For an inclusive globalisation

George Soros, a global financier and founding chairman of Open Society Institute also chipped in with his valuable contributions. He criticised the fact that globalisation placed ultimate reliance on market regarding it as a 'fundamentalist' project.

Both Prof Sen and Dr Yunus with their pro-poor insights thought that globalisation per se is not something to be critical about; on the contrary, there are reasons to be optimistic about it. For it holds opportunities and potentials that await tapping and utilisation for the good of the majority people in the world. What we need is to weigh up the pros and cons of globalisation as Prof Sen suggests so that we can adopt the merits and guard against its demerits.

Tap here to add The Daily Star as a trusted source

China, a communist country accepted free market economy only that which is commensurate with its national ethos and necessities.

Globalisation as is practised today is leading to monopolistic tendencies, and, to some extent, formation of cartels whereas it should have promoted competition across the board. It hardly offers any playing field between the rich and the poor, far less any level playing field. As a result, inequities are growing in the world instead of healthy inter-dependence for the sake of collective good.

We fully endorse the view that globalisation is moving in a wrong direction as a majority people are denied the privileges becoming weaker and weaker while the rich countries get stronger and stronger with the prerogative of giving the global economy the shape they like.

It is shocking to learn that two percent of people possess 50 percent of the world's total assets. To turn things around, the UN, World Bank, International Monetary Fund and World Trade Organisation need to play robust role in putting a human face to globalisation. One way of turning the tide would be for translating the rhetoric on technology transfer and inter-country movement of labour into tangible realities.