GLOBALIZATION AND THE THIRD WORLD: A REALIST PERSPECTIVE

By Cleve Chiro Nyinge

INTRODUCTION

The notion globalization has become the topic of discussion of the 21st century with most

people would relate to a free economy world with intercultural exchange and a harmonized

social agenda. The term hardly misses from political speeches and as the American

sociologist, Douglas Kellner, states the term has become “the buzzword” of our times. The

term globalization has long existed since the 1960s when the term specifically referred to an

integration of markets and financial trends. It was until there was a movement and opposing

views to the concept that the term became vibrant and was transferred into our everyday

lives.

However there are still debates as to what really does the idea of globalization mean. The

perception people have is that it could mean many different things and to others it represents

the revelation of a multifaceted development. During the years 1980s to 1990s was used by

the Neo-liberalist who advocated for a globalized market the notion of comparative

advantage which enhanced free trade between states. Among the economist, it is seen as an

ideal to benefit all meaning the benefiting also to the poorest countries, however statistics and

research have shown quite the opposite with most of the African and the Latin-American

exhibiting an influx in desperate situation and people in struggle for survival. In 1998 the

United Nation Development program released a report claiming that nearly 840 million

people across the globe were malnourished and bigger percentage of that number emanated

from the third world countries.

It’s at this point that some of the third world states view the concept of globalization as a new

form imperialism and neo-colonialism with developed countries and big corporate institution

imposing their superiority on poorer nations.

Whether there is an actually concept as globalization or not, one cannot deny that there is a

new emerging trend of social, economic and political harmonization. It is evidenced in the

tackling the issue of terrorism, the rising of regional communities such as the European

Union, the rise in transnational corporations, the increase of communication between

civilians of different states thanks to technological advancements, the exchange of cultural

exchange between nations amongst others. It is clear that this has transformed the

Westphalian ideal of sovereign statehood, shifting our thinking from a geopolitical to global

politics and focus on politics of worldwide social relations. The aim of this study it discuss

how this concept of globalization relates to the third world and how it affects and impacts the

third world and what is the place of the third world nations in this process of globalization.

The study would take a realist approach in addressing the issue of globalization and we will

begin by defining the term globalization from a historical view.

DEFINING GLOBALIZATION

When it comes to defining globalization there is no definitive definition as the term is a

multifaceted complex notion. Most people see it as a vague concept impossible of definition

thus the can be invoked in any way the user sees fit. Some define it as the recognition of the

changes taking place globally including economic, social and political interconnectedness

states. The dictionary defines it as a process in which businesses or other organization

develop international influence or start operating on an international scale.1

1
Oxford Dictionary retrieved from www.oxforddictionaries.com
Among the idealist and liberalist alike the term’s definition has been coined around macro-

economization in which there is a reduction on trade regulations and restrictions and more

free trade and free movement of capital.2Among the Marxist the term can be defined as a

means of spreading capitalism and seeking to oppress the economy of the developing or

poorer states.

Among the third world states the term globalization, in its definition, is associated with

westernization thereby eradicating other forms of culture. It usually denotes a form of

colonization among the African and some Latin-American countries.3

For the sake of our argument we will define the term strictly within the boundaries of security

and power. The term can be defined as a new way in which hegemonic powers can be

imposed across states in seeking to promote states’ interest. The argument is that as long as

the international system is divided into states and having the states as its fundamental actors

then the notion of globalization cannot be explained outside the notion state interest.

Through this definition we will explore the link between globalization and the third world

and how that link affects the third world.

2
Baylis J. Smith S. Owens P. (2008) The globalization of world politics: an introduction to international relations
(4th ed) Oxford: Oxfrod University Press Pp. 249
3
Ibid
GLOBALIZATION AND THE THIRD WORLD

In light of globalization there is seen a rise in inequality among states and it is in disparities

that see the dominant states being favoured more. According to Waltz he claims that

globalization would only lead to more suspicion and vulnerability and hence only breed more

conflict. The more the people and states become interdependent the more insecurity will

increase.4 One should note though that the premise of our arguments is that states are selfish

and are only after power and security. In the 1940s, power was characterized in terms of

nuclear arms, globalization has redefined power in terms of economic wealth which thus

eventually translates into military power, but let’s not dig deeper into militarism and focus on

states gaining global economic control.

The third world has been characterized with poverty and thus when we talk about

globalization we would look at how it address the issue of poverty. Most of the third world

countries, also referred to as developing nations, depend on aid from the developed, also

referred to as first world states. The developing nations lack in capacity and resources thereby

killing creativity and hence unable to keep up with the changes that are accompanied with

globalization.

The disparities in resource, capabilities and power distribution, between the developed and

the developing nations, to independently act in the global platform are hence only

exacerbated further by globalization favouring the developed countries interest while

exploiting the poor third world nations.

The effect has further been propounded by transnational corporations that lack proper

accountability and mechanism of being held responsible for their actions. For example

Zambia, the biggest source of copper in Africa has since been exploited by the developed

4
Waltz, Kenneth N. (1979) Theory of International Politics. New York: Random House.
countries for its copper and yet it languishes in poverty with people living under a dollar per

day. GlencoreXstrata, a Swiss company that does the extraction of the copper from Zambian,

was exposed for failing to pay taxes to the Zambian government. Taxes that were estimated

to double the per capita income of the nation if paid in 2010.5 The European Investment Bank

which is owned by the European has reluctant to publish its report on the issue which also has

raised questions among activist and African leaders alike. The Zambian minister for mines

stated on BBC’s documentary’s “Stealing Africa” that the country as a nation has been

blessed with abundant natural resource yet the paradox is that Zambian is ranked among the

20 most poorest nations.6

Here we see how the developed states in this case, the European states, through the European

Investment bank (EIB), which was to be a tool for development and investing in the African

only exploits Zambia, a third world nation, only to satisfy their own selfish interest and this is

to gain economic power. Hence globalization is seen to bring a new face of hegemony in

which power is fused with wealth in transnational corporations that are able to define

international policies and affairs.

On another instance we are able to see how international organizations that were meant to

benefit member states are used to undermine developing nations are now tools used by

economic powerful states to further propagate their interest and agenda while the third world

continue to languish in poverty in this Globalized society. The World Bank and the

International Monetary Fund (IMF) are such institution that have become a tunnel through

which the powerful states exercise their economic superiority.

5
A documentary by BBC, Stealing Africa, Retrieved from http://m.youtube.com
6
Hannah Osborne (2012, November 26th) Stealing Africa: How copper industry leaves Zambia in Poverty. The
International Business times. Retrieved from www.ibtimes.co.uk
The introduction of Structural Adjustments Programs (SAPs) was the beginning of a new

form of neo colonization on third world nations. One of SAPs’ requirements was to impose

privatization and less regulation in a bid by the powerful elite to save their falling economy

and to have control over other countries resource and find new market for their subsidized

products. This had tragic effect on the poorer economies in the end third world nations were

forced to pay less attention to development and public investment. An example would be the

great reduction of subsidies to agricultural farmers in Luanda left the farmers and peasant at

the mercy of global competition in which they were unable to compete with hence killing the

industry. This in effect forced the county’s one quarter to live under 75 cents a day and

brought rise to an increase of child mortality rate.7

CRITICS AGAINST ANTI-GLOBALIZATION

Liberalist and like-minded theorist have argued that there is a relationship between

globalization and poverty in that the interconnectedness between states through free trade end

poverty. Even with the present facts before them of the inequality that continues to ever

persist between developed states the third world, they maintain that globalization will in the

end reduce poverty in the developing nations. They claim that there has been a lot of

movement in both people and goods, technology and free trade between states which has led

to the rise of the East Asia economy.

The liberalist blame the consequence of poverty on government policies and decision making

process that are a barrier to free trade between states. They state that it was the inward

economy policies that made the latin-american states and Africa not to flourish in the 1950s

7
Francis Shor, (2012), U.S. Economic Imperialism and Resistance from the Global South: A Prelude to OWS,
Journal on New Politics, Volume 14 issue. 1 Retrieved from http://newpol.org/print/content/us-economic-
imperialism-and-resistance-global-south-prelude-ows
all the way to the 1980s.8 They still maintain that states interest are not only power and

security.

Contrary to their argument there is evidence to show that what has remained constant since

the treaty of Westphalia is the state’s selfish pursuit of power. What they fail to see is the new

form in which power is being perceived and the new hegemony that are being formed and

determine international relations in this global era. For example in relation to China, the

rising East-Asia economy, the U.S. is trying to surround the country with an Asian version of

NATO consisting of its allies in order to deal with what has been considered as a threat to the

U.S. hegemony.9

CONCLUSION

as long as the international system would be divided into states as its major actors then only

states would influence the process of globalization and states being insecure and selfish

would do anything including force, in this case being economic demands in forms of policies,

to get control of key resources to their benefit and use their economic status to avoid

detrimental in their pursuit of economic superiority. This is witnessed in the reluctance of the

economic powerful states like the US and China in the implementation of Environmental

conservation policies as they see it as a hindrance to gaining economic advancement and thus

an obstacle to economic hegemony.

8
Arie M. Kacowicz (2005) Globalization and Poverty: Possible Links,Different Explanations. The Whitehead
Journal of Diplomacy and International Relations Volume 6 issue 2 Pp. 111-127 retrieved from
www.blogs.shu.edu/diplomacy/files/archives/10-kacowicz.pdf
9
Devon DB, (2011, January 3rd). Neo-Colonialism, Imperialism and Resistance in the 21st Century. Global
research Retrieved from http://www.globalresearch.ca/neo-colonialism-imperialism-and-resistance-in-the-
21st-century/