Globalization and Ethiopia
By Dr. Andargachew Tiruneh (Continued from last week )
The Central Idea
Globalization is a theory which tries to explain what is
happening to human affairs in the world today. It is a rather fluid concept
without consensus as to its central concept, its boundaries
and its cause and effect. At the same time, it is the central theme
around which today's debate on world affairs is revolving
from the Americas to Europe and Asia.
The central idea of globalization is the proposition that
the world has become so closely integrated that mankind everywhere faces the
same dangers and enjoys the same benefits. However, skeptics, who tend to be
the traditional left, refuse to accept that such a change has taken place at
all. They insist that the economy is what it has always seen: countries get
only little of their income from the outside world; much of the economic
exchange is between states of particular regions rather than at the global
level; and governments still control the economy. They charge that
globalization is a capitalist ploy intended to dismantle the welfare system and
to open up the world for free trade and investment. They propose that the most
that has happened is a reversion to the 19th century laissez-faire
economic system.
On the other hand, those who believe that globalization is a
reality in today's world distinguish it from internationalization. To them, the
latter is what we had for centuries and refers to inter-state co-operation in
promoting one objective or another. By contrast, globalization is something
that emerged only in the last few decades and constitutes a much closer degree
of integration that was the case under internationalization. It has created a
cosmopolitan society, single control systems and standardized procedures in such
areas as manufacturing and regulatory processes.
Thus, there is no consensus as to whether globalization has
come to exist or not. Moreover, those who accept that globalization is a
reality in today's world do not agree on its scope. Some believe it is limited
to the world economic system whereas others maintain that is extends to recent
changes in such phenomena as science and technology, the environment, culture,
personal life, institutions and politics.
The topic is a complex one and can be viewed at three
levels. First, each of the phenomena allegedly transformed by globalization are
complex subjects in their own right. Second, there is the question of
establishing whether the alleged changes concerning each of the phenomena are
real. Third, there is the task of uncovering how much the changes in each of
the phenomena have affected Ethiopia.
It is up to Ethiopian experts on each of the phenomena to
conduct research on them and enlighten us on the likely impact of
globalization on the country. However, experts do not agree
on any of the phenomena alleged to have been changed by
globalization. Moreover, the changes implied by
globalization affect the lives of individuals and the latter have a vested
interest in the determination of policies on them. There is, therefore, a need
for oversimplification and generalisation in order to make
globalization palatable to the public. None of us can have
expert knowledge on all the phenomena embraced by globalization.
In the following sections, we will focuss on the debate
concerning the claimed transformations in each of the phenomena. In each case,
we will raise the question of how much Ethiopia is affected, or likely to be
affected, by the changes subsumed under
globalization. The point of the exercise is to contribute to
the discourses of Ethiopians on globalization. Globalization is not an
established fact; it is an international debate on whether
the present-day world society is organized differently from the past and
whether it now manages its affairs any differently from it.
The debatable nature of the subject is reflected by the
absence of a clear position on the part of the various western political
parties on globalization. In general, the traditional
left-right ideological spectrum has become distorted (according to some because
of globalization) with the result that no one knows any more what each of the
parties stands for. Obviously, this impacts on their position regarding
globalization as much as it does on other issues.
Moreover, as globalization affects many spheres of
activities, a party can have a position on each of them but not a general one
concerning the phenomena as a whole. As suggested earlier,
for example, the left generally refuses to accept that globalization has come
to pass and, to the extent it has, condemns it as a conspiracy of free marketeers.
The right, on the other hand, warmly welcomes the deregulation of the national
and international economy which globalization implies. Furthermore, the left
tends to regard the disintegration of the family as progress whereas the right
laments it and calls for a return to the traditional set-up.
Even more interesting is the fact that globalization has
given rise to a new political culture in the West. The environmental damage believed
to have been caused by globalization is precisely what gave rise to the green
movement and its political parties. The focus of the movement's program, its
lobby and its acts of violence is the protection of nature from the excesses of
globalization.
(To be continued next week)