Originally written for the Young Fabians ‘Anticipations’ magazine issue ‘The Soul of Foreign Policy’.
Between 1960 and 2000, the growth rate of developing countries has halved from 3% to 1.5%. Some regions such as Sub-Saharan Africa have even seen an absolute fall in per capita income. This is a result of the orthodox policy prescriptions advocated by developed countries and leading international institutions such as the IMF and World Bank. What these policies –broadly summed up as trade liberalisation, privatisation and deregulation – have failed to take into account is that developing nations in general lack the economic infrastructure or industrial expertise required to compete on international markets. Privatisation and deregulation prevent the formation of said infrastructure and expertise by denying governments, and thus by extension citizens, the right to determine the direction of development in their interest.
This has left many developing nations in a permanent state of destitution, unable to develop their economies and raise the living standards of their citizens. In spite of this reality, the intuitions we have built fail to address these problems. The IMF was intimately involved in many of the debt crises of developing countries. Western nations have indirectly supported despots, and when countries such as Kenya attempt to protect their industries by legislating against the import of used clothing, institutions such as the WTO provide a platform to stop them. It is difficult not to feel that this situation has been imposed for the benefit of advanced nations.
This state of affairs leaves countless people reliant on subsistence farming. Developing nations fall into repeated debt crises that only exacerbate the situation, opening the path for political instability, demagoguery, and the subsequent abuse of the rights of people who have committed no crime other than being born in a certain part of the world.
What is to be done then? In a globalised world, economic policy and foreign policy are increasingly intertwined. Economic opportunity is an essential aspect in promoting individual freedoms, and conversely, individual freedoms are necessary for citizens to determine the development of their countries.
This calls for a reformation of foreign policy, using our advantage as a developed country to promote economic development in a way that fosters cooperation and peace. By sharing our skills and technology, as opposed to foreign aid, we can produce lasting and productive outcomes that put developing nations on the path to sustained development.
This however, will not be enough. Another key aspect would involve the development a hegemony between developed nations, citizens of developing nations and progressive politicians who are willing to reform and develop institutions with the explicit intent of increasing and enhancing the range of human rights afforded to citizens. Economic development is a key factor in enabling this, and the relationships between parties should reinforce this by providing political weight to the promise of development. Pressure on politicians could be exerted by including conditions of improvements in human rights in accordance with UN constitutions, with supervisory parties ensuring progress is taking place. It should be noted that the aim of this is not necessarily to create liberal democracies, but to give citizens a chance to engage together to decide the kind of society they wish to see, in accordance with their cultural and social values.
Such a strategy would be at the core of reforming the global capitalist system into a system that puts people at its core. The age of economic insularity is over; you and I are dead, long live us!
gramme of soma 