While advocating the principle of free trade, the US has been following the policy of protectionism regarding textiles right from 1956 when the President was given the authority under the Agricultural Act to negotiate agreements for limiting “imports into the United States, of Textiles or Textile products”.
The current American concept of “fairness in trade” reminds Biswajit Dhar of Gladstone’s remark made more than a century ago under similar situation: “It (fairness in trade) bears suspicious likeness to our old friend protection.”
The decline in the economic strength of the United States started in the 1960s. The process of the end of its hegemony commenced around 1973. By the 1980s the United States had come to be established as the economic power going rapidly downhill. Several authors like Linder and others have predicted the end of the US hegemony in the international economy during the early period of the next century. With every new setback, the US has been deviating progressively from the principle of free trade, and by this time it has completely abandoned that once-sacred doctrine. These recent developments and deviations in the US trade strategy have been aptly elaborated by Biswajit Dhar in his The Decline of Free Trade and US Trade Policy Today.
Promoting Protectionism
At the level of policy, the demise of ‘non-interventionist’ mode can be seen clearly in the case of US where trade administration has adopted an “activist” trade policy, particularly during the last two decades. While the increased doses of protectionism formed the core of the nature of State intervention in the earlier years-seeking increased market-access of US products by compelling its partner countries to change their policies and become “more open”. Protectionism has now become the sole thrust of the policy-initiative in recent years. Trade legislation in US since 1974 indicates this trend. The Omnibus Trade and Competitiveness Act of 1988, particularly through its two new provisions, namely, Super 301 and Special 301, unfolds fully the intentions
of the policymakers.
Bharat on radar
In May 1989, the United States Trade Representative (USTR) identified three countries: Bharat, Japan and Brazil, and put them on the list of priority countries for action under Super 301; and six trade-distorting practices the ‘priority practices of these countries were identified; Bharat was found to restrict US exports from entering its markets through two “priority practices”.
(a) Foreign investors in the country were required to export a part of the produce, and to use locally produced inputs, thereby causing trade distortions; and
(b) US service industries were prevented from competing in the Bharatiya market. Bharat’s market was completely closed to foreign insurance companies.
A new list of ‘priority practices’ under Super 301 was issued in April, 1990. The list had two cases and both involved Bharat. The two priority practices of Bharat listed in 1989 were again included in the 1990 list. Japan and Brazil were excluded. Trade barriers to insurance and investment in Bharat were particularly irritating.
In 1989 and 1990, four countries — Bharat, China, Thailand and Brazil, were put on the priority watch list. In April 1991, USTR decided to initiate proceedings under the Special 301 clause. Bharat, China and Thailand were named as priority countries for action under Special 301.
Propaganda in the name of Liberalism
The US is insisting upon free trade and the so-called ‘liberalisation’. The US experts have excelled Dr Goebels in the propaganda techniques. “Repeat a lie hundred times, and it becomes the truth”, Dr Goebels said. Hitler went a step further. He said that if a lie is to be circulated, you should not give a simple lie, give a big bluff — so big that people will not be able, because of the magnitude of the given lie, to suspect that such a big news may be a lie. Because of the American propaganda, the doctrine of economic liberalisation became popular in the last two decades. De-regulation and privatisation have acquired respectability and authenticity. The International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank have been striving to sell ‘liberalisation’ doctrine to the third world countries by imposing on the debtor countries.
The General Agreement on tariffs and Trade (GATT) and the US are preaching the free trade principle as a sacred gospel truth. But the US is itself violating this “sacred” principle. The US is also violating the standards evolved by the International Organisation for Standardisation. The US public procurement policies are not in conformity with the GATT Government Procurement code. ‘Buy American’ restrictions cover vast area. There were thirty-one significant cases of special protection which covered four broad sectors — manufacturing, mining, agriculture and fisheries. Some other services also are being given protection. It is subsidising heavily its farm sector, while demanding that other countries should withdraw all subsidies to that sector. It is following double-standards in case of pharmaceutical sector also.
Bullying tactics of US
These are clearly the unprincipled bullying tactics. The culprits in this crime are the rulers and the big capitalists of the US — not its common masses who are themselves kept in the dark about developments on economic front. These bullying tactics are being employed not only against the southern, developing countries, but also against European community and North American peoples.
Swadeshi is the solution
US is a down-right fraud. The Hindu version of globalisation is fairly well-known to all Hindus who are not self-alienated: For them the elaboration of Hindu concept may be a superfluous repetition of whatever they know already. For the benefit of the de-Hinduised Hindus, a brief restatement of the same may, however, be helpful here.
Pandit Deendayal Upadhyaya, who could conceive of the Central State Authority without stateism, envisaged evolution of the world state enriched by the growth and contribution of different national cultures, as well as the flowering of the Manava Dharma, enriched by the perfection of all the religions including ‘materialism”.
Revered Shri Guruji believed that the world unity and human welfare can be made real only to the extent mankind realises the ultimate, absolute Vedantic truth that “all is one”. What he implied was not elimination of all distinctive features of nations and rolling them all into one uniform pattern. He visualised various groups of peoples coming together in a spirit of familism realising the innate oneness of mankind while preserving their individual identities and special characteristics. The different human groups are marching forward, all towards the same goal, each in its own way and in keeping with its own characteristic genius. The destruction of the special characteristics, whether of an individual or of a group, will destroy not only the natural beauty of harmony but also its joy of self-expression.
This Hindu concept has been elucidated elaborately by Rishi Aurobindo who envisaged the still further stage of ‘mass spiritualism’. With this mental background, our rishis conceived of the ‘One World State’.
‘पृथिव्यै समुद्रपर्यन्ताया एकराट्’
“From sea to sea, over all the land, one State.”
This is genuine globalisation. In its absence, the world cannot go beyond the abortive experiments of the League of Nations or the UNO.
(Excerpts from the article originally published in Organiser on January 2, 1994)
