Shrinking Violets in the Global Village

In the normal course of things, one keeps tripping over them wherever they can be expected to get most attention and accomplish little. They come on TV shows and accuse each other of chicanery; they create issues where none exist; they worry audibly about our morals while possessing none themselves; they embezzle our money and wail about the disastrous state of our economy; they nearly dislocate their shoulders patting themselves on the back for every little thing they have ever done including wringing the hands of some dispirited dispossessed farmer in a remote village in an effort to show us theis caring side before they embarks on their State visits to the Swiss Alps or some other exotic place.

I am talking of politicians of course. The mummy-daddy (or ‘mai-baap’) of us all who have an opinion (often erroneous) on everything and anything and are forever assuring us (in vain) that they want to make the world a better place (just like Michael Jackson). Well, guess what? The world could do with a little improvement right about now. So this would be the time for them to step up. Except… they keep disappearing on us.

One has largely ceased expecting better things of our politicians but can they have so wholeheartedly embraced the thought that all politics is local to the extent that none of them can be found willing to address the pressing concerns of the world today? Unlike, say, twenty years ago, when even nobody wanted to be a statesman. Everybody would rather be a ‘grass-roots leader’ or ‘legislator’ and pay rigid attention to their Swiss Bank account or the immigration status of their mistress’ imported nanny. Time was when no one had yet lived with the term ‘globalization’ long enough to verbalize the idea that no nation is an island, despite its geography. Yet, in spite of their ignorance, politicians tried their best to lead, sometimes with disastrous results and often out of less than altruistic design, but at least they tried.

But in our enlightened times you can’t get a politician to act as a world leader except in the most desultory way. Instead, the masses starved for leadership look increasingly towards celebrities willing to step into the breach. Bono and Oprah between them, for example, have probably done more for the poor in Africa than all the halfhearted promises of the G 7. This is because celebrities involved in causes have the will and the freedom to put their money and their energies where their mouth is. In fact, if they didn’t, it would soon invite excoriating attacks by a Press only too quick to dismiss them as inveterate publicity seekers.

State officials and international civil servants, on the other hand, are grievously hampered by a lack of political will, the prime ingredient in a multi-lateral action of the kind needed to rectify the many ills that stalk our world such as climate change, poverty, infectious disease, terrorism, etc. Unfortunately we the people are further jinxed by the fact that where there is political will, there is no power; where there is adequate power, there is little interest.

Consider the greatest statesman of our times, Nelson Mandela – Nobel Laureate, anti-apartheid icon once called a terrorist by US Vice-President Dick Cheney among others, the grieving father of a son dead from AIDS, and a former President of South Africa. His authority is not derived so much from his former office, but from his personal struggles against injustice and the concerns most dear to his people viz. poverty and the spread of infectious disease. When he appeared in London alongside a banner that said “Make Poverty History”, people gathered in their thousands and the politicians gave them their polite interest and there the matter stopped.

On the other end is Tony Blair – a man whose authority is definitely derived from his title. For some time past he has espoused the cause of Africa’s poor and famously declared, “Africa is a scar on the conscience of humanity.” Yet the best that Mr. Blair and the G7 Finance Ministers could come up with was an idea to hold an international lottery, the proceeds of which will settle foreign debt incurred by Heavily Indebted Poor Countries (HIPCs), a group of 37 African nations, two Latin American and one Asian.

Perhaps if Mr. Blair and Mr. Mandela worked in unison, we may see some progress but such cooperation will be a hollow feat if it is only Mr. Blair and Mr. Mandela who step forward. But their colleagues seem far too involved in the financial aspects of the global village to pay much attention to the society that is being shaped by those finances.

The exhilaration of free market movement and its attendant riches on a planet being rapidly depleted of its natural resources means that most modern day governments are merely an upgraded version of the ones that once promoted colonization. The big business bogey that haunts many earnest young socialists and their aging mentors becomes a reality in the international corridors of power when it is allowed to influence economic and foreign policy.

Jaws dropped in unison at this year’s meet of G 7 Finance Ministers, when the Indian Finance Minister – an invitee – publicly addressed the inequality of globalization as it is currently practiced. In his words, “…the terms [of globalization today] are heavily weighted in favor of the developed countries. Millions of people in the developing countries, and in the least developed countries watch in silence, and with a growing sense of bitterness, that the Age of Prosperity is passing them by. This does not augur well for either globalization or stability.”

He was studiously ignored, at home more than abroad, for his pains even though this was a significant statement, coming from a man hailed as the second most famous face of the Indian economic miracle. However, the lack of leadership amongst nations means that although many other governments around the world (China and Brazil among others) hold the same views, nothing much is likely to be done about it.

The folly of such ostrich-like behavior is only too visible in the increasing amounts of violence to be found in the world today. Whether it’s the young Jihadists or the ethnic insurgency groups plaguing various countries, one of the biggest and most undervalued reasons for terrorism is economics. Young people everywhere are finding that globalization and technological advancement have succeeded in creating immense wealth but has left them behind – whether it is in the United States, the Middle East, Europe, South Asia or South East Asia, each for circumstances peculiar to it.

It is a fallacy to suppose that the creation of wealth must be the sole objective of modern governments participating in the global village. Creation of wealth means nothing to most of the 6.5 billion human beings alive today unless other economic factors are also looked after. For example, creation of employment opportunities allows the common man to partake of the wealth created by state and international economic forces. But people can only enjoy this wealth if their taxation systems are regularized and income-friendly. This has a direct impact on the quality of life of the average person, as do things like health care and infrastructure such as transport, electricity, water and telecommunications, etc. And a better quality of life is a step towards building a more stable nation. Which leads to a better world. For you and for me.

Now if only ‘world leaders’ can be coaxed from their lecture tours, ski resorts and magazine covers to actually lead the world...