Opinion

The South Turns the Tables

»

by: Le Monde | Editorial

photo
China's factories drive that country's astounding growth and are transforming global power relationships. (Photo: Michael Wolf / Mother Jones)

    Rich countries' development aid to emerging countries shrank by over eight percent in 2007. Those countries' development nonetheless proceeded strongly. According to the International Monetary Fund, it will be the same again this year: the United States' economic growth rate will fall to 1.3 percent, that of the Eurozone to 1.5 percent, while emerging countries, with China and India in the lead, will continue to gallop ahead at a rhythm of 6.7 percent. The future is there, in Asia first of all, but also in Brazil, in the half of Africa that has caught on to globalization, and we should not forget raw materials-producing countries, Russia, as well as the Gulf emirates. Private capital is flowing into those countries: more than a trillion dollars in 2007, according to a report published June 10 by the World Bank.

    A page is being turned on the Industrial Revolution, which had established Europe's supremacy, then the United States' for two centuries. A multipolar world is being created at an accelerated speed. To simplify, the South is turning the tables on the North.

    The reversal manifests itself in the birth of giant companies that aspire in their turn to rise through the ranks of power and of "sovereign" funds, held by governments that want to invest in our businesses, our factories, our banks. This money is often welcome; it is sometimes threatening, when, for example, it comes from Gazprom, the driving force of a Russian neo-imperialism that does not hide that its aims are neither strictly nor solely commercial. Nonetheless, it would be uncalled-for not to authorize these companies to come here when our multinationals deploy themselves in their countries. Emerging countries' development must also extend to the possession of capital and brands.

    The essential quality of this spanking new world is interdependence. While the South gains in autonomy and profits from regional integrations, "globalization" has increased exchanges of products, capital, know-how and people at a planetary level. The problems of scarce resources and the environment are global. To stave off growing protectionist threats, the United States and Europe must agree to make room for the new powers in international organizations. In return, the South must assume its new responsibilities.

    --------

    Translation: Truthout French language editor Leslie Thatcher.


IN ACCORDANCE WITH TITLE 17 U.S.C. SECTION 107, THIS MATERIAL IS DISTRIBUTED WITHOUT PROFIT TO THOSE WHO HAVE EXPRESSED A PRIOR INTEREST IN RECEIVING THE INCLUDED INFORMATION FOR RESEARCH AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES. TRUTHOUT HAS NO AFFILIATION WHATSOEVER WITH THE ORIGINATOR OF THIS ARTICLE NOR IS TRUTHOUT ENDORSED OR SPONSORED BY THE ORIGINATOR.

"VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS ARE PROVIDED AS A CONVENIENCE TO OUR READERS AND ALLOW FOR VERIFICATION OF AUTHENTICITY. HOWEVER, AS ORIGINATING PAGES ARE OFTEN UPDATED BY THEIR ORIGINATING HOST SITES, THE VERSIONS POSTED ON TO MAY NOT MATCH THE VERSIONS OUR READERS VIEW WHEN CLICKING THE "VIEW SOURCE ARTICLE" LINKS.

Comments

This is a moderated forum.  It may take a little while for comments to go live.

"the United States' economic

"the United States' economic growth rate will fall to 1.3 percent," Only by fudging the numbers. For instance, the real rate of inflation is reached by "not counting food and energy (gasoline, etc.)".

Ecological decay is

Ecological decay is progressing faster than economic growth. I am not sure where they intersect, but the disasters increase daily, and soon we shall be spending more to fix the damage each year than the economy grows. The growth model is a house of cards on planet earth.

""globalization" has

""globalization" has increased exchanges of products, capital, know-how and people" Did Thomas Friedman dictate this nonsense? When do we see the free "exchanges of ... people" from Mexico, or Africa, north?