Since 1995 and the establishment of the WTO, the quick spread of new technologies, and the increasing interdependence between countries, supporters and detractors of globalization have been arguing about whether globalization actually exists and if its effects are positives or negatives for the business and/or the welfare of the entire human population. The purpose of this assignment is to analyse and assess the following statement made by Kofi Annan in 2000 concerning globalization: It has been said that arguing against globalization is like arguing against the laws of gravity. Globalization has its defenders and its protestors. In order to better understand each point of view and to assess Kofi Annan' statement, we will first explain what is globalization. We need to compare different definitions to have a neutral and general definition on which everybody agrees.
[...] First of all, according its defenders globalization is a process that is improving living standards and welfare in the world, increasing trade and decreasing trade barriers. Thanks to international institutions trade is regulated, disputes can be settled, and non-tariff trade barriers can be dismantled. In other words, free competition is ensured, companies can find new markets for their product; they can also find new production locations with lower costs, higher productivity, availability of resources (Johnson and Turner, 2003). From a pro- globalization point of view, the point is not to discuss whether globalization is increasing disparities between developed and developing countries or not. [...]
[...] It means that globalization has already existed and has already been reversed. But is the process that we are facing today really globalization? Actually it is not exactly what we can call globalization. It is more precisely a regionalisation and a triadization. Countries from the triads (Europe, North America, and East Asia) are more strongly linked to their neighbours than to far countries. Regionalisation can be considered in the same time as a part of the globalization process and also as a threat for globalization. [...]
[...] Even if there are some bad points, Kofi Annan's statement is true; arguing against globalization is not the point, because globalization is a non-reversible process, like the laws of gravity. But we can shape it through reforms of international institutions, new agreements in WTO in order to make it better fit with our expectations and our needs and reach the final step of the globalization process, which is globalization itself. References Books: MAKING GLOBALIZATION GOOD, the moral challenge of global capitalism, John H. [...]
[...] Chairman of the US FED from 1987 to 2006 The protestors' most common argument is that globalization does not benefit to all the people in the world but on the contrary, to few powerful people in developed countries. In other words, globalization benefits more to large corporations than individuals. Antiglobalizers say that rich countries and MNCs have established globalization in their favour, with their own rules thanks to international organisations. Thus, developing countries have to suffer the consequences of such a process. [...]
[...] “Complaining about globalization is as pointless as trying to turn back the tide” Tony Blair, Prime minister of the United Kingdom from 1997 to 2007 The statement made by Kofi Annan compares globalization and the laws of gravity. The meaning of this statement is that, according Kofi Annan, globalization is a process that involves the whole modern world and this process is irreversible. Everybody has heard the story of the apple falling on the Newton' head. Laws of gravity are facts of life. [...]
Online readingwith our online reader
Content validatedby our reading committee