and industrial and commercial areas.

I don't think the city is declining but instead it is expanding. That is not contradictary to globalization but rather one of its consequences.

The border of the nation state is not going to disappear in the near future. One reason is that the border defines citizenship, which determines who benefit from public goods provided by the government and who contribute to the public finance. From this perspective, the border of the city may become more and more vague and ambiguous. In some sense, it is disappearing into the countryside.

Dear Feng Frederic, Dear Mohannad Husain;

As you know, the city meets or must meet three important requirements: the organizational, the functional and the aesthetic that must complement each other to make the city work and make it livable. While the current trend is urbanization, metropolitization (or even megapolization) will further undermine public policy objectives and policies to better address the needs of the population. will also generate more tension, discomfort and more problem neighborhoods. What would then be the situation of citizenship and the individual and collective welfare. If we try to put all this negative trend in the global context of crises and tensions, globalization and conflicts, how to imagine the future of the nation state and consequently the cities? What then would be the future of the people who live the precariousness and the marginality in the extreme state (as well in the poor countries as the rich countries)? We already bitterly concede that the signs of such a scenario are becoming more and more predictable; the current economic war has the wrong proof, it will lead to more military war of forced intervention and more damage to the local scale.