Globalisation, extremism and violence in poor countries

Abstract

Globalisation—understood as external and internal market liberalisation—generates conditions in poor countries that are conducive to the emergence of extremist movements, instability and conflict. Liberalisation and the accompanying requirement of macroeconomic stabilisation subject people to rapid and sometimes devastating changes in fortune. Yet globalisation has had vastly different effects in different countries. Many have succumbed to sporadic growth or stagnation, inequality and turmoil, whereas others have achieved a broadly based prosperity, peace and democracy. A comparison of two liberalising African cases—Egypt and Mauritius—is employed to explain this divergence in paths. Mauritius has so far deftly navigated the maelstrom of globalisation by achieving growth with considerable equity and genuine democracy, while Egypt has followed a path of belated and partial liberalisation, irregular growth, the rise of new inequalities and insecurities, repression and violent Islamist movements. The major reason for this divergence lies in certain contingent institutional and class processes.

Notes

Richard Sandbrook is at the Munk Centre for International Studies, 1 Devonshire Place, Toronto, Canada M5S 3K7. Email: [email protected]. David Romano is in the Department of Political Science, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Email: [email protected]

G Soros, ‘The capitalist threat’, Atlantic Monthly, 279 (2), 1997, pp 45–58; and D Rodrik, Has Globalization Gone Too Far?, Washington, DC: Institute for International Economics, 1997.

Quan Li & D Schaub, ‘Economic globalization and transnational terrorism: a pooled time‐series analysis’, Journal of Conflict Resolution, 48 (2), 2004, pp 230–258.

For these arguments, see D Rodrik, The New Global Economy and Developing Countries: Making Openness Work, Washington, DC: Overseas Development Council, 1999, ch 6.

Not every liberalising developing country encounters all these tensions. The degree of a country's exposure depends on many factors, including the severity of its preceding economic crisis and the extent and pace of its market opening.

A Mittal, ‘Land loss, poverty and hunger’ in D Barker & J Mander (eds), IFG Special Report: Does Globalization Help the Poor? San Francisco: International Forum on Globalization, January 10, 2002.

See E Luttwak, Turbo‐Capitalism: Winners and Losers in the Global Economy, New York: HarperCollins, 1999, for a thorough review.

W Cline, ‘Financial crises and poverty in emerging market economies’, paper delivered at a conference on Social and Economic Impacts of Liberalisation and Globalisation, University of Toronto, 19–20 April 2002, pp 3–6.

R Kaplinsky, ‘Globalisation and economic insecurity’, Institute for Development Studies Bulletin, 32 (2), 2001, pp 13–24.

V FitzGerald, ‘Global linkages, vulnerable economies and the outbreak of conflict’, in EW Nafziger & R Vayrenen (eds), The Prevention of Humanitarian Emergencies, Basingstoke: Palgrave, 2001, p 79.

GA Cornia. & J Court, Inequality, Growth and Poverty in the Era of Liberalisation and Globalisation, Policy Brief No 4, World Institute for Development Economics Research, Helsinki, 2001, p 1.

Ibid.

RH Wade, ‘Is globalization reducing poverty and inequality?’, World Development, 32 (4), 2004, pp 567–589; and A Berry & J Serieux, ‘All about the giants: probing the influences on world growth and income inequality at the end of the 20th century’, ces‐ifo Economic Studies, 50 (1), 2004, pp 133–170.

Cornia & Court, Inequality, Growth and Poverty, pp 14–18.

EW Nafziger & J Auvinen, ‘Economic development, inequality, war, and state violence’, World Development, 30 (2), 2002, p 156.

On the case of Venezuela, see M Lopez‐Maya, L Lander & M Uger, ‘Economics, violence and protest in Venezuela: a preview of the global future?’, in K Worcester, SA Bermanzohn & M Unger (eds), Violence and Politics: Globalization's Paradox, New York: Routledge, 2002.

See, for example, the insightful analysis of rural rebellion in Mexico and Egypt in D Tschirgi, ‘Marginalized violent internal conflict in the Age of Globalization: Mexico and Egypt’, Arab Studies Quarterly, 21 (3), 1999, pp 13–34.

B Crawford, ‘The causes of cultural conflict: an institutional approach’, in B Crawford & RD Lipschutz (eds), The Myth of ‘Ethnic’ Conflict: Politics, Economics, and ‘Cultural’ Violence, Berkeley, CA: International and Area Studies, University of California, 1998, p 35.

J Snyder, From Voting to Violence: Democratization and Nationalist Conflict, New York: WW Norton, 2000.

B Barber, Jihad vs McWorld: How Globalization and Tribalism are Reshaping the World, New York: Ballantine Books, 1996, p 81.

Ibid, p 215.

For examples in the Islamic world, see P Lubeck, ‘Islamist responses to globalization: cultural conflict in Egypt, Algeria and Malaysia’, in Crawford & Lipschutz, The Myth of ‘Ethnic’ Conflict, pp 293–319. For sub‐Saharan Africa, see SP Riley & TW Parfitt, ‘Economic adjustment and democratisation in Africa’, in J Walton (ed), Free Markets and Food Riots: The Politics of Global Adjustment, Oxford: Blackwell, 1994.

W Reno, Warlord Politics and African States, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1998.

R Kothari, ‘Under globalisation, will nation state hold?’, Economic and Political Weekly, 1 July 1995, p 1596.

M Zald, ‘Culture, ideology and strategic framing’, in D McAdam, JD McCarthy & M Zald (eds), Comparative Perspectives on Social Movements, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1996.

Tschirgi, ‘Marginalised violent internal conflict’.

For an elaboration of this argument, see RAF Woltering, ‘The roots of Islamist popularity’, Third World Quarterly, 23, 2002, pp 1145–1158; and AK Cronin, ‘Behind the curve—globalization and international terrorism’, International Security, 27 (3), 2002, pp 35–45.

A Hourani, A History of the Arab Peoples, Cambridge: Belknap Press, 1991, p 380.

R Gulhati & R Nallari, Successful Stabilisation and Recovery in Mauritius, edi Development Policy Case Series No 5, Washington, DC: World Bank, 1990, pp 11–17.

D Brautigam, ‘The “Mauritius miracle”: democracy, institutions and economic policy’, in R Joseph (ed), State, Conflict, and Democracy in Africa, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 1999, p 159.

JA Bill & R Springborg, Politics in the Middle East, New York: HarperCollins, 1994, p 217.

D Wiess & U Wurzel, The Economics and Politics of Transition to an Open Market Economy, Paris: oecd, 1998, p 32.

Ibid, pp 35, 54.

L Haddad & A Ahmed, ‘Chronic and transitory poverty: evidence from Egypt, 1997–1999’, World Development, 31 (1), 2002, pp 71–85; and T Mitchell, ‘No factories, no problems: the logic of neo‐liberalism in Egypt’, Review of African Political Economy, 82, 1999, pp 455–468.

P Rivlin, Economic Policy and Performance in the Arab World, Boulder, CO: Lynne Rienner, 2001, p 28. Rivlin notes that pre‐1970 employment data for Egypt are not very reliable, however, and even today's statistics vary according to the source.

US Energy Information Administration, ‘Country Analysis Briefs: Egypt’, 2001, at http://www.eia.doe.gov/emeu/cabs/egypt.html.

W Easterly & A Kraay, ‘Small states, small problems? Income, growth and volatility in small states’, World Development, 28 (11), 2000, pp 2013–2027.

WF Miles, ‘The Mauritius enigma’, Journal of Democracy, 10 (2), 1999, p 92.

LW Bowman, Mauritius: Democracy and Development in the Indian Ocean, Boulder, CO: Westview, 1991, p 33.

B Carroll & T Carroll, ‘Trouble in paradise: ethnic conflict in Mauritius’, Commonwealth and Comparative Politics, 38 (2), 2000, p 25.

For example, uncertainties arising from the phasing out of preference for the country's three major exports—sugar, textiles and clothing—under the Lomé Convention and the Multifibre Agreement.

J Houbert, ‘Mauritius: politics and pluralism at the periphery’, Annuaire des Pays de l'Océan Indien, 9, 1982–83, pp 242–243.

Gulhati & Nallari, Successful Stabilisation, p 40.

DJ Sullivan. & S Abed‐Kotob, Islam in Contemporary Egypt: Civil Society vs the State, London: Lynne Rienner, 1999, p 41.

K Duran, ‘Cairo: a torrent of frightening disclosures’, The World and I, 15 (11), 2000, p 301.

Bill & Springborg, Politics in the Middle East, p 222.

P Lubeck, ‘Antinomies of Islamic movements under globalisation’, WP 99–1, Center for Global, International and Regional Studies, University of California, Santa Cruz, 1999, p 13.

Bill & Springborg, Politics in the Middle East, p 222.

RM Burrell & RK Abbas, Egypt: The Dilemmas of a Nation, 1970–1977, Beverly Hills, CA: Sage, 1977, p 32.

R Bush, ‘An agricultural strategy without farmers’, Review of African Political Economy, 80, 2000, pp 235–249.

Tschirgi, ‘Marginalized violent internal conflict’, p 8.

Economist Intelligence Unit, Country Profile: Egypt, 9 October 2001, p 3, at http://db.eiu.com/reports.asp?title = country + Profile + Egypt&doc_id = 918057&valn.

Tschirgi, ‘Marginalized violent internal conflict’; and Lubeck, ‘Antinomies of Islamic movements’.

D Zeidan, ‘The Islamic fundamentalist view of life as a perennial battle’, Middle East Review of International Affairs, 5 (4), 2001, p 12.

G Abdo, No God But God, London: Oxford University Press, 2000.

Compare the scores on rule of law, government effectiveness, graft, and the overall ‘polity score’ in United Nations Development Program, Human Development Report 2002, New York: Oxford University Press, 2002, Table A1.1. For a discussion of the high institutional quality in Mauritius, see A Subramanian & D Roy, ‘Who can explain the Mauritian miracle: Meade, Romer, Sachs, or Rodrik?’, in D. Rodrik (ed), In Search of Prosperity, Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press, 2003, pp 229–232.

R Sandbrook, Closing the Circle: Democratization and Development in Africa, London: Zed Books, 2000, pp 17–19 and ch 5.

RB Allen, Slaves, Freedmen, and Indentured Labourers in Colonial Mauritius, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999.

Note that about half the total equity of firms in the epz is owned by Mauritians—which is a high level of local ownership even in comparison with South Korea and Malaysia. See Subramanian & Roy, ‘Who can explain the Mauritian miracle’, p 210.

This interpretation draws on Houbert, ‘Mauritius’; A Darga, ‘Autonomous economic and social development in democracy: an appreciation of the Mauritian miracle’, Africa Development, 21 (2/3), 1996, pp 79–88; and Allen, Slaves, Freedmen, and Indentured Labourers.

B Carroll & SK Joypaul, ‘The Mauritius senior public service since Independence: some lessons’, International Review of Administrative Sciences, 59 (3), 1993, p 434.

This interpretation draws on T Meisenhelder, ‘The developmental state in Mauritius’, Journal of Modern African Studies, 35 (2), 1997, pp 278–297; Houbert, ‘Mauritius’; and R Seegobin & L Collen, ‘Mauritius: class forces and political power’, Review of African Political Economy, 8, 1977, pp 109–118.

See B Carroll & T Carroll, ‘Accommodating ethnic diversity in a modernizing democratic state: theory and practice in the case of Mauritius’, Ethnic and Racial Studies, 23 (1), 2000, pp 120–142.

R Springborg, Mubarak's Egypt: Fragmentation of the Political Order, Boulder, CO: Westview, 1989, p 11.

Additional information

Notes on contributors

Richard Sandbrook

Richard Sandbrook is at the Munk Centre for International Studies, 1 Devonshire Place, Toronto, Canada M5S 3K7. Email: [email protected]. David Romano is in the Department of Political Science, McGill University, Montreal, Canada. Email: [email protected]