Post Cold War Effects on the Third World

by Dawn Hunt

 

22/08/05

 

In the question of “how has the third world been affected upon the end of the Cold War”, there are three main areas to examine; all of which are interlinked and address a broad range of issues and consequences faced by the third world.  These three main areas are: democratisation, globalisation and the economy.

 

Democracy

 

Just before the end of the Cold War, there was a sharp rise in third world countries that had democratised.  Yet, with the crumbling of the Soviet Union and socialist ideology in countries such as the eastern European states, democracy rapidly spread throughout the third world.

With the U.S. standing as the one remaining superpower, it was able to influence the likes of the IMF and World Bank in conditions of democratisation for third world countries to receive aid assistance.

 

Many third world countries democratised on their own accord with the death of socialist ideals upon the death of the Soviet Union.  On a positive note, democracies increased transparency and accountability in third world countries, so that they were opened up to the same level of information and freedom of movement that had been enjoyed by the west for many years. On a negative note however, democracy simply does not fit with certain cultures as pointed out by Malaysia’s prime minister Muhammad Amahathir; thus in many regions throughout the world, democracy is being actively challenged and rejected.

 

According to a “Foreign Affairs” article, poor democracies and poor dictatorships spend roughly the same on health care, yet democracies fare better with better management and equal distribution of opportunities.  However, that is not to say that autocracies have not flourished on their own terms.  Some democracies such as India, have not flourished in the way that its Asian tiger counter parts have on their own terms.

On the whole, it could be said that democratisation has been the most positive affect of the post Cold War era, on third world countries.

 

Globalisation

 

Globalisation has taken shape on many levels throughout the third world.  Just because many countries have democratised with the demise of the Soviet Union, doesn’t mean that quality of life has improved for people in the third world by a long shot.

 

Globalisation has affected the third world both politically and culturally.  In the name of Marketisation, blurred borders between countries and trans national corporations (TNC’s), the role of the state has been undermined, especially with so many non state actors on the political stage.

According to Caroline Thomas, there is increasing concern that TNC’s and privatisation is playing more and more of a part in public affairs.  With increased freedom of movement and access to information, such as the internet, trans-global transactions have speeded upand there is an increasing awareness of corruption, both at government level within democratic and non democratic regimes.  However, there is also a distinct lack of representation of third world countries in cases such as the G8 summit and other key conferences which have taken place in the last several years.

 

Unfortunately, the cultural gap between the west and east is ever widening.  The so-called “war on terror” spear headed by the U.S. in the wake of the September 11 attacks on the World Trade Centre, continues to fuel resentment, suspicion and mistrust between entire societies in the west and east.  As the west’s policies in the third world refuse to change, most notably the U.S., terrorism continues to spread both in developing countries and in the west.  As western ideologies continue to dominate the rest of the world, more and more resistance and resentment is flowering within entire societies.  There are now more indigenous societies than ever before, that are experiencing a resurgence in their own cultural values, customs and identities in answer to western hegemony throughout the world.

 

The economy

 

Perhaps the most negative and devastating affect on the third world with the end of the Cold War, has been poverty and a sharp downward spiral of developing economies.  As the Cold War ended in 1989, countries in both Latin America and Africa owed billions in debts that were encountered through loans taken out with the IMF and World Bank.  Interest rates soared in the ‘80s, the price of oil fell and third world countries were forced to borrow as well as cancel structural adjustment programs (SAP’s), due to conditions and strict guidelines imposed by the IMF and WB.

 

As pointed out by Caroline Thomas, in Latin American countries for example, by the mid ‘90s there was a drive towards the Washington consensus, as well as continued corruption and regime change in the region; thus leaving it the region with the most unequal distribution of wealth in the world.  Increased market subsidies replaced production in many countries in the third world, affecting the livelihood of both farmers and manufacturers.  Several countries across the third world were forced to cut into shoestring education and healthcare budgets, just to repay the debt owed to the international financial institutions (IFI’s).  Sadly, more and more third world countries have been forced to rely on aid agencies for basic things such as food, medicine and clean water.  With third world economies being so badly affected by the widening gap between the rich developed north and the poor south, there is little or no funding left to improve infrastructures. 

 

There has been far too little to show for far too few reconstructive programs sponsored by rich western countries, to improve the economies and overall well being of third world countries.

 

Conclusion

 

The west has dominated overwhelmingly in the rest of the world with the end of the Cold War.  Enforced democratisation, globalisation and devastating economic consequences have gripped the third world.  As a proposed solution to many problems faced by the third world in the wake of the twenty-first century, an alternative path forward must be considered.

 

The alternative way forward, would involve the three main areas mentioned above.  For example, especially within democracies, grassroots development projects (GDP’s) have already been in existence for some time.  However, more credibility must be given to these organisations in south/south co-operation.  In terms of globalisation, far too much power has been given to TNC’s and taken away from the state, in the name of marketisation and the private sector.

 

There must be a respect for cultural diversity in all societies, rather than a one size fits all approach, present in the current orthodoxy of international politics.  The long term goal of shifting away from a globalised market economy, to perhaps a more regional/localised economy, must be addressed.  In short, the “top down” approach simply does not work for the world’s poor in developing countries.  If leaders and policy makers would consider the benefits of a “bottom up” approach, thus giving impoverished people the chance for investment, increased productivity and better representation, then the third world might thrive on the ticket of opportunity.  However, these changes and long term objectives, musts happen outside the framework of western ideology in order to cultivate a more holistic and peaceful political environment both in the developed and developing world

 

Click here to return to Dawn’s Rants

 

Hosted by www.Geocities.ws

1