Four more years of Bush

'Globalisation' encapsulates the economic policies that Bush Administration has been implementing. The US is leading the capitalist world with the help of IFIs (international financial institutions), World Trade Organisation (WTO) and many other subsidiary bodies like UNCTAD and UN agencies to execute neo-classical economic doctrines: the paradigm involving privatisation, de-regulation, free imports at low or no rates of duties, no subsidies and no restrictions on free movement of international capital, especially on capital account.

'Freedom' or democracy is a tricky concept. It is inherently good. But consider: world's number one capitalist power is proclaiming its divine mission to spread democracy -- to areas of its interest. What does Bush mean by democracy or freedom? It certainly has the kernel of civil liberties. But that is packaged in a raw capitalist paradigm. On closer examination, and considering the recent US conduct, it is clear that America can and does overlook lapses in civil liberties and democratic norms so long as its friends remain loyal to it and stay faithful to the US-recommended economic paradigm, so have US officials reassured.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

There is little obscurity in 'globalisation'. The world has seen it, implemented it and has either been greatly benefited -- if the country had undergone enlightenment, has widespread education and sciences are being applied to economic tasks -- or greatly impoverished. That happens within each society and among trading nations. Free enterprise produces some brilliant successes and many more failures. This is an iron law of capitalism within a nation as much as among nations.

Capitalism is resurgent after Communism collapsed. It will benefit a few new countries like China, India or a few S.E. Asian states but mainly OECD countries. A large number of underdeveloped economies will go belly up -- a result already witnessed in Sub-Saharan Africa. Many more are sure to join them. Americans regard this as natural. Former colonies of Europe have known what this paradigm implies; they have experienced the few partial successes and seen many failures, all resulting from free trade.

Poor countries' indebtedness reflects their being inefficient producers. Today's western scholars ignore what was written in 19th and 20th Centuries: how colonial masters manipulated terms of trade between metropolitan areas and colonies, despite free trade. Now crocodile tears are being shed by creditor nations over the plight of the debt-ridden. Noble speeches are made. But the debt mountain goes on becoming higher and higher. The rich creditor nations are reducing the poor man's debt burden for decades; they have underlined the affirmative action's need. But the poor man's situation never improves. Nor can it. After all, in capitalism the purpose of economic effort is to enrich oneself. But that can only be at the expense of widespread poverty. Who can get rich if he does not exploit the ignorance and economic weakness of many? Globalisation can only produce more negative, and a few positive, results; no qualitative change is likely.

Let's turn to Bush's chief cliché 'freedom'. His mission is spreading 'freedom'. But there are sure to be slips between the cup and the lip. True, the US is militarily matchless. It is also a powerhouse of economic strength; it is 27 per cent of world economy. When it proclaims it has a mission from on very high, it means business.

But we need to translate it. After all, Bush has been at spreading freedom since 2001, beginning with Afghanistan. Having succeeded there, he turned to Iraq. By next week, he will have succeeded in showering the blessings of democracy on rather ungrateful Iraqis who continue blowing themselves up at an uncomfortable rate. As January 30 draws closer, suicide bombings are increasing.

It is doubtful whether Bush has an exit strategy from Iraq or even wants one. As far as one can divine the future, he will need American soldiers in Iraq for the permanent military bases that America desires. Bush is not really anxious to get out of Iraq. He merely wants an ostensibly democratic Iraqi invitation to stay on permanently; Pax Americana requires some casualties every year. Moreover, he has still to bring in the benefits of freedom to Syria, Iran, North Korea and perhaps -- why not -- Egypt and Saudi Arabia though it is rather unlikely.

Bush's assertions about God's mandate for spreading freedom signifies that he stays the ME course. More regime changes are likely to be planned. That's all. No one should think that Bush's interest is confined to ME. Neither God nor Mr. Bush can be so contained. As a global power, the US has interests all over Asia -- where most of the action is.

God and Bush are not limited to even the Asian landmass. Except for 'old Europe', US faces no cognisable challenge from any Continent. The 'old Europe', is not a military challenge. The latter is already diluting its opposition and is looking for ways and areas to cooperate with America. Economically, the situation is different. Competition over trade matters can be expected from it.

Asia contains Russia with its bewildering uncertainties; it has the wherewithal of being a superpower. But its economy is still largely disorganised because it became a capitalist power from being communist one in a jiffy. It is a federation of 100 nationalities with no strong ideological glue. Will the Russian centre hold? Who knows? If only, it can get its economic act together, it can survive -- otherwise it will qualify for American ministrations for 'freedom'.

Among possible Asian challenges there are Japan, South Korea, Australia, Formosa; but these are close allies. China is emerging as a giant economy, with considerable military might. A large number of secondary powers -- Indonesia, Iran, Pakistan, Israel, Turkey -- frequently demand attention. While Israel, Turkey and Pakistan are perpetual friends of America, India is supposedly emerging as a rival of China. India too is a strategic partner of America like Pakistan, Turkey or Israel. The question is how the US has to manage this motley crowd of friends.

The US economy also makes prior demands on its foreign policy. It does not need markets for consumer goods; it exports, mainly, capital and high technology, for both civilian and military use. It imports consumption goods mainly from Japan and China, running roughly over $ 634 billion as trade deficit. US is world's largest debtor; its current account deficit is expected at $ 603 billion or 6.3 per cent of GDP. The dollar, the reserve currency, has been losing its value. This can be catastrophic for both US and those who keep their monetary reserves in dollars. If too many people discard dollars too soon, the dollar will crash; world will be left holding worthless dollar bills. Meantime for stemming the tide out of dollar, Washington will have to go on raising interest rates. That can cause recession-cum-depression in the US -- and later worldwide.

The US needs devastated economies to rebuild -- like Afghanistan and Iraq. That can keep its cutting-edge technology in use; the US needs to modernise armies and air forces of many countries to keep up its war industries' profits. It wants to control oil business everywhere -- from extraction, transportation, refining to marketing. It needs markets for its surplus capital and high technology. Its foreign policy is required to provide these. Freedom everywhere thus has an imperial ring.

MB Naqvi is a leading columist in Pakistan.