The world economy will shrink this year for the first time since 1945, and some economists worry that the current crisis could spell the beginning of the end of globalization. Hard economic times are correlated with protectionism as each country blames others and protects its domestic jobs. In the 1930s, such “beggar-thy-neighbor” policies worsened the situation. Unless political leaders resist such responses, the past could become the future.
Ironically, however, such a grim prospect would not mean the end of globalization, defined as the increase in worldwide networks of interdependence. Globalization has several dimensions, and though economists all too often portray it and the world economy as being one and the same, other forms of globalization also have significant effects — not all of them benign — on our daily lives.
The oldest form of globalization is environmental. For example, the first smallpox epidemic was recorded in Egypt in 1350BC. It reached China in 49AD, Europe after 700, the Americas in 1520, and Australia in l789. Bubonic plague, or the Black Death, originated in Asia, but its spread killed a quarter to a third of Europe’s population in the 14th century.
Europeans carried diseases to the Americas in the 15th and 16th centuries that destroyed up to 95 percent of the indigenous population. In 1918, a flu pandemic caused by a bird virus killed some 40 million people around the world, far more than World War I. Some scientists today predict a repeat of an avian flu pandemic.
Since 1973, 30 previously unknown infectious diseases have emerged, and other familiar diseases have spread geographically in new, drug-resistant forms. In the 20 years after HIV/AIDS was identified in the 1980s it killed 20 million people and infected another 40 million around the world. Some experts project that this number will double by 2010. The spread of foreign species of flora and fauna to new areas has wiped out native species, and may result in economic losses of several hundred billion dollars per year.
Global climate change will affect the lives of people everywhere. Thousands of scientists from more than 100 countries recently reported that there is new and strong evidence that most of the warming observed over the last 50 years is attributable to human activities, and that average global temperatures in the 21st century are projected to increase between 1ºC and 5ºC. The result could be more severe variations in climate, with too much water in some regions and not enough in others.
The effects will include stronger storms, hurricanes and floods, deeper droughts and more landslides. Rising temperatures have lengthened the freeze-free season in many regions, and glaciers are melting. The rate at which the sea level rose in the last century was 10 times faster than the average rate over the last three millennia.
Then there is military globalization, consisting of networks of interdependence in which force, or the threat of force, is employed. The world wars of the 20th century are a case in point. The prior era of economic globalization reached its peak in 1914, and was set back by the world wars. But, while global economic integration did not regain its 1914 level until half a century later, military globalization grew as economic globalization shrank.
During the Cold War, the global strategic interdependence between the US and the Soviet Union was acute and well recognized. Not only did it produce world-straddling alliances, but either side could have used intercontinental missiles to destroy the other within 30 minutes.
This was distinctive not because it was totally new, but because the scale and speed of the potential conflict arising from military interdependence were so enormous. Today, al-Qaeda and other transnational actors have formed global networks of operatives, challenging conventional approaches to national defense through what has been called “asymmetrical warfare.”
Finally, social globalization consists in the spread of peoples, cultures, images and ideas. Migration is a concrete example. In the 19th century, some 80 million people crossed oceans to new homes — far more than in the 20th century. At the beginning of the 21st century, 32 million US residents (11.5 percent of the population) were foreign-born. In addition, some 30 million visitors (students, businesspeople, tourists) enter the country each year.
Ideas are an equally important aspect of social globalization. Technology makes physical mobility easier, but local political reactions against immigrants had been growing even before the current economic crisis.
The danger today is that shortsighted protectionist reactions to the economic crisis could help to choke off the economic globalization that has spread growth and raised hundreds of millions of people out of poverty over the past half century. But protectionism will not curb the other forms of globalization.
Modern technology means that pathogens travel more easily than in earlier periods. Easy travel plus hard economic times means that immigration rates may accelerate to the point where social friction exceeds general economic benefit. Similarly, hard economic times may worsen relations among governments, as well as domestic conflicts that can lead to violence.
At the same time, transnational terrorists will continue to benefit from modern information technology such as the Internet. And, while depressed economic activity may slow somewhat the rate of greenhouse gas build-up in the atmosphere, it will also slow the types of costly programs that governments must enact to address emissions that have already occurred.
So, unless governments cooperate to stimulate their economies and resist protectionism, the world may find that the current economic crisis does not mean the end of globalization, but only the end of the good kind, leaving us with the worst of all worlds.
Joseph S. Nye is a professor at Harvard University and was recently rated as one of the most influential scholars of the past 20 years by scholars of international relations.COPYRIGHT: PROJECT SYNDICATE
Rather than a “diplomatic win,” the recently announced opening of a Taiwan office in Guyana proved to be a source of disappointment and displeasure. The government in Georgetown decided to halt the mutual establishment of representative offices less than 24 hours after the agreement was announced. Unsurprisingly, the “China factor” appears to have been the primary reason behind this reversal. The Guyanese Ministry of Foreign Affairs explicitly stated that the country would “continue to adhere to the one China policy” as it nixed the agreement with Taipei. Why does Guyana matter, though? International attention on this Caribbean nation of less than 1
The rise of China as a major economy and military power has been a major development this century. While China’s economic clout is felt across the world, it has also been aggressively pursuing a military modernization program. One study published by the Washington-based Center for Strategic and International Studies in May last year said that since 2016, China’s annual defense budget has been 7.2 to 8.1 percent of total government spending. Although China has projected its rise as peaceful, the truth is that Beijing has begun to redefine the power structure in Asia in its favor, leading some international relations
The Olympic Charter in the sixth Fundamental Principles of Olympism prohibits discrimination based on nationality or political opinion. It also requires that the International Olympic Committee (IOC) maintain political neutrality and take action against any form of discrimination affecting the Olympic movement (rules 2.5, 2.6 and 16.1.3). The Japanese Olympic Committeeis required to ensure the observance of the charter and take action against discrimination carried out within Japan (Rule 27.2). The committees are failing to carry out their missions. Athletes from Taiwan are discriminated against on the basis of their nationality, and it must stop. Every country that participates in the
With a new US president in the White House, Beijing might have to rethink its approach toward Taiwan following a public meeting on Feb. 10 between Representative to the US Hsiao Bi-khim (蕭美琴) and a US Department of State official. Prior to his inauguration on Jan. 20, there was little known about what then-US president-elect Joe Biden’s China policy would be, and there were reports that Beijing had hoped to influence members of the incoming administration over Taiwan and other areas of contention. A BBC report on Dec. 3 last year cited a US intelligence official as saying that China