On globalization and localization

After the demise of the Soviet Union, millions of people started declaring it a great triumph of humankind. They asserted that no power could prevent the world from emerging as a single entity with the same economic and political system. State after state in Eastern Europe, Central Europe and other parts of the globe opened their doors for capital and free market. Almost all parts of the globe, except some pariah states like North Korea and Cuba, fell under the wave of globalization connecting themselves to a globalized world in a bid to benefit from this emerging global village.

But the recent pandemic has exposed the fragility of this system. It seems that globalization has turned out to be curse for millions of people living on this planet. Even before this pandemic, there were events which indicated that this connectivity could be lethal in times of crisis. For instance, the financial crisis of 1990s that hit the South East Asian states made it clear that any big financial crisis would spell a disaster not only for one or two states but several parts of the world. The crisis of 2008 further exposed the fault lines in the global financial system which is an important component of the globalized world. The apocalyptic event not only reduced purchasing powers of American consumers but also affected manufacturing sectors in developing world that depends on these consumers.

With the rise of American President Donald Trump, the world tried to move towards protectionism but the global economy by that time had become so interconnected that it was not possible even for the big powers to remain isolated from this globalized world. Trump’s trade war may have hit China in some ways but its impacts were also felt in the US, Europe and other parts of the world. Trump’s erratic behaviour not only harmed Beijing and Washington’s close allies but it also created uncertainty in the global economy. There have been times when even a single tweet of the Oval Office’s incumbent would be enough to create panic in world’s stock exchanges. Many questioned the rationale of retaining this fragile system that could be jolted by a single tweet, creating an invisible fear among investors and stock brokers.

It is not only the acts of an unwise chief executive of the world’s most powerful state but an irresponsible attitude on the part of some other leaders that could also plunge the global economy into disarray. For instance, the murder of Jamal Khashoggi not only disturbed freedom-loving people but also created a gloomy prospect for the global market because Riyadh is considered one of the crucial life-lines for global economy and finance. For some time it seemed that the autocratic state could be slapped with sanctions with many wondering what impacts would it have on the financial and economic system of the world but the charm of Saudi wealth deterred states from undertaking such a disastrous step.

The war in Yemen also kept on haunting many investors but its impacts were not felt across global financial centers. However, the tension in the mountains of the war-torn Arab state further strained ties between Tehran and Riyadh. This tension affected several states when the Tehran-backed rebels targeted Saudi oil facilities, making the world market jittery again. The world remained indifferent to Yemen where millions are on the verge of starvation because of the conflict which has created one of the biggest humanitarian catastrophe but even a few flames of this war could jolt the global economy once they engulf the oil facilities of the region.

The tension between Tehran and Washington in the aftermath of Iranian General Qasim Solemaini’s assassination further created a gloomy outlook for the globalized world that waited for an Iranian response with a bated breath. Fortunately the clerics of the theocratic state did not turn out to be as irrational as many in the West expected them to be. Their maverick response had hardly created a sense of relief among the financers and investors when the world was again hit by the Russian-Saudi oil war that did unimaginable harm to global economy with the oil prices witnessing some of the lowest trends in decades. Now, the new tension between Washington and Beijing over the coronavirus also has the potential to affect an already faltering world economy.

It seems that the big powers want to enjoy the benefits of this globalized world but when it comes to sharing responsibilities they just shy away from performing. This pandemic, which has badly affected economy, has also left millions of vulnerable people at the mercy of rich countries’ generosity that does not seem to be coming forth. At a time when the World Health Organization needs more resources to fight this outbreak, the sole superpower is threatening to cut down its funding. According to one report, if the virus hits sub-Sahara Africa and other poor regions, it could infect one billion people and cause 3.2 million deaths in 34 fragile states, including Afghanistan and Syria. An under-funded WHO would be unable to help in such a situation.

Similarly this global economy and globalized world, that has helped create dozens of super-rich across the globe, is not interested in mitigating the miseries of people hit by a global pandemic. More than 1.3 billion people are facing the risk of job losses across the global. From the textile workers of Bangladesh to the peasants of Latin America, millions are on the verge of starvation but the opulent gentlemen of this global village are not even ready to throw some crumbs towards them; let alone coming forward and extending help and succor to these souls.

UN estimates indicate that half a billion people or eight percent of the world’s population could plunge into destitution by the year’s end, largely because of the pandemic. More than 250 million people are already facing hunger and if adequate funding is not arranged for food aid then 30 million people could die within a matter of months.

Many wonder what will be the end of this globalized world. This globalization that was already under question for not allowing the movement of workers will now be closely scrutinized by many across the world. Such scrutiny may prompt millions of people to abandon this so-called globalization that only benefits the advanced capitalist world while leaving millions to face the brunt of their reckless economic, financial and political policies. They might be compelled to return to localization which may at least have a modicum of certainty because they might be in a position to plan keeping in mind the strength of their local market instead of depending on volatile global markets that is rattled by the speculation of gamblers in the world’s stock exchanges.

At least it would restore a sense of ownership. At least they would know that their fate depends on their local economy and not on the stockbrokers of New York, Tokyo or London. At least they would attempt to come up with some local solutions to the problems that they are facing.

The writer is a freelance journalist.

Email: egalitarianism444@ gmail.com