Human
Rights And Globalization
By Dr Samir Naim-Ahmed
21 April, 2007
Countercurrents.org
I- Introduction
Would globalization enhance
the implementation of human rights as stated in the Universal Declaration
of Human Rights ( 1948 ) and the subsequent United Nations agreements
, particularly the covenant on civil and political rights ( 1966 ) ,the
covenant on economic, social and cultural rights (1966 ) and the declaration
on the right to development (1986 ).?
Attempting an answer to this
question is not an easy task, mainly because of the different and contradictory
connotations of the term globalization .
If globalization is conceived
as turning the whole world into one global village in which all peoples
are increasingly interconnected and all the fences or barriers are removed,
so that the world witnesses a new state of fast and free flow of people
, capital , goods and ideas then the world would be witnessing unprecedented
enjoyment of human rights every where because globalization is bringing
prosperity to all the corners of the globe together with the spread
of the highly cherished values of democracy , freedom and justice (
1 ) .
On the other hand if globalization
is conceived as turning the world into a global market for goods and
services dominated and steered by the powerful gigantic transnational
corporations and governed by the rule of profit then all the human rights
of the people in the world , particularly in the south would be seriously
threatened ( 2 ) .
Literature on globalization
,in general, by both the so called advocates and opponents of globalization
is abundant . However the critics of globalization lay much more emphasis
on its impact on human rights , particularly of the poor people and
of the developing countries . Their analysis and conclusions are usually
supported by facts and figures drawn from international reports and
statistics to prove that human rights have been adversely affected by
globalization . They usually relate one or the other aspect of human
rights to one or the other aspect of globalization , such as relating
poverty in developing countries to debt or relating unemployment to
privatization , or relating health deterioration to the monopoly of
medicine patents . Or they enumerate the aspects of deteriorations in
human rights , such as impoverishment and lowering standards of living
, increasing inequality discrimination , deprivation of satisfaction
of basic needs such as food clean water and housing , illiteracy ..etc
and explain these facts by globalization in general through making comparisons
between the state before globalization ( usually before the 1990s )
and after it , such as stating that “ progress in reducing infant
mortality was considerably slower during the period of globalization
(1990-1998) than over the previous two decades.
The advocates of globalization
do not deny the fact that in some regions basic human rights are not
respected during the past decade but they explain this by the resistance
of some countries and peoples to globalization and they claim that globalization
must have winners and losers . The losers resistance to globalization
is attributed to their state of stagnation and rigidity or to their
traditional culture or even to the nature of their religions which is
anti democratic and anti modernization ( 3 ) .
So both advocates and critics
of globalization agree on the fact that human rights are in some way
or the other adversely affected by globalization particularly in the
south , but they differ in their explanation of this fact and hence
in their prescription for the remedies . While the advocates prescribe
more absorption of peoples and countries in the global system , the
critics of globalization prescribe opposition and resistance of the
hegemony of the transnational corporations and the injustice inherent
in the globalization process . Who is right ? to answer this question
we need, as I think, to examine the underlying basic assumptions of
both the human rights agreements and the globalization agreements ,
particularly the economic, which I believe are contradictory as far
as human rights are concerned .
II- Contradictory basic assumptions of human rights and globalization
The underlying basic assumption upon which all UN human rights agreements
were based was governments’ responsibility while globalization
basic underlying assumption has been from the very beginning government
relief from any responsibility regarding human rights .
All human rights agreements
were discussed , negotiated and signed by governments and all the declarations
were addressed to governments who were held responsible for either their
implementation or violations .Governments were asked to take whatever
political , economic, social , cultural and legislative measures to
enhance the implementation of human rights in their countries . All
human rights annual reports on the state of human rights in countries
of the world published by UN , human rights societies or some countries
such as USA held government responsible for violations of human rights
. governments were assumed to be policy and decision makers for all
economic, political and social domains in their countries .
Since the Universal declaration
of Human rights in 1948 many countries of the world ,whether in the
north or the south succeed in enhancing the implementation of human
rights , particularly in the economic, social and cultural domains simply
through policies of subsidizing food, housing and services such as health
care , transportation ,sanitation, culture and education . Many countries
, particularly in the south made considerable achievements in the field
of the right to work simply by taking decisions to protect local industries
from competition and thus creating job opportunities for their population
.
On the contrary globalization
agreements require governments to abide by the global market mechanisms
and to follow the advices ( instructions ) of the international agencies
such as WTO, IMF, and the World Bank .
So governments have to be decision takers rather than decision makers
particularly in the economic domain and they have to make all necessary
adjustments and restructuralisations in their societal systems. They
have to issue new laws in every sphere to facilitate the operations
of the free market mechanism and to cancel any existing laws which hamper
this operation . They may even have to change articles in their constitutions
, such as those related to public and private sectors .Many of those
changed laws are related to human rights particularly the economic,
social and cultural rights . The most important of these changes are
related to taxation, worker-employer relations, owner-renter relations
, government subsidization of basic needs goods such as food , water
and housing and services such as education , health , transportation
, and even mass communication and cultural services ( such as telephones,
newspapers, theatres , books and television ) . Every thing has to be
dealt with as a market commodity judged by its economic value rather
than its social value .
The adoption of the wide
open door policy by governments requires issuing laws which impedes
another fundamental human right declared by UN , that is the right to
development . Laws allowing the free flow of capital and goods with
almost no restrictions on imports through tariffs adversely affect local
developmental projects .
So governments find themselves
in a very paradoxical situation . If they try to abide by UN human rights
agreements which they signed they would be violating the globalizations
agreements , which they also signed ! and they would be criticized or
even penalized for this violation ( by cutting the aids offered to them
by international institutions ) , and if they try to abide by globalization
agreements they would be necessarily violating the human rights agreements
and would be criticized for that in the human right reports and the
UN statistics on human development would show them lagging behind in
indices of human development!!
III- How do governments
face the contradiction?
Governments, particularly
of the developing countries , have been persuaded and pressured to sacrifice
human rights for the sake of globalization .
Violations of human rights
agreements , particularly those of economic, social and cultural rights
are not met by practical punishments or deterrence measures . the reactions
of both international organizations and local human rights groups do
not exceed criticism , condemnation or demonstrations at most . On the
contrary violations of economic rules of globalization and agreements
are met with very severe practical measures such as economic boycotting
and cutting of aids .
Many authors provide evidence
on the adverse effects of governments adoption of globalization economic
agreements on basic human rights due to the reduced overall government
spending on services and satisfaction of basic human needs and the increasing
tendencies towards privatization of these services.
Vandana Shiva states that “ during 1979-81 and 1992-1993 , calorie
intake declined by three percent in Mexico, 4.1 percent in Argentina
,10.9 percent in Kenya , 10.0 percent in Tanzania , 9.9 percent in Ethiopia
. In India , the per capita cereal consumption declined by 12.2 for
rural areas and 5.4 percent in urban areas . “ she explains these
figures by saying that countries cannot ensure that the hungry are fed
because this involves laws, policies and financial commitments which
are” protectionist “. ( 4 )
She also offers evidence
on the impact of globalization agreements on the right to health : “
Under the trade Related Intellectual Property agreement of the world
Trade Organization , countries have to implement patent laws granting
exclusive , monopolistic rights to the pharmaceutical and biotech industry.
This prevents countries from producing low cost generic drugs . Patented
HIV/AIDS medicine costs $15,000 , while generic drugs made by India
and Brazil cost $250-300 for one years treatment . Patents are , therefore
robbing AIDS victims of their rights” .
Diana Smith shows how the
policies associated with globalization affected primary health care
services . She states that : “ introducing the market mechanism
into the provision of health care obviously makes services less available
to the poor . the privatization of health and hospital services also
makes the poor suffer as services become more oriented towards those
who can pay . In addition , essential drug policies , which aim to make
necessary pharmaceuticals available to all at an affordable price ,
are threatened by increasingly liberal policies towards pharmaceutical
companies . Finally , increasing unemployment and poverty add to the
nations health problems by creating extra demands on reduced government
services.”( 5 )
The authors of Global Issues
state that “ the lives of 1.7 million children will be needlessly
lost this year (2002 ) because world governments have failed to reduce
poverty levels “ and “Progress in life expectancy was also
reduced for 4 out of5 groups of countries , with the exception of the
highest group ( life expectancy 69-76 years ) , also “ progress
in reducing infant mortality was also considerably slower during the
last two decades than over the previous decades “. ( 6 )
T . Rajamoorthy states that
“ globalization resulted in the violation of the fundamental right
to work. In their drive for profits , companies, in particular TNCs,
have been restructuring their operations on a global scale. The result
has been massive unemployment . In 1995 , the ILO announced that one
third of the world ‘s willing to work population was either unemployed
or underemployed ….the goal of full employment , which was one
of the pillars of the social consensus that prevailed after the Second
World War , has been jettisoned by nearly all governments …. Globalization
has also engendered or accentuated the process of the casualization
and informalization of labor” . He mentions that only 8% of the
labor force in India is in the formal economy while 90% work in the
informal economy with no legal protection or security and are subject
to ruthless exploitation . Many companies ,including TNCs got rid of
their unionized labor force and moved their operations to law wage and
depressed areas to avail themselves of the large supply of unorganized
and unprotected , mainly female labor.( 7 )
Mathews George Chunakara
describes the state of workers in developing countries after globalization
as a race to the bottom , and the bottom means slave like conditions
. He explains this by the search of transnational companies for cheap
labor in order to maximize their profits , so the governments of developing
countries compete for the investors by providing cheaper labor ( 8 )
.
The right to education has
been also adversely affected by the privatization policies and the turning
of education into a profit generating enterprises in the developing
countries . Due to the reduced governmental expenditure on education
the quality of public free education has suffered a lot . Investors
established educational institutes covering all the range from kinder
gardens to universities offering better but much more expensive quality
of education for the elites and motivated mainly by profit . However
most developing countries still suffer a high rate of illiteracy and
graduates of the governmental low quality educational institutions are
not well prepared for the labor market so they suffer unemployment .
Danilo Turk showed that the
globalization agreements and policies had its adverse effects on the
right to work ,the right to food , the right to health, the right to
education and the right to development ( 9)
There is almost a consensus
over the fact that the human rights are much more adversely affected
by globalization in the south or the so called developing countries
.One of those adversely affected fundamental rights is the right to
development . “When countries loose their right to regulate the
entry ,behavior and operations of foreign investment in the interests
of their own people , it is not difficult to appreciate why it is bound
to result in an impairment of the right to development . (10)
IV -Consequences
of violations of human rights
No doubt that the widespread
violations of human rights is related to the widening gap between the
rich and the poor , both on the global and on the local levels . International
Statistics prove this fact ( 11 ). It shows that:
- half the world –nearly three billion people – live on
less than two dollars a day
- The wealthiest nation on earth has the widest gap between rich and
poor of any industrialized nation
- The top fifth of the world’s people in the richest countries
enjoy 82% of the expanding export trade and 68% of foreign direct investment
–while the bottom fifth , barely more than 1%
- In 1960, the 20 % of the worlds people in the richest countries had
30 times the income of the poorest 20%--in 1997 , 74 times as much
- A few hundred millionaires now own as much wealth as the world’s
poorest 2.5 billon people.
- The combined wealth of the world’s 200 richest people hit $
1 trillion in 1999; the combined incomes of the 582 million people living
in the 43 l3east developed countries is $ 146 billion
-
This leads to an increasing feelings of deprivation and injustice among
the populations of the different countries of the world which is enhanced
by the rapid and unprecedented advance in communication and information
technologies , which really turned the world in this respect into a
global village . the deprived are exposed daily , if not every minute
to images and evidences of the huge gap in standards of living between
the rich and the poor .
Some consequences of this
deprivations of human rights are social and political unrest and even
violence and counter violence . It also leads to an increasing resort
to suppression and to chaos . Paradoxically the expenditure on suppressing
protest and violence may be equal to or even exceeds the ought to be
expenditure on implementing economic, social and cultural human rights
for all the peoples of the world . What matters more is the loss of
human lives and the loss of constructive contributions which all the
deprived could have offered to the economic, social , scientific and
cultural advancement of humanity if they were granted their basic human
rights . Racism , prejudices, and discrimination are negatively associated
with justice and implementation of human rights .
There is enough evidence
that the world wealth is ,in general, rapidly increasing due to the
advance in science and technology and that it is more than enough to
satisfy the needs of all the dwellers of the globe . What is needed
is the globalization of human rights and prosperity , but how ?
V-Globalization and
the human rights approach
Mary Robinson (12 ) stressed
the fact that “ A key characteristic of economic globalization
is that the actors involved are not only states , but private power
in the form of multinational or transnational corporations. It is now
the case that more than half of the top economies in the world are corporations
not states , and international investment is increasingly private .”
She states that there is a trend towards holding companies accountable
through legal rules for the human rights and environmental impact of
their policies. she says that corporations should ensure that they uphold
and respect human rights as reflected in the Universal Declarations
of Human Rights and are not themselves complicit in human rights abuses
.
But if we acknowledge that
transnational corporations are much powerful than the states , particularly
those of the dependant developing countries then who would issue those
badly needed legal rules and who would implement them ? Transnational
corporations which are steering the economic globalization are not at
all directed by ethical or humanitarian principles . The maximization
of profit is the major if not the only driving force for all their activities
.
To be logical I tend to think
like this : if economic corporations became transnational and that much
powerful what is needed is a powerful transnational government based
on real democracy for all the countries and citizens of the world .
A government which is capable of issuing and implementing global rules
aimed at realization of the maximum use of all humankind achievements
for the sake of all the dwellers of our globe . A government which is
capable of making economy in the service of man instead of making man
a victim and a slave for the market economy.
References
1-Such as:
Thomas L. Friedman : The lexus and the Olive Tree,: Understanding Globalization,
Cairo : international Publishers,1999.
Anthony Giddens :” Globalization” ,BBC Reith Lectures (http://www.Ise.ac.uk/Giddens_99/week!.htm)
Leslie Sklair, Globalization-Capitalism and its Alternatives , Oxford
University press ,2002.
Gray C. Hufbaur, Globalization Facts and consequences ,Institute for
International Economics,2001. http://www.iie.com/papers/hufbaur1000.htm)
2- Such as:
Paul L. S.J., Education for Globalization , America Press 2002 http://www.americapress.org/articles/locatelli.htm
Vandana Shiva, Violence of Globalization ,the Hindu ( New Delhi, India
) March25,2001
http://www.zmag.org/crisesCurEvts/shivaglob.htm
Theodore Levitt, The globalization of markets “ Harvard Business
review 61 (3 ) ( May-June): 92-102 .
3-Such as :Thomas Friedman & Gary Hufbaur
4-Vandana Shiva , opt.
5-Diana Smith , What Does Globalization Mean for Health ? third world
network,1999
http://www.globalpolicy.org/globaliz/special/health.htm
6-Global Issues, Causes of Poverty : http://www.globalizationissues.org/Traderelated/Facts.asp
7-T. Rajamoorthy, Development and Human Rights
http://www.daga.org/press/ia/glob/glob04.htm
8- Mathews George Chunakara globalization and its Impact on Human .
Rights.
http://www.daga.org/press/ia/glob/glob06.htm
9- Danilo Turk , How World Bank-IMF policies adversely affect
human rights” , Third World Resurgence ,may 1993.
10- Global Issues , Poverty Facts and Stats, http://www.globalissues.org/Traderelated/Facts.asp
11- Cited in : Poverty facts and Stats, Global Issues .
12- Mary Robinson, Globalization Has to Take rights into Account , The
Irish times , January 22,2002.
This paper was presented at the XV Congress of the International Sociological
Association,
Brisbane,8-11 July,2002 .Dr. Samir Naim-Ahmed is Professor of Sociology
at Ain shams University , Cairo
Click
here to comment
on this article