Globalization is a 'process that focuses on the worldwide flow of ideas, resources,
people, economy, values, culture, knowledge, goods, services, and technology', while internationalization of higher education is described as 'the process of integrating an international, intercultural and global dimension into the goals, teaching/learning, research and service functions of a university or higher education system'. Internationalization emphasizes the relationship between and among nations, people, cultures, institutions, systems while globalization stresses the concept of worldwide flow of economy, ideas, culture, etc. The difference between the concept of 'worldwide flow' and the notion of 'relationship among nations' is both striking and profound. Thus these two concepts are very much related to each other but at the same time different. Debate continues whether internationalization of higher education is a catalyst, reactor or agent of globalization. For an internationalized institution, there is no one formula or collection of metrics. Internationalization is a transformation process that is adapted to each higher education institution's specific needs and goals. As a result, there is no "one-size-fits-all" internationalization paradigm. Adopting a set of 'in vogue' aims and tactics for 'branding' purposes simply serves to undermine the idea that each program, institution, or country must establish its own approach to internationalization based on its own clearly expressed rationales, goals, and expected outcomes. This acknowledges that the internationalization process is guided by an evaluation of individual requirements and priorities, and that a "formulaic" or "current trend" approach is neither suitable, useful, nor sustainable. This fact may also be a source of difficulty. What if, for example, an institution or country views higher education internationalization as a weapon for gaining economic or political advantage? In this case, the academic goals and principles of cooperation, mutual benefit, and partnership must be highlighted. Internationalization has risen in scope, size, and impact through several decades of intense development. There's no denying that internationalization has changed the face of higher education, but it has also changed the face of internationalization. The crucial question is whether the changes were for the better or for the worse. Could anybody have predicted twenty-five years ago that international student mobility would be big business in 2014, and that it would be more closely associated with the recruitment of minds for national innovation agendas than with assisting underdeveloped nations build human capacity? According to recent national and international surveys of university internationalization aims and rationales, building a global profile or global status is becoming more essential than meeting international criteria of excellence. Capacity development through international cooperation projects is being supplanted by activities aimed at gaining world-class recognition and higher rankings. Some questionable double degree schemes advertise awarding two degrees from colleges situated in separate countries based on the labor for one diploma. And it's all in the name of globalization, right? Simultaneously, there are several instances of good projects that demonstrate how collaborative scholarship, cross-border education exchange, and campus-based internationalization methods contribute to the growth of individuals, institutions, nations, and the globe as a whole. Internationalization has a wide range of advantages and disadvantages, as well as dangers and unforeseen effects.