arch/ive/ief (2000 - 2005)

There is purposeful ambiguity over the exact nature of globalisation, paricularly in relation to explaining how it can encompass the third world in the sharing of this prosperity. Etymologically, it implies a shrinking world, one planet where we can live in harmony and share the fruits of economic liberalisation. Practically, it implies one planet, two worlds, the excessively consuming north and the destitute south. One World 2000 elaborates further," it is not a vague feeling about the future...it is a specific economic strategy pursued by the countries of the industrialised world and the Multi National Corporations (MNCs)...to sweep aside smaller local competitors irrespective of social and environmental cost".

The G8 leaders, led by the ingratiating Bill Clinton et al. have masterminded a new policy for expansionism through economic imperialism. Same wine, new bottle. It is a calculated policy of keeping the developing countries marginalised in the new world order so to catalyse discontent among the peoples and instability - perfect barriers to development. The US hegemony now hinges not only on its parasitic global military presence, but further requires the unregulated markets of every country. George Bush, the soon to be President has already named two MNC chiefs as potential cabinet candidates - Alcoa Aluminum boss Paul O'Neill for treasury secretary and Time Warner president Richard Parsons as trade representative.

If there was an ounce of goodwill in these tyrants' hearts then presumably they would have fulfilled their promise of abrogating all 3rd world debt, currently handicapping countries and killing people. The US selective amnesia policy confirms these suspicions, in which it happily "forgot" and forgave the huge 1930s loans to the UK, France and Italy.

The big question is whether any of the reported benefits of globalisation can rub off on the Nepalese economy. Internal confusion is rife among the important Nepalese economic actors. The Kathmandu Chamber of Commerce states "the companies in Nepal which compete in the global environment...(it is obvious that they) have little or no chance to compete in the global market" A depressing realism but at least it's acknowledgment can be a foundation for improvement. However, the Nepalese representative at the Second Economic and Financial Committee of the UN Global Conference 2000 seems to have his wires crossed when boasting that "there are many sectors in which the developing world is very competitive". Perhaps he'd like to share his secret with the Nepalese business community.

Economically the businesses are suffering due to lack of infrastructure, human resources, and information (to name a few), complimented by the Nepali Congress's ever changing policies with regards to the business community. Both foreign and domestic investment relies upon the economic stability and assurance of government support. Much of the UK's foreign direct investment (FDI) stems from the implementation of attractive incentives to foreign investors. Nepal's only attraction is cheap labour, another exploitative avenue for an MNC in search of increasing profits.

The MNCs are the sole benefactors of unregulated trade, and in my country now monopolise every facet of industry. The onslaught of advertising adroitly manipulates the psyches of the unwary masses. Indigenous industries in Nepal are few and far between and hold little obstacle to the dumping on the market by these MNCs. The new world order led by these pernicious organisations do believe in freedom, certainly the freedom to maximise profits by whatever means necessary.

The World Trade Organisation, provides the necessary carte blanche, and holds few attractions for developing nations. It is an organisation established without democratic consent, especially relevant to developing nations which are automatically excluded from any issues affecting themselves with no transparency in the actual negotiations and agreements. The lack of any South Asian alternative in the wake of the SAARC imbroglio leaves this region in a precarious position. Many have little choice but to join rather than to be left behind.

Nepal's proximity to India has been it's never-ending Achilles Heel, any positive changes in Nepal's economic status quo is quickly revoked because of the impossibility of shaking the reliance on Indian imports. This relationship was further consolidated by the then Nepali Congress Prime Minster Sher Bahadur Deuba's signing of the 1996 Mahakali treaty which concretised the subordinate economic status.

If the incumbent NC government has failed to invoke an industrial revolution in domestic production then what is so wrong with the MNCs goods? A parallel cultural globalisation is also at work, that is of "McCulture" or "Coke-Colarisation". In the UK, all the national traditions and idiosyncrasies have been drowned by the onslaught of manufactured US corporation culture. One World 2000 explains," relentless images lead to the McDonaldisation of local cultures driving people to exchange real lives for junk consumerism...the global language is nothing more than an ability to recognise the trade marks of major US drinks manufacturers". Walking through the golden streets of Kathmandu I have already encountered numerous fast food outlets offering nutritious drive-thru hamburger deals. Although in its incipiency, already Colgate, Microsoft, MTV & Co. are infiltrating the uneducated mind of the masses. Globalisation brings with it the most hideous aspects of Westernisation and sterling efforts need to implemented immediately to prevent the steady erosion of the historically rich Nepalese culture. In the UK, this is exemplified in the 100 billion rupee "Millennium Dome", a symbol of all that is British which provides lucky ticket holders with the choice of not one but three McDonalds under the same roof.

Additionally MNCs do not support local economies, are remotely controlled, insensitive to local considerations and most damagingly the vulgar profits are not used for the development of Nepal but are transferred to the fat bank accounts of the western shareholders. It is easy to use the MNCs as a scapegoat as they are the propagators of this new imperialism, but it is individuals whose mindsets have been so contaminated in the importance of money who must be held responsible. The shareholders in the west are not well informed in what exactly their hard earned investment is creating - a new world order of subordination of the southern hemisphere.

It is glaringly obvious that neither Nepal nor the west is benefiting from this new mantra that is globalisation. It is a conspiracy for the continuance of the US hegemony. The real danger lies not in the inability of Nepal to compete in the global market, but more the encroachment of western values and potential for exploitation. As economist Paul Krugman so eloquently observed, "bad ideas flourish because they are in the hands of powerful groups".