In the view of neo-liberalists, the term ‘globalization’ is nearly equivalent to ‘global market’, which is an ongoing process of de-regulating global capital market. However, the issues of inequality and power distribution are covered by this ‘de-politicizing’ globalization viewpoint. This essay attempts to reconstruct the political thinking and action in globalization by focusing on ‘war’. It means that we attempt to reflect and examine the deployment and distribution of power mechanism in globalization. To start with Clausewitzian ‘politics-war’ proposition two theoretical models are compared: ‘the postnational constellation’ (Jürgen Habermas) and ‘empire’ (Michael Hardt and Antonio Negri). Both of them can be seen as theoretical responses to the political development of globalization. They both inherit critical tradition in Marxism and strong oppose the claim of free-market triumph. The discrepancies between two model are also examined. Habermas’ ‘postnational constellation’, follows Kant’s concept of ‘eternal peace’. On the other hands, Hardt and Negri’s ‘empire’, follows the Foucaultdian analysis of power (especially the concept of ‘bio-power’) to picture a ‘global civil war’ image. The comparison between two models is examined by focusing on the issue of ‘American power’ in the development of globalization, since the U.S. is the most powerful national state and war-making engine in the world. Thus, the future of globalization possibly depends on its relation to the whole system of nation-states.