Publications

FRAMEWORK OF GLOBALISATION: SITUATING THE CHALLENGES FOR THE NEW MILLENNIUM,
WITH AFRICA AS A FOCUS

One of the most popular catch-words of the day, in Africa and around the world, is "globalisation." It is possible to publish an article or book, attract an audience, secure a grant, and get invited to a panel presentation, if the word "globalisation" is in the title. So, here I am, to speak about "globalisation" before this gathering of ICCR -- but admittedly from a very limited perspective. I come from Africa, where I’ve worked for over ten years in Zambia, one of the poorest countries in the world. My reflections on "globalisation" take Africa as a focus, and my feelings about the topic take Zambia as a locus. For me, the topic is neither abstract nor academic, but it is concretised in the lives of the people I live and work with and will soon return to.The topic, I know, is not new to you, members of ICCR. It is the context of much of your concerns about corporate responsibility in our world of today.

I know from my early contact with ICCR in the formative years of the 1970s and 1980s, when I worked with the team of the Center of Concern in Washington DC, that the faith vision of ICCR has always been situated within a wider community of interests than simply the United States. And I note from the revised Principles for Global Corporate Responsibility (1998) that the wider community is defined as embracing ecosystems, national communities, local communities and indigenous communities.For me, coming from the African perspective, the concern with community is existential, as summed in a beautiful African proverb: "I am because we are; we are because I am." My personal existence, identity and worth is only within community; and the order, function and beauty of community is only possible with my personal contribution. Is it possible today to speak of a truly "global community"? Is that what globalisation is all about? I am afraid that I am not one who views globalisation in its current character and operation as an authentically communitarian phenomenon. Indeed, I judge the present asymmetical structures of globalisation as inherently destructive of true global community.

What I want to provide in these brief remarks is some social analysis -- for better or worse, my name is still linked to that catch-word! -- of the structures and consequences of globalisation. You are certainly familiar already with these elements and the most I can do here is offer a framework for linking them together, show their relevance to Africa from my perspective, and suggest some avenues of response by ICCR from your perspective.As a parenthetical introduction, let me simply note that what Africa is experiencing today as globalisation is actually the fourth stage of outside penetration of the continent by forces which have had negative social consequences on the African people’s integral development. This outside penetration has occurred over the past five hundred years:

first as slavery, during which the continent’s most precious resource, African women and men were stolen away by global traders for the benefit of Arab, European and American countries.

second as colonialism, when British, French, Belgium, Portugese, Italian and German interests dictated the way that map-boundaries were drawn, transportation and communication lines were established, agricultural and mineral resources were exploited, and religious and cultural patterns were introduced.

third as neo-colonialism, the form taken by outside political pressures and economic forces that set trade patterns, investment policies, debt arrangements, technology introductions, political alliances, etc.

fourth as globalisation as we know it, characterised by the attachment and integration of the economies of the world through trade and financial flows, technology and information exchanges, and the movement of people.

Unfortunately, during none of thes stages has the primary concern of outside penetration been the beneficial improvement of the African peoples. I mention these four stages of penetration of Africa in order for us to see that the phenomenon of globalisation, while new in much of its stuctural reality, is old in too much of its consequential actuality.

TWELVE STRUCTURES

Now let’s move out wider and present an overall framework of the structures of globalisation. As I mention twelve of these, I expect that you will fill in the details from your own experiences and concerns, and that the panel discussion will provide the concrete examples and make the relevant applications for the work of ICCR.What are these structures of globalisation?

1. Ideology of neo-liberal capitalism: The driving dynamic of globalisation today is an ideology that many feel is the only alternative for the future, and some even argue marks "the end of history." This is an "economic fundamentalism" that puts an absolute value on the operation of the market and subordinates people’s lives, the function of society, the policies of government and the role of the state to this unrestricted free market. Socialism is dead, and it is now not only capitalism that is alive but a version of capitalism that Pope John Paul II has called "savage capitalism." Neo-liberal policies support economic growth as an end in itself (with, of course, some social side-effects), use macro-economic indicators as the primary measurement of a healthy society, promote an export-oriented strategy of economic development in the context of free trade and privatisation, impose austerity measures that hurt those who already are hurting the most, curtail social programmes that may be demanded by the common good but are referred to as "too costly," disregard environmental concerns, restrict the regulatory, protective and enhancing roles of the state, and reinforce the concentration of wealth and power in the hands of a small and undemocratic elite. This ideology governs not only economic structures but also political arrangements. It assumes almost a religious character, as greed becomes a virtue, competition is considered a commandment, and profit is seen as a sign of salvation. Dissenters are dismissed as "non-believers" at best, and "heretics" at worst. Problems with the operation of this ideology -- even such massive problems as the collapses experienced last year in Asian economies -- are seen not as "mortal sins" but as mere "falls from grace" that deserve more penitential practice of the exercises that are demanded by the ideology.In Zambia, as in many other countries of Africa and the developing world, we experience this neo-liberal ideology in the IMF-World Bank proposed and imposed "structural adjustment programme" -- the infamous "SAP." With some sardonic truth, Zambians refer to SAP as "starve African people," "stop all production," "send away profits," or, in ciNyanja, the local language I use in my liturgies, "satana ali pano" -- "the devil is in our midst!"

2. Political breakdown of a bi-polar world: Related to the ideological supremacy driving globalisation is the political supremacy of an increasingly globalised system of governance. Geo-politics are asymmetrical. With the collapse at the close of the 1980’s of the Soviet Empire and the end of the Cold War, there is no longer major political division along economic lines of capitalist and socialist countries. The West reigns supreme. If the "New World Order" proposed after the Gulf War of 1991 has not in fact become a reality, at least there is no serious challenge to that supremacy. The immense tragedies experienced daily with the bombings in Yugoslavia amidst heinous ethnic cleansing are occuring within the structrure of this uni-polar political globalisation. For NATO is the instrument of the most powerful, and the wider community of the United Nations is by-passed with immunity.

3. Technological innovations: I speak now of what is surely the most popularly evident of the structures of globalisation. The new electronic communication possibilities bind together the globe in previously unimaginable ways. Personal computers, fiber optics, satellites, networks of faxes, e-mail and Internet: all of this makes economic and political globalisation more and more a reality. Transfer of funds is almost as important as transfer of information, all of it done by punching keys and flipping switches. "F1" pressed on a computer keyboard opens, or closes, whole new worlds! Human "interface" (an interesting phrase with profound philosophical connotations in a globalised world!) is frequently not necessary and often not desired. This technology is not simply a servant but also is a master. For example, I’ve learned from recent reports in one of my favourite newspaper comic strips, "Doonesbury" (a delight to which I only have infrequent electronic access in Zambia) that Wall Street is considering expanding its worlkng hours to afternoon and evening. This will be done in order to demand that brokers can be available through electronic technology to market activity in a twenty-four hour time zone.(In sub-Saharan Africa, this technology is coming in rapidly and will be a major force in the future. A personal example: I am able to get first-hand information in Zambia about globalisation through "surfing" the Internet, and I can keep in regular contact with the my team in Lusaka by using e-mail.)

4. Regional blocs and trade agreements: The new configurations of globalisation are made up of regional efforts at cooperation and integration, which also provide for enhanced competition. These include agreements and institutions such as the World Trade Organisation (WTO), the European Community, the North American Free Trade Association (NAFTA), the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Lome arrangements with the ACP countries (Africa, Caribbean and Pacific). In my part of the continent, we have the Southern African Development Community (SADC) and the effort to restore or to begin anew beginning some free trade zones. There is also the proposed US legislation, the Africa Growth and Opportunity Act. The key actor in the global trade structures, of course, is the World Trade Organisation (WTO), meeting in Seattle in a few months -- not, unfortunatly, in the Lutheran Bible Institute in Issaquah! Benefits from the globalised trade negotiations of the Uruguay Round are not fairly distributed.

You have heard before the figures: while Europe will accrue $80 billion gain from the liberalised regime, China $40 billion, Japan $25 billion and the United States $18 billion, Africa as a whole would in effect experience a $3 billion loss. Moreover, many of you have been keen observers and active opponents of the proposed Multilateral Agreement on Investment (MAI) -- sunk last year in no small part because of the mobilisation of truly "globalised" efforts by non-governmental groups such as those represented here in this room. But although this mechanism for depriving local governments of any ability to effectively regulate the activities of transnational corporations and to guarantee minimum social and environmental protection for their citizens has been sunk (earning it the name "the MAI-tanic"), it is threatening to re-surface again in the shift of negotiations from the OECD to the WTO. Watch the Seattle meeting!

5. Financial markets and labour markets: Money is the life-blood of an economy, both global and local. Money moves across the globe both at incredible speeds and in unbelievable magnitudes. More than three trillion US dollars are exchanged through the financial markets every day. Only a very tiny portion of that sum actually is involved in producing goods, providing employment, and promoting improved life conditions. Investments, speculations, purchases, shares, etc., know no national boundaries in a globalised economy and know no personal or institutional motivation other than profit maximisation. We have learned that the Asian financial flu that brought such immense suffering to the people of Indonesia, for example, is highly contagious in the body of globalisation.

There is also increased mobility in labour markets, as corporations move production sites to the most favourable areas of cheap wages, trained personnel and political stability ("law and order"). This accounts for job losses and lowered wages in some areas, sweat shops and environmental hazards in other areas. The focus of ICCR and other concerned groups on the maquiladoras show many of the sad consequences of this globalising of labour markets. This is especially true in the treatment of women workers.

6. Transnational corporations: A major set of important actors in the drama of globalisation has for many years been the large transnational corporations (TNCs). I don’t need to spend much time before this audience in speaking about these actors. Indeed, you know very well a figure that still does amaze many people, especially in Africa, that of the largest one hundred economies in the world today, fifty are global corporations and not nation states. What effective influence can the struggling countries of the developing world have in negotiations aimed at attracting these mammoths except to offer financial and tax incentives, docile and cheap labour forces, and reduced social and environmental regulations? And what impact does all this have on the social well-being of the residents of these countries?

Let me cite briefly the example of the TNCs moving into the Copperbelt in Zambia. Our great mining conglomerate, ZCCM, is being privatised according to the demands of the SAP.The former owner under British colonial rule, Anglo-American Corporation, is among the TNCs taking control (TNCs also from Europe, China, India, etc.), but without any effective measures to protect the environment or promote social sustainability. But for Zambians, ZCCM was more than an economic entity, it was an entire community social infrastructure of housing, schools, hospitals, social clubs, sports teams, pensions, etc. Outside TNCs certainly view this social infrastructure differently than does local management. A globalised economy driven by TNCS has its own agenda.

7. International financial institutions and donor groupings: A second major set of important actors in globalisation includes the banks and the donors. These are indeed formidable actors, whether we speak of the Paris Club of bi-lateral donors, the London Club of commercial banks, or the Washington Club of multi-lateral donors (most particularly, World Bank and IMF). (I have had occasion to explain to Zambian friends that none of these so-called "Clubs" are discos!) As is well known, the impact of these banks and donors on the political, economic and social realities of of globalisation is immense. Let me cite another example from my Zambian experience, the impact of external debt and the debt servicing regularly exacted by the global structures of IFIs and lending countries. (I must restrain myself here, since debt cancellation is a major focus of my current work in Zambia.)

In the mesh of import-export globalisation, Zambia owes $7 billion in debt (or $700 for every Zambian woman, man and child), and last year paid more in debt servicing than all its expenditures for health, education and social services. The HIPC initiative for debt relief, offered by the World Bank and the IMF, it must be clearly stated, is too little, too late, too rigid and too unrealistic. A creditors’ scheme that focus on debt repayment rather than a debtors’ scheme that promotes human development, HIPC is not worthy of reform but only of rejection. That is why in Zambia and elsewhere we are so actively pursuing debt cancellation through the Jubilee 2000 campaign. I pray that all of you are actively involved in this campaign.

8. Environmental challenges: The image of the earth as seen from the moon is "a picture worth a thousand words" when it comes to thinking about globalisation. We are all bound together through ecological concerns. A growing global consciousness of this interdependence affects at least some efforts to save the purity and sustainability of our planet. But a globalisation driven by market dynamics has a two-fold ecological consequence for many poor countries such as those in Africa. First, there are the climatic warming (the so-called "green house effect") caused by pollution levels in Northern industrial countries, and also the dangerous practice of toxic waste dumping. Second, poverty conditions exacerbated by the severe SAP approach means both less care of the environment by cash-strapped governments and more encroachment on nature by persons desperately struggling for survival.

9. Cultural consequences: One commentator has called the process of globalisation the birth of the "McWorld" -- a cultural integration and uniformity that mesmerises the world with fast music, fast computers, and fast food. This "McWorld" is the product of the influence of MTV, McIntosh and McDonald’s. [Benjamin Barber, "Jihad vs. McWorld," The Atlantic Monthly, March 1992] Cultural imperialism is not a new phenomenon but it assumes alarming proportions today when driven by the new technologies and profit propensities of the dynamics of globalisation. Traditional cultural values such as family, community, respect for life, hospitality, etc., come into strong confrontation and do losing battle with the values communicated through Western music, movies, videos, cable and satellite television, advertisements, and the idolised figures of entertainment and sports.

I read in yesterday’s newspaper (The News Tribune, Tacoma) that the introduction of television into some south sea islands has in the past few years made "thin" more acceptable to young women than the locally and culturally sanctioned "fat" look. Not for health reasons, but because Western T.V. personalities are thinner. In Africa, we say that Western cultural messages imply that "White is Right, and West is Best."A Jesuit economist friend of mine from Nicaragua, Xabier Gorostiaga, speaks of the "predominance of the geo-culture over the geo-political and geo-economic." Culture is gaining ground over the traditional sources of economic and political power, and in the globalisation of today it is the dominant geo-culture of the West that is an overwhelming force against traditional African cultures.

10. Crime and drug trafficking: We all know that an analysis of economic growth must include figures on the informal economy as well as the formal economy. Indeed, the former sector is frequently the fastest growing part of an economy -- this is certainly true in Africa. But we also must pay attention to the underground economy -- the part that flourishes outside the law and includes theft, corruption, bribery, prostitution, smuggling and drug trafficking. This underground economy flourishes in the context of globalisation. Much corruption is fostered by international business deals; prostitution spreads with sex tourism to many countries; smuggling of stolen cars is a big business in many states in Africa (I know that from personal experience in Zambia!); and drug trafficking is reaching horrendous proportions throughout the world.

11. Arms trade: Another globalisation dynamic that I want to highlight here is the trade in arms, instruments of destruction, earners of profits by enabling people to murder each other in systematic and efficient fashion. The campaign against land mines -- disgracefully rejected by the Clinton administration -- brought fresh to public consciousness the despicable consequences of the globalised arms trade.I return to Zambia in a few weeks, to a country that currently is not in armed conflict, thank God, but is surrounded by terrible wars in its neighbours of Angola and Congo. These wars have been fed, and will continue to be fed, by an incredible trade in arms light and heavy. The African Synod of 1994 referred to the arms trade in Africa as "obscene." There are other even more damning names that it can -- and should -- be called! Let us be clear about this. The arms trade today is driven by no ideological struggle, imperialist design or individual pride. It is simply for profit. I know of no better example of "savage capitalism" in the context of globalisation.

12. Gap between the rich and the poor: Lastly, I turn to the social fabric of globalisation that is marked by the dynamic of a widening gap between the rich and poor, both between nations and within nations. Recent Human Development Reports of the United Nations Development Fund (UNDP) document that the richest 20% of the world’s population receives 85% of global income, while the poorest 20% receives 1.4%. That gap is continuing to grow, having doubled over the past thirty years. This is the so-called "champagne glass economy," a picture of the globe in which the huge poor majority occupy only the narrowest stem of the glass while the tiny rich majority enjoy the broad bowel of affluence. And I am sure you have heard that the UNDP report estimates that the 358 billionaires worldwide together possess more wealth than the nations with the poorest 45% of the world’s population.

(I am sure that the well-known Seattle billionaire, Bill Gates, is wealthier than most African countries!) Within countries, this dynamic of the growing gap between rich and poor is all-too-evident. When prosperity does come to a country in the develdoping world, it comes very unevenly. We must remember the distinction between a "poor country" and "poor people" -- who really benefits in a globalised economy? The growing gap in Zambia is graphically portrayed along Cairo Road, the main street of Lusaka, the capital city where I live. Today there are more Mercedes Benz, foreign style botiques and South African super-markets, and more and more street vendors, street kids and beggars.

ALTERNATIVE STRUCTURES

I have painted a very grim picture of the structures of globalisation. It is a framework that does not seem to have much redeeming value. You may say to me, "Surely there are positive aspects of globalisastion." I suppose that there are -- but please invite someone else to present that side of the picture! I’m sorry, but I see too many of the negative sides in my daily life in Zambia to offer what might appear to be a more balanced picture.But I do want to conclude on a positive note by speaking briefly of some alternatives to globalisation as I have described it, some alternatives that may draw response from ICCR in your excellent work for global corporate responsibility.

First, "globalisation of solidarity": This is a counter-emphasis, indeed a counter-cultural emphasis, to the structures that drive globalisation today. This emphasis was summed up by John Paul II in his World Day of Peace Message in 1998, when he called for "a globalisation in solidarity, a globalisation without marginalisation." I find that emphasis explicitly spelled out in "The Context of Faith" section of your 1998 document

Principles for Global Corporate Responsibility.

There a profession of faith speaks of the "responsibility to sustain the human community and all creation." In addressing what this might mean in your tradition of focus on corporations, it is stated: "We believe that the challenge for both companies and individuals in the global community is to ensure that the distribution of economic benefits is equitable, supports sustainable community and preserves the integrity of creation." (There are similar excellent statements in this faith section of your document and in the listing of principles, criteria and bench marks.)What might this "globalisation of solidarity" mean for you? Specifically, in relation to Africa? I can only urge you not to forget Africa.

That might seem strange to say to you, but it is a sentiment that I express to every audience I possibly can in the States. Africa is so far away, so strange, so depressing. Well, it isn’t! And it deserves better coverage in the press, wider instruction in the schools, fairer treatment in policies, deeper inclusion in prayers. Solidarity means awareness and caring, action and programmes. I must be honest and say that I’ve been disturbed in the month and a half I’ve been back in the States. The killings in Littleton are truly awful, but so are the daily killings in the wars in Congo and Angola -- "forgotten wars, unknown, unwept." The scenes of refugees fleeing Kosovo are heart-wrenching, but so are the much greater flights of refugees throughout Africa. (In the past several weeks, Zambia has received over 25,000 refugess from Congo -- again, the case of the poor welcoming the poor....) Don’t foget us! When you plan ICCR’s movement into the next millenium, ask yourself at each step what relevance this has for Africa. Build a globalisation of solidarity!

Second, "globalisation from below": This happy turn of phrase focuses our attention on the fact that integral human development, sustainable development, depends more on harmonious human relationships than on the organisation and operation of an unfettered free market. A fundamental fault with globalisation, especially as experienced in Africa, is that it is not rooted in community but structured from above according to abstract economic laws. To counter this situation in a creative fashion calls for the promotion of local communities that work for integral development and are effectively linked with similar groups across national boundaries. Much -- but, admittedly, not all -- of the recent world-wide explosion of activities in the so-called civil society, activities by non-governmental organisations (NGOs), is an expression of this effort to build globalisation from below.

The women’s movement, human rights advocacy, environmental concerns -- all have strong international networks of local groups. And two recent campaigns have special relevance to Africa as examples of globalisation from below: the campaign against land mines and the Jubilee 2000 debt cancellation campaign. The fact that both these extremely complex and difficult issues have been moved to the forefront of global concerns is a tribute to widespread efforts at the local level.

So, when you plan ICCR’s movement into the next millenium, ask yourself at each step how you can link with like-minded, like-hearted, like-handed, groups around the world. Build a globalisation from below! So, this is my framework within which you might view globalisation. I hope I have reminded you of things you already knew, deepened in you feelings you may already have, and raised in you questions you can pursue, together now with the panel and later in your working days here in this conference.