MUCH has been said and written about globalisation. Many intellects, politicians, businessmen, management gurus and others have touched on this much-hyped phenomenon.
But what is globalisation? Is it a new and recent phenomenon? Is globalisation accidental or a natural evolution of mankind’s ever-advancing civilisation?
It is imperative that we all understand globalisation is an on-going process and not a static condition.
This implies globalisation is a progress in mankind’s continuing course of development.
In general terms, globalisation can be defined as a process that disintegrates the geopolitical borders between countries and transforms the world into one global unit.
It must be understood that globalisation is a result of history. It is real and it is definitely here to stay.
There is a general and popular notion that globalisation is a new occurrence that began in the 1980s with the rapid development and advancement in information and communication technology (ICT), the fall of the Soviet bloc and the emergence of a number of strong competitive Asian economies.
Some view globalisation as the process of expansion of the influence of business, commerce, industry, technology and knowledge from the capitalist centres to the peripheries.
As such, globalisation is thought of as capable of bringing about change and modernity to the less-developed peripheral states.
Looking at the historical facts, globalisation took place centuries ago during the “voyages of discovery” when Vasco da Gama and Christopher Columbus navigated around the globe in search of wealth for their rulers.
In other words, globalisation began with the emergence of capitalism in Europe some five centuries ago.
At the beginning of capitalism, merchants had to cast their commercial nets far and wide–so far, in fact, that they sailed around the world in search of riches in the Far East, the Americas and the Dark Continent.
This is a primal form of globalisation, otherwise known as “mercantile imperialism”.
This was, as a matter of fact, the starting point that bound the economies of the world together.
By 1939, all the dissension within the financial-capitalist system exploded in the form of World War II.
By the end of that global war, the world was in economic, political and social ruins, safe for one country.
The United States, untouched by the war, was financially enriched and militarily dominant.The country initiated the notorious Cold War to fortify its political and financial grip on the regions of the world not within the military or political sphere of the Soviet Union.
This resulted in a bipolar political climate for nearly five decades.
This domination by the United States was collated and safeguarded by an elaborate coterie of military alliances that acted as the global police for an expanding global capital.
This global capital was first termed “multinational”, then “transnational” and finally “supranational” capitalist enterprises.
Each stage of development has brought more powerful groups of financiers together to invest on a global scale.
Initially there were limits to this stage of globalisation because it was not possible to circumstantially control the flow of money.
Nonetheless, the development of the computer and ICT meant instant control and solved one aspect of this problem.
The disintegration of the Soviet Union, eliminating the last political barriers, resolved the other.
From its secure foundation in the domination of Europe and Latin America, global financiers–commanded by the US finance capital–set out to reshape the world.
The battle cry is “free trade”. The infantry is the alphabet-soup bodies such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the World Bank and the World Trade Organisation (WTO).
At this juncture, globalisation means a free-flow of capital searching for cheap labour.
Since the United States dominates these bodies by merit of its military and economic might, it has imposed an economic Pax Americana over the rest of the world.
Then in 1998, came the crunch, when several Asian tiger economies suffered from the ostensible “tomyam domino effect” that began in Thailand.
The stock markets and currency exchange markets in these countries crashed to a record low.
Some analysts were on record as saying that the “bubble had burst” and “the Asian economic miracle is over”.The IMF then came into the picture, offering help to the affected countries.
This scenario is very much akin to a Rambo movie when an American goes into a foreign land to become the hero–but not without strings attached, of course.
Painful pills were prescribed to these countries. Economic reforms dictated by the IMF had to be implemented in exchange for financial aid and loans.
South Korea, Thailand and Indonesia took the bitter pills.
Malaysia, on the other hand, opted to solve the problem by finding its own alternative “home grown” medicine.
Though this may be unorthodox, Malaysia seems to have recovered faster than most affected countries. This can surely be proved by the economic figures for 1999.Global financial markets grease the wheels of the multilateral trading and investment system.
Yet, policy makers have put the whole system at risk by freeing the financial markets from any framework of control.
The Asian financial crisis has brought the realisation to “throw sand in the wheels of international finance” before more harm is done to the economy.
The far-reaching impact of globalisation to the developing countries, in particular in the last few years of the 1990s, should be regarded as a valuable lesson to all.
It serves as a powerful reminder that everyone should be on their toes to the ever-changing socio-economic and political fabric of the world brought about by globalisation.Malaysia is a multiracial, multireligious and multicultural country with Islam as the official religion.
As a relatively young country, Malaysia should welcome globalisation. But because of this, the country should remember to tread the process of globalisation with caution.
The unique socio-political framework of the Malaysian community cannot afford the destructive elements of globalisation.
As the majority community in the country, Muslims must be alert to the changes brought about by globalisation.
Islam has given the outline that in whatever that we do, we should avoid any form of destruction.
If globalisation brings with it elements such as mental subjugation, oppression, social injustice, economic inequity and neocolonisation, then clearly it is against the teaching of Islam, or any other religion for that matter.
That is why we all must be cautious and prepared when dealing with globalisation, especially when the next two decades will.
With the year 2020 nearing, Malaysia must remain competitive in all areas while, at the same time, be vigilant to the detrimental effects of globalisation.
