A Pivotal Dais for Diplomacy

Despite Having Generated Many Global Benefits (including poverty reduction), globalization has been under attack from the political left, right and populists of different types. Unfortunately, its ardent defenders—often well-meaning liberals—have not helped the cause. Caught between the doomsayers who warn against the dire consequences of deglobalization and denialists who argue that reports of discontent are greatly exaggerated, the political and intellectual space for a serious and much-needed reform of economic interdependence has narrowed. Globalization is undoubtedly worth preserving for the many gains that it brings to many people. But this, in turn, requires a fundamental reconsideration of both its direction and scale. In this essay, I present a brief overview of the problems inherent in the current model of globalization. In the second section, I explain why Bharat may be uniquely placed to lead the way towards a more secure, inclusive and sustainable globalization. The Raisina Dialogue can serve as the flagship for this for reasons that I outline in the third section. In the same section, I offer an agenda for future research and dialogue.

THE LIMITS OF GLOBALIZATION

The critique and questioning of globalization are far from new. But the discontent has grown over the last decade and entered the mainstream. In part, the backlash against globalization is a product of inadequate narratives on the part of the pro-globalizers. While the sceptics and critics have been vociferous and visible in advancing the anti-globalization story, the supporters of globalization have worked quietly under the assumption that globalization did not need ‘selling’ because its benefits should be obvious to all.

The election of Donald J. Trump to the US presidency, with his ‘America First’ agenda, and the Brexit Referendum in 2016 provided powerful illustrations of the widespread appeal of an anti-globalization narrative. Importantly, this is not just an issue of ‘communication’ or framing. As the years have gone by, the content of globalization has also left much to be desired. Three deficits—involving security, sustainability and ownership—render the current model of globalization precarious.

First, increasingly integrated global value chains, which form a core part of globalization today, have also created new security vulnerabilities that some states are better able to exploit and hold to ransom than others. Second, although globalization has contributed to the increasing prosperity and longevity of humans globally, this has come at horrific costs to other species that inhabit the planet. For instance, the World Wildlife Fund reports ‘an average 69 per cent decline in the relative abundance of monitored wildlife populations around the world between 1970 and 2018’. Factory farming, export of live animals, trade in animal parts, encroachment on wild lands and forests—all intrinsic parts of the globalization that many of us have known and cherished—have resulted in needless suffering and death, biodiversity loss, as well as adverse effects on human health (including pandemics). Third, despite repeated pronouncements in the West that the North–South divide is a thing of the past, large swathes of the ‘Global South’ have been united in their frustration with the international institutions that govern diverse aspects of globalization. This discontent is evident within international organizations (ranging from the UN Security Council to the World Trade Organization, or WTO) as well as in the parallel institutions that have emerged (such as the expanded BRICS and the India-led Voice of the Global South Summit).

Fixing these problems will be a tall order, but it is clear that a business-as-usual approach will also not work. A balance between idealism and pragmatism is needed, together with some out-of-the-box thinking. The India that is Bharat has much to offer in this regard.

THE BHARAT WAY?

Bharat has many strengths to draw on as a world leader to reshape globalization: its experience—even before its emergence as independent India—in negotiating the institutions of global order, long-standing democratic credentials and civilizational identity allow it to turn to ancient ideas that sometimes serve as a useful guide to tackle modern problems. I offer three pathways that could form a part of a Bharatiya approach to globalization, which would begin to address the problems identified in the previous section.

A SECURE GLOBALIZATION

First, even at a time when the rest of the world was gungho about pushing for globalization, India maintained considerable caution. This was evident in its trade negotiations, both under the umbrella of the General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade (GATT) as well as the WTO. For the negotiation positions that it took, it encountered (sometimes bitter) critique. Today—although some of that critique still persists—India is far from alone in its scepticism about over-reliance on global markets. While its emphasis on food security and the issue of public stockholding continue to encounter resistance in the WTO, its own emphasis on manufacturing via Atmanirbhar Bharat has parallels in the industrial policies of developed countries.

(Excerpted with permission from S Jaishankar & Samir Saran’s ‘Rasina Chronicles’; published by Rupa Publications)