Zimpapers Logo

Prosper Ndlovu, Analysis
THE rising isolationist and protectionist rhetoric under the Donald Trump-led United States of America as well as in Europe, particularly Britain, has taken the world by surprise.

Given that these are the champions of capitalism, an ideology that is premised on free market economy that abhors state regulation, policy makers and intellectuals alike have been left confounded by the irony of this bold shift, which has provoked debate concerning the direction the world is taking.

It is also intriguing to note that even leaders from 20 world powers, popularly known by the acronym “G20”, have also broken with the bloc’s decade-old tradition of rejecting protectionism after they failed to reach an agreement to endorse free trade and open trade marks rejection of protectionism in the face of US opposition. The ministers and central bank chiefs of the G20 countries ended talks in the German town of Baden-Baden last Saturday, making only a token reference for the need to strengthen the contribution of trade to the global economy, international media reports show.

While this could be viewed as a win for Trump and his anti-globalisation agenda, analysts warn that isolationist and protectionist policies could reverse the global development gains so far achieved, with inevitable catastrophic consequences, especially on developing economies. In a world of globally integrated and interdependent economies, crude protectionism would not only stifle international trade but the flow of investment, expenditure on humanitarian services as well as compromise peace and security issues.

Economist and Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe (RBZ) Deputy Governor Dr Kupukile Mlambo, lamented what he referred to as “nostalgic nationalism”, a tendency to turn away from globalisation.

“In the US they talk of bringing millions of jobs back to America. In the UK they talk of Brexit, in China they talk of the ‘Great rejuvenation of the Chinese people’ and in Europe we are witnessing a rise of the far right populist movements. It is a world that is increasingly inward looking and maybe even less caring,” said Dr Mlambo.

In view of this shift, the former African Development Bank chief, warns that global risks are likely to pile on emerging and developing economies. This could further strain developing economies that are already bearing the brunt of global liquidity crisis and have been victims of massive capital flight to the developed countries through externalisation and imports, said Dr Mlambo who was addressing a graduation gathering at Solusi University on Sunday.

Businessman and economic analyst Mr Dumisani Sibanda feared the isolationist stance by the so-called super powers would frustrate a lot of non-governmental organisations (NGOs)- coordinated programmes.

“The impact of this approach could be a cut on development aid and that includes health services such as family planning as well as HIV and Aids,” he said.

Developing economies heavily rely on the developed north for foreign direct investment, trade market benefits, health and other forms of humanitarian support and innovation. In Zimbabwe, for instance, development aid is a crucial source of liquidity with NGOs receiving nearly a billion or so dollars annually for different projects, according to the Reserve Bank of Zimbabwe.

In his submissions during a plenary session of the inaugural African Economic Platform (AEP) Summit in Port Louise, Mauritius on Monday, President Mugabe alluded to this sad global reality when he alluded to the presence of NGOs across the continent and challenged African governments to do                                  more to come up with home grown solutions to the continent’s problems.

Africa and its developing counterparts are facing numerous challenges such as terrorism and serious labour migration to the developed north.

Isolation and protectionism would also worsen inequalities between the global north and south and heighten tensions that could threaten peace and stability. Studies already show there is serious concentration of wealth in developed countries. According to Oxfam International, the combined wealth globally is controlled by only one percent of the richest population.

The United Nations has already raised a red flag on what the anti-globalisation agenda could imply to the overall world order and possible effects, particularly on developing countries. Through his radical changes, Trump has since his election, angered and confused many, including the US allies who have been left guessing in terms of sustainability of their long standing relations with America.

Under its “America first” mantra, the Trump administration has boldly stated its desire to cut Washington’s contribution to the UN programmes. This entails reducing or ending funding for international organisations whose missions do not substantially advance US foreign policy interests. Al Jazeera reported that the cut includes slashing funding for the State Department and USAiD, its foreign aid legacy while shifting money towards the military with a $54 billion in defense spending. The US is the largest financer of UN activities globally with reports indicating that it is spending about $10 billion per year on the intergovernmental body, which constitute about 22 percent of its total                                                                                          budget.

Isolation could also come as a huge cost to the attainment of Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs), a global agenda to transform the world for better by 2030. The initiative is spearheaded by the UN with a set of 17 goals and 169 targets between them. Among the goals is alleviating poverty, end to hunger, quality education and gender equality, clean water and sanitation, climate action, affordable and clean energy as well as good health and well being.
International media reports, citing the UN, indicate that the world is facing its worst humanitarian crisis since the end of the Second World War, with an estimated 20 million people in developing countries such as Yemen, South Sudan, Somalia and Nigeria, facing starvation and famine. Last week a top UN  official, Stephane Dujarric fiercely reacted — pointing on the need to collectively address underlying drivers of global problems such as terrorism through continued investments in conflict zones, fostering conflict resolution, countering violent extremism, peacekeeping and peace building, sustainable and inclusive development and enhancing respect of human dignity.

In his last days in office, former US President Barak Obama also warned the world of the dark side of what he termed “crude sort of nationalism”, which is taking root amid the populist movements that are gaining currency around the world.

“We are going to have to guard against a rise in a crude sort of nationalism, or ethnic identity or tribalism that is built around an us and a them, and I will never apologise for saying that the future of humanity and the future of the world is going to be defined by what we have in common, as opposed to those things that separate us and ultimately lead us into conflict,” Obama said.

“Take Europe,” he continued, “We know what happens when Europeans start dividing themselves up and emphasizing their differences and seeing a competition between various countries in a zero-sum way. The 20th century was a bloodbath.”