|
Economic Crisis, War and Revolution
Arvind
|
Contents Appendix
Economic Crisis, War and Revolution
Synchronised Sinking
Recession and War
Worldwide Impact
US in Shambles
Japan : Dark Clouds Sans
Silverlining
Europe Limping Along
Russia, CIS, & East Europe : United
we fall
East Asia gets pneumonia as America
Sneezes
Some Backward Countries in deep
Trouble
India : Stagnation Continues
Conclusion
Notes
It was Sept. 7. Four days before the attack on Washington and New York.
Shock waves shook the entire financial system as the US government
released its figures for August 2001. The GDP growth rate in the second
quarter was just 0.2%, in spite of seven successive cuts in interest
rates, a big infusion of government spending, and a huge tax rebate.
There was a gigantic loss of 8 lakh jobs in the manufacturing sector in
just two months of July and August, taking the unemployment rate
(official) to 4.9% compared to 4.5% a month earlier. While it was still
reeling under the shock of these figures, came the attack at the very
heart of the US’s mighty financial/military empire. Shock turned to
disaster. $90 billion lost in crumbling skyscrapers; $10 billion lost by
US airlines alone due to two days closure; billions more lost by
insurance companies; huge losses to the US’s financial sector due to a
week’s closure of transactions, and due to the closure of Wall Street
for 4 days — the first time since World War I; and 1% being written
off the US GDP due to the entire country being in a state of paralysis
for at least two days. The closure of Wall Street for four days led
to a loss of $330million to the four major merchant banks (Morgan
Stanley, Merill Lynch, Goldman Sachs and Lehman Bros). Within 10 days of
the attack, Wall Street fell 15% and the IT (Information Technology)
Nasdaq index fell 17%, and US airlines announced over one lakh lay-offs.
That week witnessed the worst fall in US stock market history, with
share values eroded by $1.4 trillion (one trillion is 1000 billion). The
Japanese Nikkei stock index too fell to a 17 year low.
Synchronised Sinking
The US is not the only economy to be hit by the recession. What we are
seeing is that drop in the world economy is occurring simultaneously in
the three major blocks : continental Europe, The US and Japan, or what
one observer acerbically brands as the syncronised sinking. 1
The second biggest economy in the world, Japan, whose economy has been
in a state of stagnation for over a decade, was in its worst ever
post-war recession, well before the attack. Germany, the third biggest
economy in the world, was also in a severe crisis. Its growth
projections for this year were the lowest amongst the 11 other euro-zone
countries. In mid August itself, official data revealed that
unemployment had been rising for the seventh consecutive month. The
report added, "a record number of firms are implementing severe
austerity measures to combat the ravages of falling profits and
recessionary conditions".
These three largest economies account for over 60% of world output. When
the ripples in the tiny S.E. Asian economies in 1997 could create tidal
waves worldwide; one can well imagine the impact of recession in the
three major economies of the world. In fact, a recession in just the US,
which alone accounts for 29%of world output, can send the world economy
into a tailspin. In fact, today, except for the Chinese (which has also
seen a slowdown) and Russian (which just saw some growth last year after
a decade of collapse) there is barely a single economy in the world that
is not in a state of stagnation, some of which, like Turkey, Indonesia
and Argentina, are in a state of total collapse. Since the start of
2000, share prices have plummeted by 29% liquidating more than $11
trillion* of wealth ¾
wiping out one-third of global wealth (EPW; Nov.10, 2001) According to
the FTSE All-World Dollar Index, in the year to Aug.20, 2001, world
industrial output has dropped 6.5%. This index, based on nine industrial
and financial sectors, have shown a massive drop : US ( -13%); Canada
(-19%); UK (-16%); Japan (-15%); Argentina (-26%); Brazil (-28%);
Colombia (-27%); Turkey (-45%).
A recession is said to exist if the growth rate of GDP* of a country
turns negative for two consecutive quarters (3-month periods). At the
global level if GDP growth rate drops below 2.5% the world economy is
said to be in recession. The recession in the 1970s was precipitated by
the overnight hike in oil prices — the oil shock. The ‘crisis’ in the
S.E. Asian economies in 1997, was no real ‘crisis’ but an attack on
those economies by the FIIs. These, together with the other
disturbances, were short-lived troughs within the general slowdown in
the world economy since the 1970s. With globalisation and the gigantic
growth of the speculative economy, frequent crashes and partial
recoveries are inevitable. In the years 1975, 1982 and 1991, which were
years of recession, global GDP grew by 1.9%, 1.2% and 1.4% respectively.
The investment bank, J.P. Morgan, predicts a global growth rate in the
current year of 1.6%.
But, the current recession is unlike the earlier three. This has not
been caused by just one or two factors, but is the result of the endemic
weakness within the bourgeois system itself, to which has been added the
volatility of artificially boosted financial and infotech bubbles*. The
crash is likely to be far deeper and far more devastating in its impact.
The current recession is a classic case of the crisis of overproduction.
This has been combined with the bursting of the financial (stock-market,
debt market, real estate, etc) and infotech bubbles. The two combined,
make a devastating mix.
Look at the crisis of over production. Demand has been drying up,
leading to cuts in production and mass retrenchment. This is further
reducing demand, resulting in over-production and burgeoning stocks,
intensifying the crisis. This is clearly visible in Japan, the US,
Germany and all other stagnant economies, since the last one year.
Together with this, the slackening of industrial production led to risky
and speculative finance capital investments of huge quantities in the
stock market*, debt market*, real estate, IT sector, etc. As much of
this market capitalisation was speculative, with little real business,
actual profits or commensurate returns, most of these bubbles burst. The
balloon can be stretched to a certain extent, anything beyond it, it
will burst. This is what happened first in Japan, now in the US.
Since Sept.11 the downturn in the economies of the world has got
aggravated. In early December 2001, it was announced that the American
economy was in recession since March of that year. The OECD has
predicted the worst growth rate in 18 years (since 1982) for its member
countries. Its 30 members are expected to grow by just 1% this year and
1.2% in 2002. It also predicts that for many countries, like the EU
countries, the situation next year could even be worse than the current
year. World trade growth in the first half of 2001 fell to as low as 1%,
compared to 12.5% in the same period last year.
Through October and November 2001, daily reports continued to appear of
TNCs retrenching their employees. Motorola, the US telecom mammoth, laid
off a further 7,000 in November, taking the years total to 32,000 — 26%
of its work force. It faces its first operating loss in 45 years. The
bankruptcy of Enron, the largest corporate crash in history, is a
further indication of the depth of the crisis. The French telecom giant,
Alcatel, announced a third quarter (July to Sept.) loss of $507 million
and retrenchment of 10,000 workers. Deutche Bank, Germany’s biggest
bank, announced further job cuts of 4,500, taking the years’ total to
over 7,000. Airlines throughout the world have suffered losses of about
$12 billion this year and retrenched 2 lakh employees. Lately, the
Belgian airlines, Sabena, closed down, while the Swiss and Scandinavian
airlines reported huge losses and job cuts. Unemployment in the US
jumped by as much as half a percentage point in just one month, taking
it to 5.4% in October. During the couple of months to Nov.2001, 93,000
internet-related jobs alone were lost. The IMF has estimated that by the
end of next year 26 million people will lose their jobs throughout the
world.
Worst affected by the recession are countries of the third world that
have little or no social security system*. In just the past two months
agricultural prices have dropped by about 5%, which will hit farmers in
the third world the hardest. The World Bank has said that as a direct
result of the ‘slowdown’ 40,000 children worldwide will die from disease
and malnutrition and 10 million more people will fall below the bank’s
extreme poverty line of $1 a day. Already major countries like
Turkey, Argentina and Indonesia are facing its worst economic crisis in
post world war two history.
It is amidst this state of acute crisis that we must view Bush’s
war-mongering statements. We must look beyond the mere events of
Sept.11, to understand the economic compulsions pushing the US to war.
The international media just focus on an aggressive Bush or a
‘terrorist’ Bin Laden; a hawkish US administration or a ‘fanatical’
Islam. Though immediate events may be the trigger, the causes lie far
deeper, with the Sept. 11 event acting as a mere catalyst. Well before
Sept. 11, the world economy was already into recession, with America
being one of the latest victims. It is this that has been fuelling new
aggressiveness amongst the major imperialist powers and their agents
throughout the world. The economic compulsions pushing the imperialists
to aggressive posturing goes deeper than the whims of a Bush or a Blair.
This is reflected in, not only the war posturing of the US and Britain,
but also of the imperialists ganging up at Doha to push a ‘New Round’
which will have even more disastrous implications for third world
economies. It is also reflected in the scramble for Central Asian oil,
with the US establishing military bases in 5 CIS* countries, much to the
discomfort of, not only Russia, but also its European allies.
But, before taking stock of the extent and nature of the global economic
crisis, let us first see the link between the recession and the war
posturing of the Bush regime.
Recession and War
In these conditions of recession, war serves four purposes.
First, it helps revive the stagnant market, through a big leap in the
sale of arms.
Second, it helps to ferociously attack all backward countries, to
enable it to push the burden of the recession on to the backs of the
third world countries.
Third, recession intensifies the contention for the dwindling
markets, with an economically weakened US superpower, having to flex its
military muscle to defend its markets and spheres of influence, from the
newly rising imperialist powers, particularly Europe.
And fourth, it acts to divert the attention of the masses from their
increasing impoverisation, and as a pretext for introducing fascist
measures to ruthlessly suppress the growing discontent of the masses.
First, the crisis of overproduction can to some extent be cushioned, by
boosting a stagnant market through a big hike in arms sales. During a
demand-induced recession (or crisis of over-production) when demand for
commodities dries up, the government boosts demand in the
armament-linked sector through war. War profiteering is always known to
give huge returns. With this sector thriving many companies gear their
production (and new investment) to meet the demands of war. In this way
the bourgeoisie seeks to come out of its crisis. This scenario can be
seen today in America.
The arms lobby has a large representation in the Bush Cabinet. Though it
already has a gigantic budget of $300 billion (plus an additional $30
billion on intelligence), the Bush administration sanctioned an
additional $20 billion for its immediate war offensive¸ with promises of
much more. Within a fortnight of the attack, the US government hiked
defense spending to $344 billion. In addition, the US arbitrarily
scrapping the ABM (anti-ballistic missile) Treaty and pushing ahead with
the NMD (National Missile Defence) project, in spite of opposition from
its allies, is a further indication of the war-plans of the US. Already
in the year 2000, a Congressional Research Report, printed in the New
York Times, showed that international arms sales grew by 8% to $40
billion; of which the US contracted for $18.6 billion. ‘The Economist’,
one of the chief apologists of US/British imperialism, went so far as to
state, in its issue after the Sept.11 attack, that war is not
necessarily a bad thing in periods of recession. In an article entitled
‘The Wages of War’ in the Sept. 22/29 issue it added: "Government
spending, on the other hand, typically shoots up in war time. It is
widely credited, during the Second World War, with removing the last
vestiges of the Great Depression. It also fuelled booms during the
Korean and Vietnam wars. A massive increase in spending on airport
security, border controls and a military build-up in America may yet
have a similar effect". In other words, the imperialists are already
talking of the need for war to pull the economy out of recession!! That
is, to put The Economist’s words crudely: mass murder in order to
sustain profits.
The second aspect of this recession will mean a big economic offensive
against the people and nations of the third world. It will aggressively
push its ‘economic reforms’ no matter what the cost to the local people.
In recessionary conditions its desperation for markets becomes all the
more acute, and like a frenzied mad dog it bites all and sundry if there
is not total compliance to its wishes. This was reflected in the manner
the imperialists bulldozed the ‘New Round’ on the third world at
the WTO Doha meet. It is also reflected in the US’s threats to aggress
on other countries (like Iraq, Philippines, Somalia, Sudan, etc) after
Afghanistan is finished with.
Such aggressive policies will result in growing resistance from the
people of these countries. There will be a growth in the struggles for
national liberation against imperialism, particularly US imperialism,
and its lackeys. If not led by the proletariat, this may take varied
forms, from petty-bourgeois nationalism, to religious and ethnic forms
of protest, to spontaneous riots and violent outbursts. The outbreak in
Argentina in early December 2001 is an indication of things to come.
But, more and more it will take on armed forms, with people having
experienced the futility of peaceful methods in the face of monsters and
tyrants. Bush’s declaration of war is not just against an Osama Bin
Laden, it is a declaration of war against the anti-imperialist people of
the world. He shrieked ‘those who are not with us, are against us’.
In other words, those who do not prostrate before US imperialism’s
economic, political and military demands, can be branded as
‘terrorists’, attacked and killed. What was done in the post-war period
through secret, covert operations, the Bush administration now seeks to
do openly. They will now not hesitate to attack any third world country
that does not fully bow to its wishes.
Third, with recession, the scramble amongst the imperialist powers for
markets gets intensified. The only superpower, US imperialism, seeks to
maintain its markets, while the up-and-coming imperialist powers,
particularly the EU countries, try to displace US markets. Both also
scramble for markets once under Soviet imperialist domination and the
newly opened Chinese market. Other imperialist powers, like Japan and
Russia, also contend. US imperialism, as a weakened economic power
(more so with the current recession) must resort to military muscle
flexing to keep the other imperialist powers at bay. This will result in
growing contention amongst the imperialist powers. This will result in
greater protectionism, growing finally into imperialist blocs. At
present no rival imperialist power has the military strength anywhere
near that of the US. But, as their military prowess develops, it will
lead to armed confrontations resulting in a third world war. But, this
will take time. For the present, the main source of war will be US
imperialism, the number one enemy of the world people. They will use war
and the threat of war to maintain and extend their spheres of influence.
Fourthly, with a deepening recession, increasingly fascist methods are
being adopted throughout the world giving little space for peaceful
opposition. It is the fear of the growing armed opposition that is
resulting in the war cry of all the reactionaries to ‘ fight
international terrorism’. As it is, the massive anti-globalisation
demonstrations in the developed countries are gaining in militancy and
strength, making it difficult for the imperialist robber barons to even
hold their gatherings. So, after the upsurge of the anti-globalisation
demonstrations, from Seattle to Genoa, the WTO ministerial meeting was
held in the autocratic princely State of Qatar, where all demonstrations
are banned and none given visas to enter the country. Within days of the
attack, under the pretext of increasing security, the US, Europe, and
most countries throughout the world, including India, have begun further
curtailment of civil liberties and a whipping up of a nationalist
chauvinist, anti-Islamic, hysteria. This has been particularly loud in
America and Britain, which urgently needs to rally the people around
their governments’ war offensive. Many countries have already introduced
draconian anti-terrorist, anti-immigrant and anti-people fascist laws.
In the aftermath of the Sept.11 attack, the sea-saw statements emanating
from Europe and Russia is an indication of the pressures being asserted
by the US. Europe too would like to be part of the schemes to further
open up third world markets and crush all growing opposition to
imperialism — even resort to force in the name of fighting terrorism.
But they are not part of the other aspect of the US’s plan to utilize
this ‘war’ to also consolidate its geo-political positions and
markets throughout the world at the expense of the other imperialist
powers.
Already the cracks in the imperialist alliance are visible, with not
only Europe, but also Britain opposing the extending of the war beyond
Afghanistan. Even in Afghanistan there were open fissures on how the war
should be conducted. The US was hesitant to use the services of the EU’s
offer of military assistance, in case they demand a share in the Central
Asian pie. Besides, under the pretext of the Afghan war, the US has
moved swiftly to establish bases in 5 CIS* countries, in an attempt to
keep Russia, Europe and China away from the vast oil and gas reserves in
Central Asia.
So, also, the attack on Afghanistan is not merely about Osama Bin Laden
and his forces. No doubt, this is one aspect — to crush Islamic
opposition to imperialism. But three other factors are operating in the
US’s military plans. First, given Afghanistan’s enormous strategic
importance, particularly as the gateway to the oil/gas rich Central
Asia, it seeks to establish a docile government. Second, through this
military action it seeks to gain the initiative over the other
imperialist powers lurking in the region. Third, it is also a warning to
other third world countries to fall in line or else face possible
attack. In fact, the attack on Afghanistan satisfies both the arms and
petroleum lobbies, which have a large presence in Bush’s cabinet.
Afghanistan holds the key to the transport of the vast oil and gas
reserves in Central Asia, for which there is acute competition between
the US, Europe and Russia. In fact, a year ago, France went so far as to
invite the Taliban for talks. Dealing with the Taliban would have given
the French companies a head start in building a pipeline across the
country to bring Central Asia’s gas and oil to South Asia. As ‘The
Economist’ reported, 2 "the
potential rewards are enormous". Both Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan
are desperate for collaborations and outlets for their huge reserves. ‘The
Economist’ added, "this places America in a quandary. If its
relations with Iran do not rapidly improve, and its faltering attempts
to pipe Central Asian oil and gas westwards through the Caucasus
collapse, a trans-Afghan pipeline may become its best hope of countering
the Russian, Chinese, and Iranian influence in Central Asia".
So, the attack on Afghanistan has a twin purpose — first to stamp out an
important source of Islamic opposition to the US imperialists; second,
to create a docile Afghan government that will open the gates to the
treasures of Central Asia. And with these war manoeuvres, the US can
also successfully checkmate France’s attempts at gaining a head start in
the region, and flush out Russian and Chinese influence in the region,
through sheer muscle power.
With the growing recesssionary conditions such scrambles for markets and
sources of raw materials will get ever more fierce. And it will be the
US that will be the chief source of war, to threaten, bully, browbeat
and force countries to accept its dictates.
Now, to understand fully the implications of the dangerous war situation
being provoked by the US there is need to understand the depths of the
impending recession, not only in the US, but throughout the world.
Worldwide Impact
The downturn in the world economy began by March 2000. In the year
ending March 31, 2001 stock markets* fell everywhere and over the year
$10 trillion (1 trillion = 1000 billion) was wiped off global share
values* — equivalent to America’s annual output or 30% of the world GDP
— of which $4 trillion was the loss suffered in the US alone 3
Of this the US economy lost $5 trillion in market
capitalisation. India lost $40 billion. The table 4
on next page gives a picture of the drop in the market capitalization*
in some of the major countries of the world.
By March 2001 itself Japan’s Nikkei index was at its lowest level in 26
years having lost 70% of its value since 1989. America’s Nasdaq index
saw a 60% loss in the one year to March 2001. Germany’s Nemax index fell
67% to Dec.2000, and the UK’s Techmark index fell by 57% in the same
period 5.
Market Capitalization ($ billions)
|
March 2000 |
March 2001 |
Loss (%) |
Turkey |
109 |
38 |
- 65.1 |
US (Nasdaq) |
6,253 |
2,652 |
-57.6 |
Indonesia |
49 |
22 |
-55.0 |
Philippines |
45 |
26 |
-42.9 |
S.Korea |
274 |
157 |
-42.9 |
Malaysia |
178 |
107 |
-39.9 |
India |
227 |
140 |
-38.3 |
Japan |
4,446 |
2,259 |
-20.3 |
Singapore |
168 |
123 |
-26.8 |
UK |
2,833 |
2,259 |
-20.3 |
Hong Kong |
651 |
544 |
-16.5 |
The figures mentioned in the above chart are till March 2001. After that
the stock markets have either declined or remained stagnant. Then came
the further crash after the Sept. 11 attack. Within the fortnight all
the major stock exchanges fell in value by as much as 10% to 20%. It was
the biggest sustained drop since the great depression. What is more,
unlike the earlier falls during the past three decades, the current drop
continued much longer. Though there has been some recovery since, the
Dow Jones is well below the peak figure of over 11,000.
The following chart (printed in the Business Standard) gives a picture
of the extent of the devastation:
|
Stock index Number* |
% Change |
On Sept. 5, 2000 |
On Sept. 27, 2001 |
Since Sep.5, 2001 |
Dow Jones Industrial Average |
10,033 |
8,567 |
- 15 |
Nasdaq Comp. |
1,759 |
1,464 |
- 17 |
Britain(FTSE 100) |
5,316 |
4,717 |
- 11 |
Germany (Dax) |
5,048 |
4,136 |
- 18 |
France (SBF-250) |
2,960 |
2,526 |
- 15 |
Japan |
10,599 |
9,697 |
- 09 |
Singapore |
1,623 |
1,311 |
- 19 |
S. Korea |
552 |
472 |
- 14 |
Thailand |
338 |
275 |
- 19 |
India |
3,229 |
2,716 |
- 16 |
Now, if we turn to other indicators, it has been estimated that in the
second quarter of this year (April to June 2001) the combined GDPs of
the major economies of America, the Euro Area and Japan fell for the
first time since 1990. But, at that time growth was relatively brisk in
the East Asian countries. This time, they too are in serious trouble,
with industrial production having dropped by as much as 10% or more over
the past year 6. It will be
the first time since 1973 that the two major economies of the world —
accounting for 47% of the world GDP — are simultaneously in recession.
In addition, the growth in volume of world trade in the last year slowed
to around 4% compared to 13% in the previous year — the sharpest decline
since 1975. In fact, the US has, defacto, been exporting its current
depression to third world countries as its huge drop in imports has
already had a disastrous impact on those countries dependent on the US
for a market. Globalisation has increased this dependence enormously.
Today, American imports amount to 6%of the rest of the world’s GDP,
compared to just 3% in 1990. In the second quarter of this year the
growth of American imports dropped to minus 10%, compared to a growth
rate of 20% in the same period last year. One can well imagine the
impact of such a huge drop in imports, particularly on the countries of
East Asia, which are heavily dependent on exports to the US.
By December 2000 itself it was clear that a crisis of overproduction was
deepening. World manufacturing capacity was around 60% — the lowest
since the 1960s 7. Global
industrial production fell at an annual
rate of 6% in the first half of 2001, the sharpest dive in two decades.
The crisis in the steel sector illustrated the malaise. Huge stocks,
crashing prices and a collapse in earnings, have dominated steel
production worldwide.
Notwithstanding the daily propagation of the so-called American boom,
this period of globalisation has been witness to a series of crises. The
volatility in the capitalist system has increased enormously. During
this decade of globalisation, the world’s second largest economy, Japan,
stagnated throughout, with an average growth rate of just 1%; the third
largest economy in the world, Germany, has been limping along with an
average growth rate of 1.5% through the 1990s; Russia, the CIS*and much
of East Europe have been in continuous recession for much of the period;
there was the stock market crash of 1987 and the ‘savings and loan’
crises in the USA in 1992 & 1994; there was the 1995 crash of the
Mexican economy; then there was the 1997 crash in S.E.Asia followed by
the even more disastrous crash in Russia and CIS* countries in 1998; the
crash in Brazil in 1999; and, since the last year we have been
witnessing the total collapse of the Turkish and Argentinean economies.
One must see the oncoming recession in this background.
Not only that, the entire hype of the great advantages of globalisation
is a gigantic hoax. As the Monthly Review brought out
8 "the expansion of the 1990s is
the slowest in the post war era………. The rate of growth of national
output since the recovery and expansion began in 1991 is about half the
rate for the 1950-73 period…….. Whereas US GDP grew by more than 52%
during the eight-year expansion from 1961 to 1969, it has increased only
half that much in the eight years since 1991. By any post war
comparison, the performance of the US economy — and with it the world
economy — in the 1990s has been remarkably anaemic".
The following table 9 brings
this out lucidly:
Average Annual growth rate of real GDP in the
OECD countries |
Period |
Growth rate (%) |
1960 to 73 |
4.9% |
1973 to 79 |
3.0% |
1979 to 89 |
2.8% |
1989 to 99 |
2.4% |
In other words, the growth rates in the major 24 developed countries was
at its lowest in the period of globalisation. The MR article adds: "for
all the euphoric talk of the ‘new economy’, for all the extravagant
claims for new technologies and globalising markets, then, the world
capitalist economy in the 1990s has been characterized by poor rates of
growth in output, productivity and average incomes ……… For the mass of
humankind outside the core areas of the world economy, the overall
pattern has been one of retrogression: declining living standards,
dramatic increases in social inequality, pauperisation of large sections
of the population. We are dealing, in short, with systemic problems that
plague global capitalism as a whole, not mere discrete failings of a
specific model".
The much-hyped boom of the 1990s was, in essence, a boom for an
excessively small class of elite. Even in the US, which has gained the
maximum from globalisation, it benefited only the richest of the
American population, bypassing, not only the workers, but also the bulk
of the middle classes. According to a report, 10
the fruits of economic growth in the last few decades in the US "were
enjoyed by a surprisingly small part of the population, the top 20%, and
particularly the richest 1%. Living conditions of the middle classes
stagnated in the 1990s". The real earnings of US production workers
dropped by 14% in the private sector between 1973 and 1995. It is these
worsening living conditions, which are at the root of the new upsurge of
people’s movements against globalisation.
Globalisation has also given unheard of wealth to a handful of
billionaires, with disparities between the rich and the poor reaching
unbelievable levels. It is this concentration of wealth in the hands of
the top strata of society that has been much propagated as the success
of globalisation. The festering rot was deep, but this was masked by the
glamour and glitter of the top 10 to 20%. As the 1999 UNDP’s Human
Development Report says: "the income gap between the richest fifth of
the population and the poorest fifth stood at 3:1 in 1820, 11:1 in 1913,
30:1 in 1970, 60:1 in 1990 and 86:1 by 1997. In 1997, the top 20%,
living mostly in high income countries, earned 86% of world GDP and the
bottom 20% just 1%" 11.
In 1850 today’s rich countries accounted for 35% of the world’s total
income. By the 1980s they accounted for 68%. The difference between the
per-capita incomes of the poor and rich countries increased from 70% in
the 1850s to more than 1000% in the 1980s. Between 1989 and 1996 the
number of billionaires increased from 157 to 447. The net wealth of the
10 richest persons is one-and-a-half times the total incomes of all the
Least Developed Countries*. (Economic Times; Dec.11, 2001)
Now, with the current recession, the rot is coming to the surface. The
glitter of hi-tech pomp is fading. The glamour of TV, Internet and
vulgar consumerism can no longer mask the deep gangrenous infestations
eating into the very vitals of this so-called globalised system. Pop
culture is being replaced by war culture. Fake talk of human rights and
democracy are being replaced by naked calls to war, to kill (capture ‘dead
or alive’), to anti-Islamic ‘crusades’, and to strangulate
even the limited sovereignty of countries in the name of ‘those who
are not with us are against us’. In this period of recession, the
fascist claws of reaction around the world are coming out into the open
with its xenophobic hysteria. And, together with all this, the brutality
of this system continues to take an enormous toll of, not only the
peoples of Asia, Africa, Latin America, Russia, CIS, East Europe and the
Middle East, but also of the working class of the developed countries.
So, globalisation has never been the great boon to society as
propagated. Even by their own standards it has been sick, fraught with
volatility and crises, and anaemic from the very start. Its inbuilt
weaknesses have now come to the fore, and are threatening devastation
not seen since World War II. Now, let us take a look at the depth of the
crisis in the major economies of the world, to get a better
understanding what this oncoming recession means to the oppressed masses
in India and worldwide.
US in Shambles
In the year 2000 itself, GDP growth rate* in the US halved to 2.5%
compared to 5% in 1999. As a result of falling share prices, the net
worth of American households fell in the year 2000 for the first time
since records have been kept 55 years ago. By end 2000 certain
economists were already predicting a severe crash of the US economy. In
an article of Dec. 2000 entitled, USA : Making of a Crash
12, Fredric Clairmont brought out
the gravity of the situation, when he said: "by all
indicators the US economy is on the skids: tumbling stock markets the
drop in personal incomes, vastly diminished consumer confidence and
lower consumption. Debt loaded balance sheets have become the nightmare
of Corporate America as US non-financial corporate debt is surging with
unprecedented velocity, already engulfing 45% of GDP." He predicted
"the grim rumblings of one of the worst
economic collapses in the making since the end of the Second World War".
The US economy entered the current year, amidst a drastic fall in the
Stock Exchange, falling corporate profits, increasing unemployment and
reduced consumption expenditure, and spiralling debts of both the
government and of the private citizen. There appeared no positive sign
from any sector that could work to revive it. Already, by Dec.2000,
according to ‘The Economist’ (Jan.6, 2001), manufacturing
activity fell to its lowest since April 1991, the end of the previous
recession. In the second half of 2000, 36,000 dot com employees lost
their jobs; there were 5 lakh lay-offs in Nov.2000, with General Motors
laying off 15,000, Whirlpool 6,300 and Aetna 5,000.
Well before the Sept. 11 attack there was already talk of the economy
going into recession. Even after the massive dose of funds pushed into
the consumer’s hands (the interest reductions alone gave an extra $6.5
billion to consumers on their credit card expenditure) and the resulting
increase in consumer spending by 2.5%, the growth rate dropped to as low
as 0.2% in the second quarter of the year. All economic indicators
dropped drastically: industrial production fell again in July for the
tenth consecutive month — the longest period of decline since 1983;
corporate profitability was down 12% and corporate defaults were
soaring; the use of industrial capacity at 77.4% was the lowest since
1983; and the stock exchange dropped a further 8% in the first six
months of the year. 13
Layoff announcements reached such levels not seen since the 1980s. In
June, Business Week reported that claims for jobless benefits had risen
over the 4-lakh mark, "a level usually associated with recession".
By end August, US jobless was at a nine-year high reaching 4.9% of the
population. 14 The job cuts
continued apace. Big layoffs were taking place in the automobiles
sector, IT sector and even in the financial services sector. Ford and
General Motors temporarily closed down their US plants, as did other
motorcar plants. Ford retrenched 5000 more white-collar workers. The
steel industry was in the doldrums, with 18 firms having gone bankrupt,
including two of America’s biggest producers, LTV and Bethlehem steel.
Plagued by over-capacity, steel prices slipped to a 20-year low. AOL
Time Warner announced a 7.5% job cut reducing staff by 1,200.
Over-and-above the 25,000 jobs lost since the beginning of the year in
the investment banking firms, Citigroup announced another 3.500 job
losses, and Morgan Chase and Goldman Sachs announced plans for big
operational cuts. The internet sector alone lost jobs over 1 lakh in
2001 i.e. 2.5 times to the last year figure.
Corporate profits have been falling at a dramatic speed. In the first
quarter of 2001, the S&P’s top 500 companies showed a drop of 6.1%; in
the second quarter profits fell by 17.3%. Profits in the technology
segment fell by 40% in the first quarter, and was expected to drop by
60% in the second quarter. Overall profits of major companies are
expected to drop by 8% this year. In the second quarter, companies’
capital spending plummeted by an (annualized) 13.6%, its biggest drop
since the 1982 recession.
It was under these desperate circumstances that the Bush administration
came out with its monetarist medicine to boost domestic spending and
spur new investment. In unprecedented measures, the government reduced
interest rates 8 times in every month from January to September 2001,
thereby reducing the interest rates by over half from 6.5% to 3%. This
was supposed to spur corporate investment by reducing the cost of
capital. This was also meant to boost consumption through the
availability of cheap credit ¾
the bulk of US consumers purchase on credit cards and through instalment
payments on which interest is charged; a reduction in interest rates
makes credit and instalment payment cheaper, encouraging expenditure. In
addition to this, they decided on a $1.3 trillion tax rebate of which
$38 billion was refunded in the current year, with the sole purpose of
further boosting consumption expenditure. 14
Yet, in spite of such drastic measures (where the tax cuts alone amount
to boosting the GDP by half percent) the economy has not recovered; on
the contrary it went into an even deeper depression. The third quarter
(July to Sept.) corporate profits reported were the worst in a decade.
So, for example, both Kodak and Intel reported a 77% drop in third
quarter profits. In spite of all the money pumped in and nine
consecutive cuts in interest rates, third quarter results showed that
the US’s economy contracted by 0.4%*.
After the Sept. 11th attack, there was a leap in the number of layoffs.
The airlines have already retrenched over one lakh; Boeing announced a
30% cut, laying off 30,000; Honeywell announced a 12,000 cut, tourism
and hotels were announcing big cuts, as was insurance, banks and the
entire IT and telecom sector. As the New York Times reported "six
days ago (i.e. before Sept. 11) the economy seemed to be at best
stagnant. Now, as a result of last week alone, many experts believe that
it is already contracting, perhaps by as much as an annual rate of 1%".
15
After the Sept. 11 attack on the US, to prevent a further slide in
the economy, the Bush Administration came out with a massive Marshal
Plan-type* package to try and prevent a recession. Within two days it
injected $70.2 billion into the system by buying government securities
and arranged a $50 billion swap with the European Central Bank. It
pushed through a $40 billion spending bill — half of it for war on
‘terrorism’ and half for relief work. In addition, it has planned a $15
billion bailout package for the crisis-ridden US Airline industry. 16
Together with all this, at the
international plane, the ECB and a number of Central Banks immediately
pumped in $80 billion to prevent any bank defaults; and 13 countries
simultaneously reduced their interest rates.
In spite of all attempts to boost the economy, layoffs continued,
consumer confidence fell further and investment continued to stagnate.
In the month of October the huge layoffs continued, and there were
numerous reports of a drop in corporate profits. Sears Roebuck cut 22%
of its workforce, Bank of America 7.5% of its investment branch, Kodak
cut 10%, the huge entertainment industry has cut 10% of its 1999 peak,
and Merrill Lynch announced cuts of 15% of its worldwide workforce. This
is just some of those reported; daily reports appear of US companies
laying off workers. In October 4,68,000 jobs were lost, and in November
it was 3,31,000. Together, this constituted the sharpest decline in 20
years. With all other efforts of revival having so far failed, Bush’s
war cry can be an attempted solution of last resort. No doubt, other
compulsions are also there, but an attempt at economic revival through
war is one factor. With the crisis deepening, in end October, the US
government announced yet another $100 billion stimulus package plus a
further half percent cut in interest rates (the third cut since
Sept.11), bringing it down to 2% — the lowest since 1961. More
important, it placed its highest ever order for defence equipment — of
hundreds of the latest fighter jets worth roughly $300 billion with
Lockheed Martin. Deliveries of these are expected from 2006. No wonder
it was defence stocks that were doing the best on the American stock
exchange.
Yet, there is no sign of a recovery. In fact, in end November the US
witnessed the biggest bankruptcy in corporate history. Enron, placed 18 th
on the Fortune-500 listing (i.e. the 18th
largest company in the world, and the 7th
largest in the US) crashed. With a market capitalisation of $80 billion
earlier, its value fell to a mere $220 million by end Nov.2001. Its
share prices dropped from roughly $90 to 26 cents (i.e. $0.26).
corporate bankruptcies for the year 2001 are expected to be over $120
billion.
What then is the genesis of this recession in the USA?
There are multiple factors precipitating this recession. Primarily,
it is a classic case of the crisis of overproduction. This has been
aggravated by the huge infusion of debt, financing both investment and
speculation. With demand drying up and the real economy in a state of
atrophy, the speculative bubbles began to burst one after another. A
debt dependent economy has a snowballing effect once the tempo of growth
cannot be maintained.
The crisis of overproduction is a necessary aspect of capitalism from
which the capitalist can never escape. It arises from the inbuilt
contradiction within capitalism, where maximization of profit and
accumulation of capital can only take place through increased
exploitation of the masses generally, and workers in particular. But,
the more the exploitation, the less is people’s purchasing power,
resulting in shrinkage of the market. So, as accumulation proceeds apace
and with it production of commodities necessarily grows, the market for
this does not grow proportionately resulting in a crisis of
overproduction.
In the early 1990s, taking advantage of the setback to communism and
people’s movements, US big capital launched an offensive against the
people throughout the world. This resulted in enormous profits to the
TNCs and the mass impoverisation of the masses throughout the world and
even in the US. Real wages in the US has been declining for more than 20
years, taking them to the 1987 levels, which itself was below 1967’s.
This resulted in the enormous accumulation of capital but stagnant
markets. An article in the summer 1998 issue of Foreign Policy
reported that the income of the poorest 20% of US households has
declined steadily since the 1970s, while the income of the richest
quintile has increased by 15%, and the income of the top 1%, by more
than 100%.
A look at the Fortune 500 listings indicates clearly that the market for
commodities has not been growing. Whereas profits have been huge, sales
have been stagnant, particularly of US TNCs. Throughout the 1990s these
huge surpluses were used to buy up other companies in a wave of Mergers
and Acquisitions unprecedented in the history of capitalism. Each
acquisition was followed by a ‘rationalisation’ package, which entailed
the displacement of thousands of workers. So, with these M & As, though
profits skyrocketed due to greater productivity (particularly through
the large investments made in the IT sector), markets did not increase
due to displacement of labour, reduction in social security and a drop
in general working conditions (outsourcing, contracting, etc.). Though
part of these lacunae was made up by a gigantic rise in salaries of the
officer class, and particularly the top one percent, it could in no way
balance the market shrinkage caused by the huge drop in purchasing power
of the masses worldwide. Besides M & As, vast amounts of the surplus
went in speculative activities, creating the financial and infotech
bubbles*. With markets not growing, little of the surplus went into
creating new production. With impoverisation reaching unimaginable
levels, and capital accumulation continuing at a frenzied pace, a crisis
of overproduction was inevitable. With the returns on investment being
much higher in the service sector (particularly financial) vast amounts
of new capital generated found their way into the so-called ICE
(information, communication & entertainment) sectors. The share of GDP
generated from the service sector in the US increased from 64% in 1980
to 74% in 1999.
The pace of Acquisitions has its limits, and the froth of speculative
profits can exist only on the base of the productivity economy. Once the
base becomes shaky the bubbles in the froth begin to burst. This was the
situation that hit Japan a decade back; it is what began hitting the US
economy from mid-2000. The cycle of dropping consumer demand, rising
stocks, increasing layoffs and reduced corporate profits has been
pulling the US economy down since a year-and-a-half. The Bush
administration has sought to revive it by increasing consumer demand by
continuous cuts in interest rates and a massive tax rebate — but, so
far, this has been ineffective. After the Sept.11 attack it has, in
addition, sought a Marshal-Plan* type infusion of funds, together with
war expenditure. It is yet to be seen what impact this has on the
economy.
Now, to look at the second aspect — the financial bubble, built around
gigantic quantities of debt (mostly bonds and equity shares)*. There
is no aspect of the US economy that is not laden with massive amounts of
debt. The Public Debt*, the Corporate Debt, the Trade Debt (called
Current Account Deficit — CAD)* and even the Household Debt, have all
reached astronomical levels. These have been built on the basis of
the confidence gained by: a strong dollar, high interest rates, and the
rise of an exceedingly powerful banking industry which has grown to
mammoth size through 8,000 M & As (in the 1980-98 period) involving $2.4
trillion in acquired assets. As a result money from all parts of the
world have been flowing into the US economy.
According to the Federal Reserve Board’s data the aggregate outstanding
public debt grew from $1,028 billion in 1964 to $25,679 billion in 1999
— an annual compound rate of 9.6% which far outstrips the growth of GDP.
This amounted to more than half the world’s outstanding public debt. The
total foreign holdings of US financial assets (stocks, treasury and
corporate bonds) is over $ 42 trillion*. It is this vast infusion of
funds that resulted in a rate of market capitalization in the 1994-99
period faster than that of even the 1925-29 boom. If we look at the
domestic business financial sector’s debt, it rose from $53 billion in
1964 to over $7.6 trillion in 1999 — a 144-fold increase. In the foreign
trade sector, the CAD grew nearly ten-fold over the 8 years from -$48 in
1992 to -$420 billion in 2000 — i.e. 4% of the GDP.
17 This huge deficit requires an
annual injection of $500 billion to sustain it.
If we turn to household spending we find that here too the debt has
risen dangerously in the last few years. Personal borrowings have leapt
from 26% of personal income in 1985 to 34% in 2000. As a result the
household saving ratio, as a percentage of disposable income has dropped
from 8% in 1990 to less than -0.8% today — a post-war low, similar to
the depression year of 1933. 21
In other words, people are spending more than they earn, leaving a huge
yearly deficit of $247 billion. A booming stock market (giving an
illusion of wealth) and a relatively low unemployment rate aroused
confidence for such profligate expenditure that fuelled the huge
consumer expenditure, which created a demand for not only American
goods, but also imports from all over the world. This confidence now
lies shattered due to the fall in stock prices and the rise in
unemployment, and will strongly impact future purchasing ability.
These huge debts need to be continuously serviced, and all the
factors that facilitated the massive infusion of funds are now reversed
— a weakened dollar, low interest rates, a declining stock market, and a
shaky financial sector. This has resulted in the bursting of the bubble
and the artificially created boom.
In addition there has been a huge crash in the infotech bubble*, which
was the backbone of the so-called ‘new economy’. An example of this
bubble was reflected in the rise and fall in value of the dot com stock.
To take an example, Yahoo’s share price dropped from $237 to $15; Lycos
from $109 to $11.25. 18
There has also been a massive slowdown in the computer hardware industry
and the other factors of the ‘new economy’; i.e. in the communications,
entertainment, and tourism sectors. Tourism, the largest industry in the
world, has been the worst hit after the Sept.11 attack.
So, to sum up, the present recessionary-type conditions in the US
economy is the result of a combination of a crisis of overproduction
together with a bursting of the bubble in the financial and infotech
sectors of the economy. The causes are deep-rooted and all encompassing
and not the result of just one or two factors. It is for this reason
that recovery (even if partial) will not be that easy as it was with the
other downturns in the past three decades.
Japan: Dark Clouds Sans Silverlining
Japan is already in deep recession, the worst in the post-war period.
This recession comes on top of a decade long period of stagnation, which
has witnessed four recessions. There is not a single economic indicator
that is positive. It is estimated that Japan’s GDP growth will drop by
as much as 5% this year. Already, in the second quarter, industrial
production dropped at an annualised rate of 17%. 19
Unemployment has skyrocketed to 5.3% from just 2%
a few years back. It is at its highest in the post world war II period.
Yet, layoffs continue to rise at a frightening pace. In end August, the
three major electronics manufacturers, Hitachi, Toshiba and Fujitsu
announced layoffs of 20,000 each. All these giant electronic companies
are showing huge losses.
Bankruptcies continue at an enormous rate. In October last year Japan’s
12th largest life insurance company, Chiyoda Mutual, went bankrupt with
a debt of $27 billion. This was the biggest bankruptcy since World War
II. Three months earlier, a departmental store, Sogo, collapsed with
debts of roughly $18 billion. In the first eight months of the year 2000
12,625 companies went bankrupt — a rise of 30% compared to the same
period in the previous year. 20
Bankruptcies continue to rise. In the first six months of the current
year debt accumulated by Japanese corporate bankruptcies totalled $58
billion, hitting the second highest total since the end of World War II.
Japan’s public debt has skyrocketed over the past decade from 55%of GDP
to 130% of GDP today. It is now a massive $5 trillion.
21. It has the highest ratio of
public debt to GDP in peacetime. Its fiscal deficit has jumped from a
surplus of 3% of GDP in 1991, to a deficit of 7% in 2000. Corporate debt
is already 97% of GDP. Land prices dropped 5% in the year 2000, the 10th
consecutive year of decline. The stock market index has been
continuously falling, and in just the 2 months from mid-July to
mid-Sept. it dropped 18% to reach its lowest level since 1983. Even the
value of the Yen dropped by 7.2% in the first 7 months of this year.
The stagnation in the economy has been so deep that prices have been
dropping by 2% yearly — i.e. instead of the normal inflation, there is a
deflation of 2% annually. This is the first bad case of deflation of a
big economy since the 1930s.
The crisis in the Japanese economy has also resulted in a decline in its
control over world markets, even in its own backyard in S.E.Asia.
Japan’s FDI around the world has fallen by 36% in the past decade, while
that in S.E. Asia has halved. Though FDI investment in China has doubled
the absolute quantum is relatively small compared to what it had in East
Asia.
Japan’s boom and crash ‘bubble economy’ was an extreme case of what is
today unfolding in America. Its massive growth in the pre-1989 period
was fuelled by speculative mania in real estate and the stock market.
Values reached dizzying heights. For example, the lands of the Imperial
Palace in Tokyo were worth more than the entire real estate of
California. By 1987, Japan alone accounted for 45%of the world’s market
capitalization (compared to the then US’s 30%). But since the bubble
burst in 1989, its financial sector was crippled with bad debts to the
tune of Y 35 trillion ($300 billion). Though the bulk of this had to be
written off, these bad debts are continuously being generated and are
now 6% of the GDP. To meet these gigantic payments the Japanese govt.
continues its frantic borrowings, being the world’s biggest borrower.
Its gross borrowings in 2001 will be $560 billion — twice as much as the
US. 22
The crisis of the Japanese economy is so acute, that in this decade
of stagnation, it is estimated that $8 trillion of the country’s assets
have been wiped out — an amount comparable only to the amount destroyed
in Russia after Yeltsin’s neo-liberal coup!! Even with an interest rate
reduced to about zero percent and enormous funds pumped into the economy
by the government, there is yet no sign of recovery.
Europe: Limping Along
Though not as drastically hit as Japan and America, the EU is also
facing a severe slowdown. Some estimates put the growth in the Euro area
in the second quarter of this year at close to zero. Forecasts put the
growth rate for the entire EU in the current year at a maximum of 1.9%
compared to an average of 2.7% over the past four years.
23 A number of TNCs are laying off
workers in thousands. The European Central Bank (ECB) has also cut
interest rates three times this year, bringing it down to 4%, in a bid
to revive the economy.
Amongst all the Euro zone countries Germany, which accounts for
one-third of its GDP, has been the worst hit. In the second quarter of
the current year GDP growth rate was zero; industrial output grew by
just 1.1%; and inflation reached 3.5%, the highest since 1993.
24 In Germany unemployment has gone
over the psychological barrier of 4 million and continues to rise as
major and minor companies are reducing staff. Most predict that the
German economy will not grow by more than 1% this year. The slowdown in
Germany has seriously impacted neighbouring countries, which depend on
Germany for much of their exports. Poland, the Czech Republic and
Austria each send over one-third of their exports to Germany.
In Britain, manufacturing slipped into recession this year by falling
for two consecutive quarters, while total industrial production fell by
2.2% compared to the same period last year. Total output of financial
services in the city of London dropped from 4.6%of GDP in 2000 to 1.6%
this year. It has been estimated that nearly one-and-a-half lakh jobs
will be lost in the city of London alone by the end of next year.
Of the other EU countries, Italy’s GDP fell by an annualised rate of
0.5%; that of the Netherlands was zero, and France’s economy had also
slowed. 25
After the Sept. 11 attack the index fell sharply on all the European
stock exchanges, with London’s falling to a three year low.
Through the 1990s though Europe’s growth rate has been somewhat
sluggish, it has not had that type of volatility as witnessed in America
and Japan. If America goes into recession, which seems most likely, it
will pull the entire world’s economies down with it, including that of
Europe. Though it may not be that badly devastated, it does not have the
strength to act as a counterbalance to recession in America. It too is
likely to be badly hit.
Russia, CIS & East Europe: United We Fall
Ever since the collapse of the state capitalist economies a decade back
these economies have been in a state of chronic sickness. The EBRD
(European Bank for Reconstruction & Development) reported that only
Poland and Slovania were close to regaining what was lost during the
1990s. Till 1996, for East Europe as a whole, GDP was still 15% below
1989 levels. 26
Russia is in a chronic state of atrophy. GDP in Russia has fallen by
over 40% since 1989. 27 All
business has been taken over by the mafia. Capital flight continues
unabated, estimated to reach a gigantic $25 billion in the current year.
The Rouble has little value, and estimates indicate that about 75% of
all business transactions are carried out without using money — either
through barter or by mutual non-payment. The black economy continues to
be half the GDP. Russian made civil goods accounts for less than 1% of
world markets (US is 36%, Japan 30%). Russia’s GNP is ten times smaller
than that of the US. Its per capita annual GDP at $3,500 is five times
smaller than the average of the G-7 countries. Though Russia saw some
growth last year due to the hike in oil prices, this year the growth
rate has already dropped by half. 28
Besides, inflation, which was under reasonable control for the last two
years, has once again risen to 25% this year. Last year’s growth of
about 8% is unlikely to sustain as its fundamentals are shaky due to the
devastation of the past decade.
If Russia is in a bad state the CIS countries are in an even worse
condition. A large part of the population of these countries is living
in a state of acute poverty and even starvation. The expectancy of life
has dropped by 5 years. Instances of TB and hepatitis have doubled since
1990. Ukraine has seen the collapse of its living standards since 1991.
In a country like Moldova, half the population lives on a yearly income
of $220, compared to $2,000 in 1992. In these countries the average
monthly wage varies from $25 in Azerbaijan, $30 in Armenia, $40 in
Kyrgyzstan, $60 in Uzbekistan; and even in countries like Bulgaria and
Romania it was $70 and $90 respectively. 29
A large part of the population of the CIS and East Europe has migrated
to the West, and were forced to takeup manual jobs and also as prostitutes, etc.
These countries have been in an acute state of crisis and recession for
the last decade, a world economic downturn can only push them deeper
into the morass.
East Asia gets Pneumonia as America Sneezes
With the East Asian economies totally dependent on exports, mostly to
America and Japan, these economies have been acutely hit by the downturn
in these countries. Real GDP turned negative in the first two quarters
of this year in Singapore, Taiwan and Thailand. Singapore’s production
fell by 11%in the year to May 2001. In the second quarter of 2001
Singapore’s growth rate in GDP fell to minus 10.1%. Exports from East
Asia declined by 10% over the past year, compared to a growth of 30% in
early 2000. Even China’s exports have slowed from 40% to 4% over the
past year. 30 Many stock
markets fell by over 30% in the year 2000. It is estimated that
unemployment will leap by 12% in the current year.
The following table 31 gives
a picture of the projected fall in GDP growth rates for the current
year:
Change in GDP (%) |
|
2000 |
2001 |
S. Korea |
9 |
3 |
Indonesia |
5 |
2.5 |
China |
8 |
7 |
Hong Kong |
10.5 |
2 |
Thailand |
4.5 |
1 |
Taiwan |
6 |
1 |
Malaysia |
8 |
0.5 |
Singapore |
10 |
-0.5 |
The ‘Asian Tigers’, the ‘Asian Miracle’, the ‘emerging
economies’ much propagated as the model for third world countries,
was nothing but sweat shops for American (and to a lesser extent, Japan)
TNCs. Their ‘boom’ in the 1990s was nothing but part of the American IT
boom, with these countries manufacturing components for the US IT
giants. Then came the 1997 economic war on these countries by US TNCs
and the financial tycoons. The huge devaluations that resulted from
these attacks, meant that export prices in dollar terms dropped by more
than half, giving windfall profits to the US PC manufactures. Though
exports boomed again, the terms of trade were extremely unfavourable to
these countries. Besides, through the devastation of these countries,
domestic consumption dropped, making these countries even more dependent
on exports. So, for example, S. Korea’s exports of goods and services
jumped from 30% of GDP in 1996 to 45% of GDP last year; Thailand’s rose
from 39% to 66%. 32 Quite
obviously they are at present far more vulnerable to international
fluctuations in the economy than ever before, particularly that of the
US.
The following table 33 gives
a picture of the extent to which these countries are dependent on
exports, particularly those of electronic goods:
|
Exports (total) as % of GDP (2000)
|
Electronic Exports As % of total exports (2000)
|
Singapore
|
179.9
|
64.2
|
Malaysia
|
125.4
|
58.8
|
Taiwan
|
54.2
|
47.3
|
Thailand
|
66.4
|
33.3
|
Philippines
|
56.3
|
59.2
|
Indonesia
|
38.5
|
14.6
|
S. Korea
|
45.0
|
38.2
|
China
|
25.9
|
24.9
|
With such massive dependence on exports to the US (Japan accounts for
13%), the slump in the US IT sector since last year, has hit East Asian
economies severely. In May 2001electronic production in the US was down
a huge 35.5% compared to the same month last year. The impact on East
Asian manufacturers of such a drastic fall, who have been used to
galloping increases (for the last 20 years spending on IT in the US has
grown at two to three times the rate of the economy), can well be
imagined. In addition, the US TNCs have sought to push the impact of the
recession on to these component manufactures, by forcibly reducing rates
of the goods purchased. To take an example, the price of standard
64-megabyte RAM chip dropped 90% from $8.9 to $0.9 between June 2000 and
July 2001.
So, these ‘tigers’ will be seriously affected by an American
recession.
Some Backward Countries in Deep Trouble
Though severely damaged, the above-mentioned economies are not the worst
to be hit. The two ideal models of IMF structural adjustments, Argentina
and Turkey, are in the midst of their worst ever crisis in modern
history. Argentina is the third largest economy in Latin America, and
Turkey is the largest in the Middle-East region. Both have been the most
faithful lackeys of the US, implementing all IMF/World Bank stipulations
with a fervour that made their Western bosses ecstatic. Both have
recently received gigantic IMF bailouts; but their crisis persists, nay
deepens. Caught in the quicksand of recession, both are also sucking
their neighbours into the vortex.
Argentina, which has faced a capital flight of $80 billion, finds its
currency {which is pegged (1peso=1dollar) to the dollar} in a state of
collapse. For a decade the dollar has been fully convertible (on capital
account) with the peso, and the Central Bank is therefore unable to
print pesos unless it has dollars to back it. As a result there is no
cash in the country, and so the local authorities have resorted to
issuing another paper note, called ‘pataconeses’ to pay salaries.
As this has no legal tender, the dollar regime has, de facto, pushed the
country into the dark ages of a barter system. Argentina has now been in
recession for three successive years.
But, in Latin America, Argentina is not alone in a state of crisis.
Mexico has a zero growth rate in the current year, compared to 7% last
year. With 80% of its exports going to the US, the crisis can only
deepen. Brazil, the largest economy in the region, also went into
recession in the third quarter of this year. Brazil’s currency has lost
22% in the first six months of this year. This, in spite of Central Bank
intervention and interest hikes. Chile’s peso is also falling, and
Uruguay is already in recession. Rarely in the past decade have the
prospects for Latin America’s economies seemed so threatening. In fact,
entire Latin America is already in recession.
In Turkey, where its currency is not thus pegged, the Turkish Lira has
recently lost 50% of its value with respect to the dollar. In the first
six months of this year six lakhs lost their jobs; unemployment is now
at 42%; hundreds of businesses have been going bankrupt and inflation is
at 65%.
The plight of the people of these countries has been turned into a
nightmare.
India: Stagnation Continues
The Indian economy has been in stagnation for three years now; and, each
year the crisis has only been deepening. Predicting a bleak future for
Indian industry the CMIE (Centre for Monitoring the Indian Economy) has
revised its forecast for industrial growth for 2001 from 4.5% to 3.5%.
In the first half of the year the Index for Industrial Production showed
a mere 2.3% growth. In fact, during the entire period of globalisation,
growth rates have fallen compared to the earlier decade. The average
annual growth rate in the index of industrial production was 7.8%
between 1980/81 and 1990/91, that slumped to 6% between 1992/93 and
1999/2000. The corresponding figures for food grains are 2.9% and 2%,
and for non-food grains 4.3% and 2.4%. Thanks to low purchasing power
over 50% of spending is towards food items.
Even the most industrialised state of the country, Mahrashtra, presents
a bleak picture. The leader of the opposition stated in the Vidhan Sabha
said that while only 5% of the population wallows in wealth, 95% are out
on the limb; and that 60% of the big industrial units and 80% of the
smaller units in the State have downed shutters. Even if somewhat
exaggerated, it is an indication of the plight of Indian industry and
manufacturing. Proposals to set up new industries have come to a virtual
standstill, with SICOM receiving applications worth only Rs.200 crores.
If such is the plight of the most developed State, one can imagine the
situation in the rest of the country. Unemployment is skyrocketing, the
rural economy is in the doldrums, agricultural prices have crashed due
to cheep imports, and even the much hyped service sector is in decline.
Middle-class savings have been vanishing with the drop in interest of
PFs and even the collapse of such blue chip mutual funds as the UTI.
Besides, a very small elite, the rest of the country faces a bleak
future, with the decline intensifying each day.
Conclusion
So, wherever we look in the world we see nothing but countries hurtling
towards economic devastation. The situation appears to be getting from
bad to worse. According to a recent estimate by the ‘Centre for
Economic and Business Research’, 34
the GDP may fall next year by as much as 2.2%. Morgan Stanley has
predicted a global growth rate of just 1.25% for the coming year.
In the early 1990s the imperialists were euphoric, portraying the
setback to communism as the ‘end of history’
¾ i.e. capitalism
forever. The hype over the long American ‘boom’ of the 1990s, built on
the blood and loot of the backward countries and the American masses,
was portrayed as the ‘end of the business cycle’. Both have
turned out to be shallow hoaxes with the present recession, and the
growing people’s movements against globalisation and war.
What then would a recession of such magnitude mean for the world’s
people?
It would mean, first and foremost, a great danger of growing fascism and
wars. Second, it will mean heightened contention between the major
imperialist powers. Third, it will mean greater domination and loot of
third world countries. And fourth, it means great revolutionary
potential for the oppressed masses of the world.
Since the last few years, we have seen a growth in the fascist forces
throughout the world, with many right-wing governments themselves
introducing fascist measures and promoting fascist organizations. This
can clearly be seen in Europe. Also, in Japan the new prime minister has
for the first time openly paid homage to the fascist’s war memorial of
those killed in WWII. In the US, the Bush administration, even before
Sept. 11, had openly been pushing the most reactionary policies
regarding militarism, Zionism, ecology, and on numerous other issues.
After the Sept. 11 attacks, both the US and British rulers, together
with their media, have gone crazy, whipping a maniacal war hysteria,
jingoism and racist paranoia. Attacks on non-whites, particularly
Muslims, have been encouraged, and have been taking place on a wide
scale, with even the police taking part. Not only has Bush been speaking
like a Hitler, but also even Blair has outdone the extreme right-wing
Tories in his xenophobic statements. British tabloids and TV have been
whipping up panic and have carried massive footage glorifying the war
preparations and the Afghan war. The message sort to be portrayed was:
the good civilized west versus the Islamic beasts! Immediately civil
liberties are being curtailed, and the police are being equipped with
draconian powers, normally seen only in the third world countries. It is
portrayed as a clash of civilizations, much similar to what the
old colonialists said.
The US has threatened a long war — first Afghanistan, then Iraq, and
then anyone who does not bow before the almighty. It is not just a war
against terrorism (i.e. mass discontent of the masses), but also a war
to grab, seize and maintain markets, in a fanatical drive to overcome
the recession. Its WAR, besides being against pockets of resistance, has
the twin purpose of browbeating third world countries into greater
servility to US dictates, and also of keeping the other imperialist
powers out of its spheres of influence. As has already been mentioned
all these factors can be seen in the war unfolding in and around
Afghanistan.
It is not surprising that therefore the contention between the US and EU
is growing, both in the economic and political spheres. Trade wars over
agricultural commodities continue. In Dec. 2001 the European commission
blocked the biggest ever industrial merger between two US giants
¾ General Electric &
Honeywell ¾
which had already been approved in America. France’s media giant,
Vivendi, the least exposed to the world-advertising slump, has been
buying over a number of American companies. Besides, in the political
sphere, not only have many European countries opposed the US extending
the war to Iraq and other countries, but so also has Britain. There have
also been conflicts on how to conduct the war in Afghanistan and on the
NMD.
In this period of recession, the most affected will be the masses
throughout the world. Unemployment will skyrocket, the agrarian economy
will crash, social security will be further cut with govt. spending
being geared to war and sustaining a monolithic fascist state, and
millions more will be pushed to death by hunger, starvation and disease.
And in the name of war and national chauvinism, all civil liberties,
trade union rights, and rights to free speech and movement, will be
ruthlessly curbed. Xenophobia, racial hatred, and communal passions will
be incited, creating rivers of blood, sprouting from the springs of
frenzy. And, together with all this inhumanity there will be wars —
imperialist sponsored wars, fascist wars, wars that kill, maim and
slaughter lakhs for the sole purpose of enhancing profits of a
microscopic few.
But, all is not that bleak. Amidst this ocean of horror, the masses will
rise against their tormentors. They will more easily take to arms, as in
war/fascist conditions any other form of struggle will look increasingly
futile. Oppression breeds revolt. Intense oppression will result in
gigantic revolts.
Where Maoists forces exist they will lead these revolts and take it
forward towards the seizure of power. Where they do not exist they will
get formed, as it is only they who wield the political and
organisational ability to take on the fascists, and it is only they who
have a real alternative to the crumbling, degenerate and inhuman system.
Besides, with this ruthless offensive of imperialism, vast sections of
the masses will be drawn into this struggle, opening up the scope for
the widest possible front against US imperialist aggression and all the
lackeys that ally with them.
The increasing exploitation and oppression in these times of recession
will catalyse the revolutionary process, by drawing in the vast masses
into the great historical movement for a just order. Besides, in these
conditions of economic crisis, the dogfights amongst the reactionaries
will intensify as they scramble for their shares in the diminishing
cake. This, together with the greater contention amongst the imperialist
powers, will facilitate greater mobility and speedier advance for the
revolutionary forces, through an astute handling of the contradictions
within the enemy camp.
The present situation, though fraught with grave dangers, is opening up
avenues for great advances in the revolutionary movement. There is
urgent need to build the widest front against the fascists and the US
imperialist sponsored war effort, under the leadership of the
proletariat. What Com. Mao said in 1970 is once again relevant today: "people
of the world unite, defeat US imperialism and all its running dogs".
Notes
1. Frederick F Clairmont, EPW, Nov.10, 2001
2. The Economist; Sept. 20, 2000
3. Economic Times; April 16, 2001
4. Economic Times; March 31, 2001
5. Economic and Political Weekly (EPW) Dec. 16, 2000
6. The Economist; Aug. 18, 2001
7. EPW; Dec. 16, 2000
8. Monthly Review; July/Aug 1999: "The present as history…….." by David
McNally
9. A Glimpse of Class Struggle in Norway; AKP
10. Survey by Milken Institute Review
11. EPW; June 9, 2001
12. EPW; Dec.16, 2001
13. Business Standard; Aug.20, Aug.30, 2001 & The Hindu; Sept. 20, 2001
14. Business Standard; Aug.30, 2001
15. The New York Times as printed in the Sept.20, 2001 issue of The
Hindu
16. Outlook; Sept.24, 2001
17. EPW; Dec.16, 2000
18. ibid
19. The Economist; Aug.18, 2001
20. The Economist; Oct.14, 2000
21. EPW; April 28, 2001
22. ibid
23. The Hindu; Aug.13, 2001
24. The Economist; June 30, 2001
25. The Economist; Aug.18, 2001
26. EPW; June 30, 2001
27. EPW; Jan.27, 2001
28. ibid
29. The Economist; Sept.23, 2000
30. The Economist; July 7, 2001
31. Far Eastern Economic Review; Sept.6, 2001
32. The Economist; July 7, 2001
33. Far Eastern Economic Review; July 26, 2001
34. Business
Standard; Sept.25, 2001. |
|
Top
Contents Appendix |
|
|