“Deglobalization” (A Book Review)

            It was once a privilege to be one of the reactors during Walden Bello’s symposium on “Terrorism and Counter-terrorism” at the University of the Philippines Visayas here in Tacloban. He may be old but enough to educate young minds that thirsts intellectual truth on the bigger picture of the world. Moreover, I felt his air of authority in the field of activism that upholds anti-imperialism, anti-colonialism, and anti-fascist upbringing. All these reflect his impressive book implanted of brilliant ideas entitled “Deglobalization”.

            Beginning with the discussion on the establishment of the World Trade Organization in consonance to the prevalence of globalization, bringing more equity and global trade remains the outlook for WTO  but inversely, what is reaped in the membership of WTO are costs, not benefits. This introduces the crisis of the globalist project designed specifically by World Trade Organization, International Monetary Fund, and World Bank.

Globalization, as supported by status quo obviously marks the hegemony of neo-liberalism which focused on ‘liberating the market’ via accelerated privatization, deregulation, and trade liberalization. These are the best solutions as what my Development Economics subject taught me. Nearly did I believe but thanks to my Sociology of Development instructor who taught me otherwise about these globalist projects, I learned to think critically. These two orientations are opposites in viewing the dimension of globalization. However, only one line of critic is followed by Bello. He buys the idea that steps to market liberalization cannot count as pre-requisites to development.

Taken from the point of view of Walden Bello unveiling the sentiments of a developing country, market liberalization all the more pushes the people to ‘below the poverty line’ as manifested few weeks after the implementation of these projects in Thailand and Indonesia. This project called as the structural adjustment program clearly institutionalized stagnation, worsened poverty, and increased inequality.

Then goes from the foreword of the book are big economic terms and events like the crises of globalization during the collapse of the Third Ministerial of the WTO and the collapse of the stock market. Good higher economic subjects’ background might be an edge to further understand some complicated equations and solutions to globalization as narrated by Walden Bello. Needless to say, the entire views of the book clashes against the prominence of USA through assassinating its good background to the readers. Irregardless of the intention, this book speaks information that one needs to know and understand. Though shocking are some of the details, this book is commendable for being highly informative in the field of reality in politics and economics.

Given this 3 Pillars that are scaffolding the new economic order- the WTO, IMF, and the WB, the roles of each are nothing but innocent in the formation of new global economy. WTO is projected as a catalyst of an economic process that would bring about the greatest good for the greatest number. IMF is identified ever to promote freer global capital flows, and the WB supervises the transformation of the developing countries along free market lines and manages their integration into the global economy. I mean that all these bring the tone of kindness from the stakeholders behind these institutions. Not until this WTO’s agreements promoted monopoly for US firms, that IMF is used to dismantle the structures of sate-assisted Asian capitalism that are barriers to the entry of goods and investments from US transnational companies, and WB accusations of being irrelevant to the task of eliminating poverty. All these constitute the crises of legitimacy of all these 3 institutions. The supremacy of United States of America was therefore innocent until proven its selfish interests that drive these multilateral institutions forward.

Targeting America’s corporations that remains prominent in this age of globalization evaporates more questions of resentment against the world’s superpower. Microsoft is so much attached to my student life but nothing I know about its predatory practices, Shell is almost everywhere that truly we know about its environmental depredations, Monsanto and Norvartis as familiar are irresponsible in promoting genetically modified organisms. This made me believe that GMOs indeed happens after thinking it as a conspiracy to deprive US of its high-tech edge. Nike, which is famous among with my friends secretly systematize exploitations of dirt-cheap labor. Lastly, these air pollution contributor cars like Mitsubishi, Ford, and Firestone are known for their concealment form consumers of serious product defects. Rapid melting of the polar ice caps is traced to Big Oil and automobile giants promoted by uncontrolled transnational corporations (TNCs).

 It is beyond my intention to shame these companies. In fact, I always wear my Nike branded shoes. Shell is most often the destination of vehicles like “multicabs” that I used to ride in roaming the city. I ate on local restaurants that offer large stunning fried chicken believed by some to be GMOs. All these are inevitably confronted especially in the age of globalization. However, what is important to highlight just like what Bello pointed out is the ‘process of uncontrolled growth’ among these companies.

To quote former British Prime Minister Tony Blair in the text, “…unregulated markets make difficult to reconcile the demands of social responsibility with the demands of profitability”. This brings us that corporate-driven globalization was creating tremendous problem, much more that the driving institutions to globalization promotes privatization, deregulation, and trade liberalization- all in all celebrates uncontrolled corporations and the imperial overstretch of America.

Structural adjustment programs are definite ways to discipline the Third World countries like Philippines. It brings the image of a new lending approach which pushes reforms. IMF and WB- imposed structural adjustments became the vehicle for a program of free market liberalization applied to countries suffering major debt problems like the Third World. Its major elements are heartfelt to me as a student of a third world country. Firstly is the government reduction on budget allocation to basic services like education, health, and welfare. Secondly is my observation on destroyed local markets being exposed to foreign competition due to the removal of restrictions on foreign investments. Thirdly is the high prices on toll fees and many others seen on news stations every evening due to privatization and radical deregulation of the use of resources that tolerates the private owner’s insatiable appetite for profit. This sends out a message that government participation is already curtailed.

In the prevalence of the neoliberal hegemony was the pushing for Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation which Philippines is one of its 21 member-states. Basically it is a framework to discipline Asian economies specially the East and Southeast Asian countries where an activist government intervenes the key areas of its economy and where domestic markets are protected from foreign competitions, and there are tight controls on foreign investment. All these are deviations to America’s free market ideals. Thus the effect was the formation of APEC to tame the Newly Industrialized Countries (NIC) in Asia.

            Another action was to weaken the United Nation’s agenda to the south through America’s power of the purse. The United States, whose contribution funds some 20-25% of the UN Budget has its major role in influencing programs to the South that leans to their interest. Putting General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) in the age of globalization, where US is the leading advocate, is purely because of the inability of US goods to enter Southern markets, and the rise of new competitors in the shape of the East Asian NICs. In fact, later on, GATT turned to loose and get flexible which justifies the birth of WTO that further United States’ assessment on interests of its corporation that which were no longer served by GATT.

            Recognizing United States as a major voice in the multilateral development banks, the domination of developed economies in the International Monetary Fund which the Fund itself is non-transparent and the one who vetoed the creation of Asian Monetary Fund  (AMF) as its counterpart that could have been a blow to the US role in Asia, and the consensus nature that defeats the one-country-one-vote principle in the World Trade Organization, these furthers the crises of legitimacy among the institutions manipulated by developed countries specifically the US.

            With all these basis that exist in the international arena as manipulated by developed countries, from IMFs packages to rescue foreign creditors, imposing radical deregulation on fallen economies, financial and trade liberalization, killing the proposal of AMF, promoting structural adjustment programs that institutionalizes stagnation in Africa, Latin America, and other parts of the Third World, all these devil institutions remains to operate with zero changes on its policies and structures.

            After all these disastrous effects that subjects to public scrutiny, structural adjustment program (SAP) failures pushes the IMF-WB meeting on 1999 to rename it to extended structural adjustment  facility (ESAF) that still preserves the neo-liberal economic model that secretly shows anti-developing country policies. Furthermore, as what the International Monetary Fund managing director Horst Koehler’s famous line “I also have a heart, but I have to use my head in making decisions”, as an answer to the charges against IMF-World Bank meeting on September 2000, the idea behind was all because of those institutions’ crises of legitimacy.

            Deglobalization is mainly an answer to international institutions’ crises of legitimacy. It is a reconstruction method after the strategy of dismantling the WTO and the Bretton Woods institutions. Bello introduces the tactic on making coalition to reduce the power of institutions like the IMF that for instance be converted into a research agency with no policy powers. In the case of World Bank, the coalition shall end its loan-making capacity and devolving its grant activities to appropriate regional institutions. In addition to the response of deglobalization is to boycott the World Bank bonds, deny new appropriations for the International Development Associations, and oppose calls for quota increases for the IMF. All these simply aim to disempower such institutions that are now at crises on their legitimacy.

            An important to understand Bello’s deglobalization effort is not about to withdraw from the international economy but simply about to reorient economies from the emphasis on producing for export to production for the local market. It is about bringing development from bottom to top. What is entirely needed for today is not another centralized global institution but the deconcentration and decentralization of institutional power and the creation of a pluralistic system. These regional blocs involve not only government and business but also NGO and people’s organization. This is an agenda of people-oriented sustainable development that will naturally succeed if it is evolved democratically rather than imposed from above by regional elites.

          Bello’s tone in the ending part of his book sounds a hero that fights the failures of today’s globalization. His proposal on the strategy for deglobalizing Philippines faces risky tasks. One thing is disciplining the private interests in the country and giving more roles to the civil society in checking the state and the private, focusing on internal market, building up capital-intensive industries, reinvigorating our agriculture, building up an industry like information technology that is managed under democratic process, and many more counter strategies to neoliberal framework.

             Deglobalization is a difficult project to accomplish as long as the hegemony of neoliberalism is on its peak. With more public scrutiny, more critics, more heartfelt economic stagnation despite IMF, WB, and WTO’s blind response to developing countries, then, the coalition that Walden Bello imagine will naturally uprise along with the reorientation on each national economies.