The problem with globalisation is that it cannot globalise politics.
This propos, from a November presentation by Joseph Stiglitz, is self-evident: capital flows unconstrained (mostly) internationally but political economy – and this scribe chooses to define that as the socially judicial art of satisfying unlimited wants with limited resources – remains a national concept whose essence frequently changes at borders.
Thus trade treaties are asymmetric and reflect, more than anything, the existing balance of negotiating power. Even after the often hailed GATT/WTO Uruguay round OECD tariffs for goods from poorer nations are 4 times higher than those from OECD members. No area is more illustrative of this than agriculture where, not only are there high tariffs, but OECD countries subsidise 48% of total farming production. That political attachment to subsidies - recognised, hidden or (especially) re-defined - explains in large part the demise of Doha last summer. Piss-taking has its limits.
Nonetheless, between WTO rules, IMF conditionally and a lop-sided market-economy dogma advocated by the developed there remains an aggregate force that presses down upon developing nations and undermines local culture, social justice, environmental protection and access to developed country intellectual property – most notoriously HIV/Aids medicines.
This is not a moralistic bash-the-North piece. It is an argument that their national politics are myopically getting in the way of a greater (including their own) economic, political and social stability. Examples abound but nowhere, probably, is it more media-obvious than in the havoc being relentlessly wrought upon the environment by capital. Love of sovereignty can have significant negative externalities.
Expecting the scales to drop from the eyes of the developed ahead of future trade discussions, as Mr Stiglitz’s presentation appeared to implicitly hope, is futile. Not much of value has ever been given away by power; and negotiation, rightly, is here to stay. And on this count there is encouragement to be found in Doha’s very failure: it showed that the pivot in the balance of such negotiations can move Southward - 'take it or leave' does not always work. Still, pleasing at it may be, that trend is not yet strong enough to yet help the very poorest.
Happy New Year.