Presentation to the Norway Social Forum, 22 June 2003

1. Where
does
war
come
from?
Alan Freeman
Afreeman@iwgvt.org
www.iwgvt.org

2. Origin of this work
 TNI seminar 2001
 Nine authors, five continents
 Less ‘what to do?’ than ‘what’s happening?’
 Their conclusions
 Globalisation in structural crisis
 Crisis of governance
 Major powers turning to war as the ‘solution’
 Similar to ‘classical imperialism’ 1873-1914

3. Consequences
 For theory
 New theoretical synthesis needed
 Study the theories of the past – what is their
real content?
 For practice
 Peace and social justice – why movements
need to support each other
 Sell the book!

4. What is globalisation, really?
 Free market in capital
 Policy set by ‘multilateral institutions’ (IMF,
World Bank, etc)
 Governing structure: coalition of
 Dominant powers (US, EU, Japan)
 NIACS (Korea, Singapore, etc)
 Elites in ‘better off’ Southern Countries
 Instruments of terror
 Debt
 Dictatorship

5. Economics as religion: social choices
disguised as necessity
 The reality
 15 million people out
of work
 The world finances the
US debt
 Inequality trebles
 The description
 Stable prices
 Free market in
capital
 Shock therapy

6. The illusion of market perfection
 Assumption ‘equilibrium’ = ‘we assume
the market works’
 Conclusion: if it goes wrong, something
outside made it go wrong
 But: the market has never been stronger
 A better conclusion: if it goes wrong, the
market itself is responsible

7. Divergence
32% 29%
1970 1980 2000
19%
80% 82% 84%
Income
People
Income per head
Advanced $10,473 $18,088 $26,201
Rest $1,248 $1,690 $1,160
Ratio 8.4 10.7 22.6

8. Stagnation
$10,000
$12,000
$14,000
$16,000
$18,000
$20,000
$22,000
$24,000
$26,000
$28,000
$30,000
1970
1972
1974
1976
1978
1980
1982
1984
1986
1988
1990
1992
1994
1996
1998
2000
2002
$2,500
$3,000
$3,500
$4,000
$4,500
$5,000
$5,500
$6,000
$6,500
$7,000
$7,500
GDP
GDP Per Capita
-0.2%
0.8%
4.2%
GDP /Cap
1.2%
2.5%
6.1%
GDP
90-00
80-90
70-80

9. Stagnation plus divergence
 1950-70
 Average income rising
 Rich rising faster
 Inequality = ‘not improving so fast’
 Those getting poorer are a minority
 1980-2000
 Average income stagnant
 Richest keep rising
 Inequality = ‘getting poorer’
 Those getting poorer are a majority

10. Who is marginal?
 ‘Third way’ theory – most people are rich
 A few ‘marginal’ poor
 Problem is ‘exclusion’
 But actually most people are poor
 A few ‘marginal’ rich
 Who run the world

11. How many rich people can there
be?
 How many people in the South can equal the
income of the North?
 Total income of South = $6,148 bn (avge $3/day)
 Average income of North = $25,672
 6,148,000,000 ÷ 25,672 = 231,380,000
 = 20 per cent of the South
 Everyone else would get nothing at all

12. The example of Argentina
 Devaluation of peso = country 3 times poorer
 Top decile was 25 times richer than bottom
 Now 64
 14,000,000 below poverty line (cannot afford
basic basket)
 7,000,000 indigent (cannot eat daily)
 23 per cent unemployed
 Four presidents overthrown in 2 months
 ‘Darwinian selection’ – the only president left
was one that refused to pay the IMF

13. What really happened in
Afghanistan?
 Portrayed as ‘barbaric tribal’
 But did possess previous rich civilisation
 Possessed productive economy
 Civil war devastated the economy
 Neoliberalism makes recovery impossible
 Was not barbaric – was barbarised

14. A social fact with political
consequences
 Governance ‘system’ of the world?
 IFIs ‘single policy’
 But require governments to implement
 Country becomes ungovernable
 Failure of ‘globalisation bloc’
 Hence recourse to direct force

15. Globalisation in question
The one state that hasn’t got weaker
Which has the largest debts in the world
Which has the largest armed capacity in the
world
Which runs the world currency

16. Is ‘globalisation’ sustainable?
 Function of state = to contain conflict
 Nation state not ‘hollow’ – becomes agent of
IFIs
 IFIs have no power of enforcement
 ‘The IMF’s army is the USA’

17. The new imperialism
A decade ago, being against empire would have been like being
against rape. To all but the perverse few who cheered for the wrong
side in Star Wars movies, “empire” was a dirty word. Today, it has re-
emerged, newly laundered.
The most aggressive advocates are “neoconservatives” such as
William Kristol, publisher of The Weekly Standard, who said on Fox
television recently that “if people want to say we're an imperial power,
fine.”
Or Max Boot, a veteran of this paper's editorial page, who wrote
shortly after Sept. 11, 2001, that “Afghanistan and other troubled
lands today cry out for the sort of enlightened foreign administration
once provided by self-confident Englishmen in jodhpurs and pith
helmets.”
Wall Street Journal 15 July 2003

18. Elements of the New Imperialism
 Doctrine of failed states
 Doctrine of pre-emptive action
 Bilateralism on the up-and-up
 The unequal balance – continents versus
countries
 Unify the North, divide the South
 BUT – can the North unite?

19. US – the world leader?
80
85
90
95
100
105
110
115
120
1
9
7
0
1
9
7
2
1
9
7
4
1
9
7
6
1
9
7
8
1
9
8
0
1
9
8
2
1
9
8
4
1
9
8
6
1
9
8
8
1
9
9
0
1
9
9
2
1
9
9
4
1
9
9
6
1
9
9
8
2
0
0
0
2
0
0
2
North America
Rest of World
Europe
South-East Asia

20. Growth of GDP per capita
-14.5
-19.8
35.4
Rest
-8.4
25.4
122.0
Euro Area
19.9
68.1
128.9
SE Asia
20.9
24.8
24.6
North
America
1990-2000
1980-90
1970-80

21. 3 theses of ‘classical imperialism’
 World divided into two types of state,
dominant and dominated
 This is a product of the market
 It is a competitive system – the dominant
states compete for control of territory

22. What might be different? (1)
 ‘Whole world is in the market’
 No-one to blame but the market
 If the market cannot sustain society,
society becomes unsustainable
 Easy to destroy, much harder to govern

23. What might be different (2)
 Continental scale of national entities
required
 USA already is
 Europe trying to become
 ‘Large’ nation-continents (China, India)
have counterweight
 Continental unity is paramount
 South-South unity is paramount

24. Europe
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2001 2002
Q2 1.57 1.31 1.49 1.65 1.48 1.31 1.43 1.40 1.37
Q3 1.76 1.64 1.75 1.74 1.59 1.65 1.58 1.52 1.47
Q4 1.89 1.95 1.96 1.86 1.63 1.93 1.63 1.58 1.54
Q5 2.26 2.33 2.28 2.28 1.91 2.17 1.87 1.80 1.77

25. Countries in transition
1970 1975 1980 1985 1990 1995 2000 2001 2002
Q2 1.70 1.48 1.57 1.51 1.75 2.27 2.02 2.16 2.39
Q3 2.19 2.29 2.47 2.81 3.78 4.87 3.37 3.75 4.23
Q4 2.31 2.58 2.81 3.20 4.29 5.27 3.42 3.89 4.37
Q5 2.36 2.61 2.84 3.23 4.33 8.46 8.01 8.40 9.38

26. The coming war with China?