The author: Ranganai Moyo
The concept and phenomenon of globalization
has been there for some time and it dates back to Adam smith and Ricardo `s
theory of absolute and comparative advantage which was based on free trade and
specialization. Ricardo argues that nations should specialize on goods and
service which they have comparative advantage and the main perception of
specialization was to enable trade among countries. Therefore, globalization can be
viewed as processes which involve the integration of social, economic and
political activities across national boundaries. It is also characterized by
the growing and intensity of global relations among nations and processes of
innovations within the international systems to enable humanity and businesses
overcome distance and barriers.Globalization is evidenced by speedy of global capital flows, cultural exchanges and
integrations of global financial systems an all these allow investments to
spread across national boundaries. Though, globalization has encouraged
economic and social exchange of goods and service across national frontiers, it
also brought some concerns among the peripheral of the world especial the poor
nations of the global south. The main catalysts of globalization are neoliberal
advocates (the capitalist West) who are also the largest shareholders in IMF
and the World Bank dictate their policies to third world countries these
institutions.Therefore, the report examine the role of neoclassical ideology
in advancing globalization and its implications on traditional theories in
international relations.
However, it might be of interest to first understand why neoliberals
support the spread of capitalism worldwide as a model for peace and security.
There was a general consensus among neoliberals that the mushrooming of various
organisations diminished the contention which put the state as the only actor
in international relations. In addition to that, prevailing wisdom of the
post-war period believed that the economic collapse and world recession of the
1930s created unstable environment which gave rise to extreme nationalists (Steans and Pettiford, 2005). So the
emergences of nationalist ideologies were associated with self-interest instead
of protecting international order and security. For example trade between communist states and the free world was virtual
impossible due to excessive
regulation preventing exchange of goods and services across the two worlds. Moreover, countries imposed barriers to
safeguard domestic markets from foreign rivals and to protect balance of
payments positions by restricting imports. It was general believed among
neoliberal supporters that, such state self-interest of protectionism had
knock-on effects on the global economy as such, the Bretton Woods were designed
to make it more difficult for states to act in a self-interest way (Steans and Pettiford, 2005). Therefore, it can be argued that up to the
late 1960s realists were the dominant force in International relations but, the
resurgence neo-liberalism in the early 1970s self-interest began to weaken.
The catalysts of globalization can be traced back to the 1940s at Bretton
Woods Conference which established institutions that were to play a major role
in the international system. The Bretton Wood System consists of International
Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the World trade Organization and was a
brainchild of the neoliberal
ideas. The role of the World Bank was to deal with reconstruction
of the world economy after it was destroyed by the two wars and the World Trade
Organization was to encourage free trade among nations. Furthermore, the IMF`s
key responsibilities in the international system was to provide budgetary and balance of
payment support as well as monitoring services of world economy. However, the
role of these institutions particularly the World Bank and IMF evolved over
time and by the 1970s, these financial institutions were to compliment
neoliberal ideas in their policy framework. There is a tradition belief among neo-liberals that free market economy enables
democratic freedom to prosper and ensures optimum economic performance with
regards to efficiency, economic growth and technological progress, Kotz, (2002). This is largely because
under a free market economy the state has a limited role as it is characterised
by a set of economic policies centred on privatization and deregulation. In
international spheres neoliberals are advocating for free movement of goods,
services and capital among other across national boundaries. In other words by
advancing capitalism, neoliberal supporters want a borderless world with
limited or no regulation as such, it appears as though neoliberal ideas shaped
the foundations of globalization. So by 1980s the world was increasingly
becoming borderless as multinational companies compete for market opportunities
worldwide.
The policy frameworks within the neoliberal school of thought provided
opportunities for multination corporations to expand their operations to
overseas markets as many countries began to subscribe to free market
ideologies. Apart from that, the United States and other capitalist countries
were successful in advancing neoliberal policies to the peripherals through IMF
and the World Bank, Kotz, (2002). As
a result, global investments rose sharply from about $60 billion in the begging
of the 1980s to $651 billion by year 2002, Alsan, Bloom,
Canning, (2006). This
was largely due to increase in international capital mobility driven by multinational corporations’ expansions across
national boundaries. Multinational enterprises play a critical role in
globalization, since their activities in the host country may promote social
and cultural changes world wide. Empirical evidence by Ruhul, Salim, and Bloch, (2009) indicate that there is a
positive relation between globalization and technological progress in Indonesian
pharmaceutical sectors. The positive relation was attributed through spillover
effects as foreign firms tend to bring capital intense goods to the host
markets which require minimum level of training and skills attainments. Since many third world countries experience
acute shortage of technological advances globalization is likely to benefit countries
in need. In addition to that, globalisation can facilitate the spread of
information and communication among different societies scattered worldwide. For
example, Leider`s study in, (2010) indicate that globalization enables the
spread of information and communications within the global among system. This
is very important especially to countries with limited resources to access
world events, so globalizations allow information and ideas be transmitted
easily and cheaply across national boundaries. Therefore, the spread of
advanced technology facilitate the emergence of social media such as twitter,
Skype and face book which are increasing uniting the world together.
The last three decades have witnessed the diminishing of autocratic system
of governance around the world as more countries continue to embrace democratically
elected national administration. The prominence of democracy chiefly in former
communist states might have been triggered by the continuation of stateless
world; as such globalizations enabled citizens commence wider demands from
their governments. For example ,the open up of countries’ economies and
emergence of the worldwide web in the 1980s allowed citizens to access some of
competitive opportunities which were only accessible in advanced economies. A study by
Vu, (2011) found that
technological progress improves broad-based human capital skills and consumer
sophistication and this might explain why the China decided to partial respond
to student protests in 1979 and also the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1989.It
look like globalization has positive effects on human aspiration because of the
numerous opportunities it bring to the global community. Besides that,
globalisation may improve the country`s export capability through especially if the
transnational national enterprises decide to set up production facilities in
the country. For example china enjoys economic prosperity as she runs a huge
balance of payment surplus because most FDI operations there are destined for
the exports. In this regards, globalization is of significant benefits to
countries as it bring nations together.
Globalization in relations to IR theories
The mechanism of the neoliberal
ideology made important contributions to international relations discourse;
particularly in the areas of human rights, democratization and governance among
others. This is largely because supporters of neoliberal views believed that
free market approach would enable states to act on mutual interest rather than
acting on their own as perceived by realists. In addition to that was a rapid
increase of Non-Governmental Organizations (NGOs) from less than 1000 NGOs in
the bigging of the 1940s to nearly 5000 by year 2000 (Steans and Pettiford, 2005).
This prompted
neoliberal followers to conclude that the state was no longer the only key
actor international relations but even non-states organization had a vital role
securing the balance of power. However, realists would argue that even if the
presences of other actors are be considered countries always act in
self-interests so the mushrooming of organizations in international arena does
not guarantee world peace. So globalization threatens world peace and security
because too many actors are advancing their own self-interest rather than
promoting a peaceful world. On the other hand Marxists advocates do contend
that globalization is taking place and it is driven by powerful capitalist to
increase their monopolistic towards the world`s poor countries. In addition to
that, Marxists would argue that rapidly increase of various actors such as the
World, IMF and NGOs are there to protect neo-imperialist seeking to control the
world`s political and economic system. In this regard, the concerts of
globalization appear to have mixed reactions within the international relations
discourse. Neoliberals are more optimistic about the prospects of peace and security
through global integration because this will enable dialogue among member
states, however their views are different from realists who argues that despite
all the efforts to bring nations together, countries will always act in
self-interest as such anarchy will continue to exist. Marxists would argue
that, globalization is just another form of imperialism driven actors within
the capitalist world seeking to increase their wealth base on the expense of
the poor world. As a result of that, globalization is likely to instigate future
conflicts which might destabilize global peace and security if citizens decide
to revolt against capitalism.
Conclusion
There is no doubt that the processes of globalization continue
to redefine the world systems as it enable global citizens to acquire various
opportunities and share across national frontiers. The perceived marginal
benefit of globalization and the pressure on governments has witnessed a change
of national policies towards deregulations and privatization these policy frameworks
are the main apparatus to global integration because it encourages competition.
As such economic and social aspects are
now transmitted across national boundaries, economic walls are falling,
citizens are able to access different opportunities and be able to share
worldwide without any form of restrictions. Autocratic leadership gradually
diminishing and democratic principles are emerging even in those countries within
the peripherals which were reluctant to adopt those values; globalization
empowers citizens to demand from their government how they want to be governed.
In light of this, the process of globalization is inevitable, given that there
has been a rapid growth of actors within the international arena, national and
global governance is evolving to accommodate the changing nature of the
international system. Having said that, I have come to the conclusion that globalization
has some positive impact on global peace and security as it bring states together
which in turn reduce the level of anarchy the main cause for conflict according
to Realists.
Reference
Steans, J and Pettiford.L, (2005), Liberalism: Introduction to
International Relations Perspectives and Themes, 2nd edn, pge.21-47:
Pearson Education, UK.
Kotz.D.M, (2002), Globalization and Neoliberalism,
Rethinking Marxism 12, (2),pge64-79,U.S.A.
Alsan.M,Bloom,D.E
and Canning.D ,(2006) The effects of
Population Health on Foreign direct Investment inflows to Low-and
Middle-Income Countries: World Development,34(4),pge.617-630,Elsevier
Ltd.
Ruhul
.S, Salim.A and Bloch.H, (2009) Does Foreign Direct Investment Lead to
Productivity Spillovers: World Development, xx (x), pge.xxx-xxx,
Elsevier Ltd.
Cheung,
K and Lin.P, (2003), Spillover effects of FDI on innovation in China: Evidence
from the provincial data, China Economic
Review, 15(2004), pge.25-44, North-Holland.
No comments:
Post a Comment