Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Table of Contents
Neocolonialism ........................................................................................................................................ 3 Quotes about Neo-Colonialism ................................................................................................................ 5 Origins of the term: charges against former colonial powers.................................................................... 5 Pan-African and Nonaligned movements ................................................................................................. 6 Paternalistic neocolonialism .................................................................................................................... 7 Françafrique ............................................................................................................................................ 7 Francophone ........................................................................................................................................... 8 Belgian Congo.......................................................................................................................................... 8 United Kingdom....................................................................................................................................... 8 Neocolonialism as economic dominance.................................................................................................. 8 Dependency theory ............................................................................................................................... 10 The Cold War ......................................................................................................................................... 10 Multinational corporations .................................................................................................................... 11 Defense of investment........................................................................................................................... 11 International financial institutions ......................................................................................................... 11 Neocolonialism allegations against the IMF ........................................................................................... 12 Alternatives to IMF Influence ................................................................................................................. 13 Sino-African relations ............................................................................................................................ 13 South Korea's land acquisitions.............................................................................................................. 14 Other approaches to the concept of neocolonialism .......................................................................... 15 Cultural theory ...................................................................................................................................... 15 Post colonialism theory.......................................................................................................................... 15 Critical theory ........................................................................................................................................ 16 Conservation and Neocolonialism .......................................................................................................... 16 The mechanisms of neo-colonialism ...................................................................................................... 16 The myth of Neo-colonialism ................................................................................................................. 29 Colonialism bred political crisis .............................................................................................................. 29 Real or false Independence.................................................................................................................... 32 Integration into global market ............................................................................................................... 34 The idea of progress .............................................................................................................................. 35 1|P ag e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Modernization requires internal changes............................................................................................... 36 China s Neo-colonialism......................................................................................................................... 38 Counting on China ................................................................................................................................. 39 Worrying trends .................................................................................................................................... 40

2|P ag e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Neocolonialism
Neocolonialism is a term used by post-colonial critics of developed countries' involvement in the developing world. Writings within the theoretical framework of neocolonialism argue that existing or past international economic arrangements created by former colonial powers were or are used to maintain control of their former colonies and dependencies after the colonial independence movements of the post-World War II period. The term neocolonialism can combine a critique of current actual colonialism (where some states continue administrating foreign territories and their populations in violation of United Nations resolutions[1]) and a critique of the involvement of modern capitalist businesses in nations which were former colonies. Critics adherent to neocolonialism contend that multinational corporations continue to exploit the resources of post-colonial states, and that this economic control inherent to neocolonialism is akin to the classical, European colonialism practiced from the 16th to the 20th centuries. In broader usage, neocolonialism may simply refer to the involvement of powerful countries in the affairs of less powerful countries; this is especially relevant in modern Latin America. In this sense, neocolonialism implies a form of contemporary, economic imperialism: that powerful nations behave like colonial powers of imperialism, and that this behavior is likened to colonialism in a post-colonial world. Neocolonialism can be defined as the continuation of the economic model of colonialism after a colonized territory has achieved formal political independence. This concept was applied most commonly to Africa in the latter half of the twentieth century. European countries had colonized most of the continent in the late nineteenth century, instituting a system of economic exploitation in which African raw materials, particularly cash crops and minerals, were expropriated and exported to the sole benefit of the colonizing power. The idea of neocolonialism, however, suggests that when European powers granted nominal political independence to colonies in the decades after World War II, they continued to control the economies of the new African countries. The concept of neocolonialism has several theoretical influences. First and foremost, it owes much to Marxist thinking. Writing in the late nineteenth century, Karl Marx argued that capitalism represented a stage in the socioeconomic development of humanity. He believed that, ultimately and inevitably, the capitalist system in industrially developed countries would be overthrown by a revolution of the working class; this would result in the establishment of socialist utopias. In 1916, Vladimir Lenin modified this thesis, claiming that the rapid expansion of European imperialism around the world in the last decade of the nineteenth century had marked the highest stage of capitalism. Presumably, then, the end of imperialism (which Lenin believed would be the result of World War I) would mark the beginning of the end of capitalism. However, neither imperialism nor
3|P ag e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

capitalism came to an end after the war or in future years. European empires persisted well into the 1960s. With the granting of independence to colonies, a theory of modernization took hold. This suggested that independent countries would begin to develop very rapidly, politically and economically, and would resemble "modern" Western countries. It soon became clear, however, that this was not happening. Postcolonial theorists now sought answers for the continued underdevelopment of African countries and found a second influence in dependency theory. Dependency theory first gained prominence as a way to explain the underdevelopment of Latin American economies in the 1960s. It proclaims that underdevelopment persisted because highly developed countries dominated underdeveloped economies by paying low prices for agricultural products and flooding those economies with cheap manufactured goods. This resulted in a perpetually negative balance of payments that prevented underdeveloped countries from ever becoming competitive in the global marketplace. Economic theorists of postcolonial Africa, such as Walter Rodney and Samir Amin, combined the Marxist-Leninist concept of colonialism as a stage of capitalism with the concept of underdevelopment to create the concept of neocolonialism, which Kwame Nkrumah called "the last stage of imperialism." According to Rodney and Amin, European countries, and increasingly the United States, dominated the economies of African countries through neocolonialism in several ways. After independence, the main revenue base for African countries continued to be the export of raw materials; this resulted in the underdevelopment of African economies, while Western industries thrived. A good example of this process is the West African cocoa industry in the 1960s: during this time, production increased rapidly in many African countries; overproduction, however, led to a reduction in the selling price of cocoa worldwide. Neocolonial theorists therefore proclaimed that economies based on the production of cash crops such as cocoa could not hope to develop, because the world system imposes a veritable ceiling on the revenue that can be accrued from their production. Likewise, the extraction and export of minerals could not serve to develop an African economy, because minerals taken from African soil by Western-owned corporations were shipped to Europe or America, where they were turned into manufactured goods, which were then resold to African consumers at value-added prices. A second method of neocolonialism, according to the theory's adherents, was foreign aid. The inability of their economies to develop after independence soon led many African countries to enlist this aid. Believers in the effects of neocolonialism feel that accepting loans from Europe or America proved the link between independent African governments and the exploitative forces of former colonizers. They note as evidence that most foreign aid has been given in the form of loans, bearing high rates of interest; repayment of these

4|P ag e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

loans contributed to the underdevelopment of African economies because the collection of interest ultimately impoverished African peoples. The forces of neocolonialism did not comprise former colonial powers alone, however. Theorists also saw the United States as an increasingly dominant purveyor of neocolonialism in Africa. As the Cold War reached its highest tensions at roughly the same time that most African countries achieved independence, many theorists believed that the increasing levels of American aid and intervention in the affairs of independent African states were designed to keep African countries within the capitalist camp and prevent them from aligning with the Soviet Union.

Quotes about Neo-Colonialism
"History has shown that where the Great Powers cannot colonize, they balkanize. This is what they did to the Austro-Hungarian Empire and this is what they have done and are doing in Africa. If we allow ourselves to be Balkanized, we shall be re-colonized and be picked off one after the other...." "By far the greatest wrong which the departing colonialists inflicted on us, and which we now continue to inflict on ourselves in our present state of disunity, was to leave us divided into economically unviable States which bear no possibility of real development...." "Common territory, language and culture may in fact be present in a nation, but the existence of a nation does not necessarily imply the presence of all three. Common territory and language alone may form the basis of a nation. Similarly, common territory plus common culture may be the basis. In some cases, only one of the three applies. A state may exist on a multi-national basis. The community of economic life is the major feature within a nation, and it is the economy which holds together the people living in a territory. It is on this basis that the new Africans recognize themselves as potentially one nation, whose domination is the entire African continent." Class Struggle in Africa"

Origins of the term: charges against former colonial powers
"As long as imperialism exists it will, by definition, exert its domination over other countries. Today that domination is called neocolonialism."The term neocolonialism first saw widespread use, particularly in reference to Africa, soon after the process of decolonization which followed a struggle by many national independence movements in the colonies following World War II. Upon gaining independence, some national leaders and opposition groups argued that their countries were being subjected to a new form of
5|P ag e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

colonialism, waged by the former colonial powers and other developed nations. Kama Nkrumah, who in 1957 became leader of newly independent Ghana, was one of the most notable figures to use the term. A classical definition of neocolonialism is given in his Neo-Colonialism, the Last Stage of Imperialism (1965). The work is self-defined as an extension of Lenin's Imperialism, the Last Stage of Capitalism (1916), in which Lenin argues that 19th century imperialism is predicated upon the needs of the capitalist system.[4] Nkrumah argues that "In place of colonialism as the main instrument of imperialism we have today neo-colonialism. [...] Neo-colonialism, like colonialism, is an attempt to export the social conflicts of the capitalist countries." He continues: The result of neo-colonialism is that foreign capital is used for the exploitation rather than for the development of the less developed parts of the world. Investment under neocolonialism increases rather than decreases the gap between the rich and the poor countries of the world. The struggle against neo-colonialism is not aimed at excluding the capital of the developed world from operating in less developed countries. It is aimed at preventing the financial power of the developed countries being used in such a way as to impoverish the less developed.

Pan-African and Nonaligned movements
Initially the term was popularized largely through the activities of scholars and leaders from the newly independent states of Africa and the Pan-Africans movement. Many of these leaders came together with those of other post colonial states at the Bandung Conference of 1955, leading to the formation of the Non-Aligned Movement. The AllAfrican Peoples' Conference (AAPC) meetings of the late 1950s and early 1960s spread this critique of neocolonialism. Their Tunis conference of 1960 and Cairo conference of 1961 specified their opposition to what they labeled neocolonialism, singling out the French Community of independent states organized by the former colonial power. In its four pages Resolution on Neocolonialism is cited as a landmark for having presented a collectively arrived at definition of neocolonialism and a description of its main features. Throughout the Cold War, the Non-Aligned Movement, as well as organizations like the Organization of Solidarity with the People of Asia, Africa and Latin America defined neocolonialism as a primary collective enemy of these independent states. Denunciations of neocolonialism also became popular with some national independence movements while they were still waging anti-colonial armed struggle. During the 1970s, in the Portuguese colonies of Mozambique and Angola for example, the Marxist movements FRELIMO and MPLA, which were to eventually assume power upon those nations' independence, denounced neocolonialism as well as colonialism.

6|P ag e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Paternalistic neocolonialism
The term paternalistic neocolonialism involves the belief held by a neo-colonial power that their colonial subjects benefit from their occupation. Critics of neocolonialism, arguing that this is both exploitive and racist, contend this is merely a justification for continued political hegemony and economic exploitation of past colonies, and that such justifications are the modern reformulation of the Civilizing mission concepts of the 19th century.

Françafrique
Foreign mercenaries, like these United States and British veterans training antiinsurgency troops in Sierra Leone, are often accused of being instruments of neocolonial powers. French government minister Jacques Oxcart was alleged to have used mercenaries like Bob Denary to maintain friendly governments or overthrow unfriendly governments in France's former colonies. The classic example used to define modern neocolonialism is Françafrique: a term that refers to the continuing close relationship between France and some leaders of its former African colonies. It was first used by president of the Côte d'Ivoire Félix HouphouëtBoigny, who appears to have used it in a positive sense, to refer to good relations between France and Africa, but it was subsequently borrowed by critics of this close (and they would say) unbalanced relationship. Jacques Foccart, who from 1960 was chief of staff for African matters for President Charles de Gaulle (1958±69) and then Georges Pompidou (1969±1974), is claimed to be the leading exponent of Françafrique. The term was coined by François-Xavier Verschave as the title of his criticism of French policies in Africa: La Françafrique, The longest Scandal of the Republic. In 1972, Mongo Beta, a writer in exile from Cameroon published Main base sure le Cameroun, autopsied dune decolonization ('Cruel hand on Cameroon, autopsy of a decolonization'), a critical history of recent Cameroon, which asserted that Cameroon and other colonies remained under French control in all but name, and that the postindependence political elites had actively fostered this continued dependence. Verschave, Beti and others point to a forty year post independence relationship with nations of the former African colonies, whereby French troops maintain forces on the ground (often used by friendly African leaders to quell revolts) and French corporations maintain monopolies on foreign investment (usually in the form of extraction of natural resources). French troops in Africa were (and it is argued, still are) often involved in coup d'états resulting in a regime acting in the interests of France but against its country's own interests.
7|P ag e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Those leaders closest to France (particularly during the Cold War) are presented in this critique as agents of continued French control in Africa. Those most often mentioned are the recently deceased Omar Bongo, former president of Gabon, Félix Houphouët-Boigny, former president of Côte d'Ivoire, Gnassingbé Eyadéma, former president of Togo, Denis Sassou-Nguesso, of the Republic of the Congo, Idriss Déby, president of Chad, and Hamani Diori former president of Niger.

Francophone
The French Community and the later Organisation Internationale de la Francophonie are defined by critics as agents of French neocolonial influence, especially in Africa. While the main thrust of this claim is that the Francophonie organisation is a front for French dominance of post-colonial nations, the relation with the French language is often more complex. Algerian intellectual Kateb Yacine wrote in 1966 that Francophonie is a neocolonial political machine, which only perpetuates our alienation, but the usage of French language does not mean that one is an agent of a foreign power, and I write in French to tell the French that I am not French.

Belgian Congo
After a hastened decolonization process of the Belgian Congo, Belgium continued to control, through The Société Générale de Belgium, roughly 70% of the Congolese economy following the decolonization process. The most contested part was in the province of Katanga where the Union Minière du Haut Katanga, part of the Société, had control over the mineral and resource rich province. After a failed attempt to nationalize the mining industry in the 1960s, it was reopened to foreign investment.

United Kingdom
Critics of British relations with its former African colonies point out that the United Kingdom viewed itself as a "civilizing force" bringing "progress" and modernization to its colonies. This mindset, they argue, has enabled continued military and economic dominance in some of its former colonies, and has been seen again following British intervention in Sierra Leone.[11]

Neocolonialism as economic dominance
8|P ag e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

United States President Harry S. Truman greets Mohammad Mosaddeq, Prime Minister of Iran, 1951. Mosaddeq, who had begun nationalizing US and British owned oil companies in Iran, was removed from power on August 19, 1953, in a coup d'état, supported and funded by the British and U.S. governments and led by General Fazlollah Zahedi . US President Jimmy Carter and Lt. Gen. Olusegun Obasanjo tour Lagos, Nigeria. April, 1978. Obasanjo had come to power in a coup three years earlier, and as oil rich state, courted both sides in the Cold War. "We, politely referred to as 'underdeveloped', in truth are colonial, semi-colonial or dependent countries. We are countries whose economies have been distorted by imperialism, which has abnormally developed those branches of industry or agriculture needed to complement its complex economy. 'Underdevelopment', or distorted development, brings a dangerous specialization in raw materials, inherent in which is the threat of hunger for all our peoples. We, the 'underdeveloped', are also those with the single crop, the single product, the single market. A single product whose uncertain sale depends on a single market imposing and fixing conditions. That is the great formula for imperialist economic domination." ² Che Guevara, Marxist revolutionary, 1961 In broader usage the charge of Neocolonialism has been leveled at powerful countries and transnational economic institutions who involve themselves in the affairs of less powerful countries. In this sense, 'Neocolonialism implies a form of contemporary, economic Imperialism: that powerful nations behave 'like colonial powers, and that this behavior is 'likened to' colonialism in a post-colonial world. In lieu of direct military-political control, neocolonialist powers are said to employ financial, and trade policies to dominate less powerful countries. Those who subscribe to the concept maintain this amount to a 'de facto' control over less powerful nations ('see Wallenstein¶s World Systems Theory'). Both previous colonizing states and other powerful economic states maintain a continuing presence in the economies of former colonies, especially where it concerns raw materials. Stronger nations are thus charged with interfering in the governance and economics of weaker nations to maintain the flow of such material, at prices and under conditions which unduly benefit developed nations and trans-national corporations.

9|P ag e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Dependency theory
The concept of economic neocolonialism was given a theoretical basis, in part, through the work of Dependency theory. This body of social science theories, both from developed and developing nations, is predicated on the notion that there is a center of wealthy states and a periphery of poor, underdeveloped states. Resources are extracted from the periphery and flow towards the states at the center in order to sustain their economic growth and wealth. A central concept is that the poverty of the countries in the periphery is the result of the manner of their integration of the "world system", a view to be contrasted with that of free market economists, who argue that such states are progressing on a path to full integration. This theory is based on the Marxist analysis of inequalities within the world system, dependency argues that underdevelopment of the Global South is a direct result of the development in the Global North. Neocolonialism originates from the Latin concept of letting one rule for the success of all The basis of much of this Marxist theory is in theories of the "semi-colony", which date back to the late 19th century. Proponents of such theories include Federico Brito Figueroa a Venezuelan historian who has written widely on the socioeconomic underpinnings of both colonialism and neocolonialism. Brito's works and theories strongly influenced the thinking of current Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez.

The Cold War
In the late 20th century conflict between the Soviet Union and the United States, the charge of Neocolonialism was often aimed at Western -- and less often, Soviet involvement in the affairs of developing nations. Proxy Wars, many in former colonized nations, were funded by both sides throughout this period. Cuba, the Soviet bloc, Egypt under Nasser, as well as some governments of newly independent African states, charged the United States with supporting regimes which they felt did not represent the will of their peoples, and by means both covert and overt, toppling governments which rejected the United States. The Tri continental Conference, chaired by Moroccan politician Mehdi Ben Barka was one such organization. Roughly designated as part of the Third World movement, it supported revolutionary anti-colonial action in various states, provoking the anger of the United States and France. Ben Barka himself led what was called the Commission on Neocolonialism of the organization, which focused both on the involvement of former colonial powers in post colonial states, but also contended that the United States, as leader of the capitalist world, with the primary Neocolonialist power. Much speculation remains about Ben Barka disappearance in 1965. The Tri continental Conference was succeeded organization such as Cuba's OSPAAAL (Spanish for
10 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

"Organization for Solidarity with the People of Africa, Asia and Latin America"). Such organizations, feeding into what became the Non-aligned Movement of the 1960s and 70s used Neocolonialism, in much the same way as Marxist dependency theory intellectuals did, to encompass all capitalist nations, and most especially the United States. This usage remains popular on the political left today, most especially in Latin America.

Multinational corporations
Critics of neocolonialism also argue that investment by multinational corporations enriches few in underdeveloped countries, and causes humanitarian, environmental and ecological devastation to the populations which inhabit the neo colonies. This, it is argued, results in unsustainable development and perpetual underdevelopment; a dependency which cultivates those countries as reservoirs of cheap labor and raw materials, while restricting their access to advanced production techniques to develop their own economies. In some countries, privatization of national resources, while initially leading to immediate large scale influx of investment capital, is often followed by dramatic increases in the rate of unemployment, poverty, and a decline in per-capita income. This is particularly true in the West African nations of Guinea-Bissau, Senegal, and Mauritania where fishing has historically been central to the local economy. Beginning in 1979, the European Union began brokering fishing rights contracts off the coast of West Africa. This continues to this day. Commercial unsustainable over-fishing from foreign corporations has played a significant role in the large-scale unemployment and migration of people across the region. This stands in direct opposition to United Nations Treaty on the Seas which recognizes the importance of fishing to local communities and insists that government fishing agreements with foreign companies should be targeted at surplus stocks only.

Defense of investment
Proponents of ties which critics have labeled neocolonial argue that, while the First World does profit from cheap labor and raw materials in underdeveloped nations, ultimately, it does serve as a positive modernizing force for development in the Third World.

International financial institutions
Critics of neocolonialism portray the choice to grant or to refuse granting loans (particularly those financing otherwise unplayable Third World debt), especially by international financial institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the World Bank (WB), as a decisive form of control. They argue that in order to qualify
11 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

for these loans, and other forms of economic aid, weaker nations are forced to take certain steps favorable to the financial interests of the IMF and World Bank but detrimental to their own economies. These structural adjustments have the effect of increasing rather than alleviating poverty within the nation. Some critics [emphasize that neocolonialism allows certain cartels of states, such as the World Bank, to control and exploit usually lesser developed countries (LDCs) by fostering debt. In effect, third world governments give concessions and monopolies to foreign corporations in return for consolidation of power and monetary bribes. In most cases, much of the money loaned to these LDCs is returned to the favored foreign corporations. Thus, these foreign loans are in effect subsidies to corporations of the loaning states. This collusion is sometimes referred to as the corporatocracy. Organizations accused of participating in neoimperialism include the World Bank, World Trade Organization and Group of Eight, and the World Economic Forum. Various "first world" states, notably the United States, are said to be involved, as described in Confessions of an Economic Hit Man by John Perkins.

Neocolonialism allegations against the IMF
Those who argue that neocolonialism historically supplemented (and later supplanted) colonialism, point to the fact that Africa today pays more money every year in debt service payments to the IMF and World Bank than it receives in loans from them, thereby often depriving the inhabitants of those countries from actual necessities. This dependency allows the IMF and World Bank to impose Structural Adjustment Plans upon these nations. Adjustments largely consisting of privatization programs which result in deteriorating health, education, an inability to develop infrastructure, and in general, lower living standards. They also point to recent statements made by United Nations Secretary-General's Special Economic Adviser, Professor Jeffrey Sachs, who heatedly demanded that the entire African debt (approximately $200 billion) be forgiven outright and recommended that African nations simply stop paying if the World Bank and IMF do not reciprocate: The time has come to end this charade. The debts are unaffordable. If they won't cancel the debts I would suggest obstruction; you do it yourselves. Africa should say: 'thank you very much but we need this money to meet the needs of children who are dying right now so we will put the debt servicing payments into urgent social investment in health, education, drinking water, control of AIDS and other needs.' (Professor Jeffrey Sachs, Director of the Earth Institute at Columbia University and Special Economic Advisor to UN Secretary General Kofi Annan).

12 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Critics of the IMF have conducted studies as to the effects of its policy which demands currency devaluations. They pose the argument that the IMF requires these devaluations as a condition for refinancing loans, while simultaneously insisting that the loan be repaid in dollars or other First World currencies against which the underdeveloped country's currency had been devalued. This, they say, increases the respective debt by the same percentage of the currency being devalued, therefore amounting to a scheme for keeping Third World nations in perpetual indebtedness, impoverishment and neocolonial dependence.

Alternatives to IMF Influence
Due to its large cash reserves, the Chinese government has begun playing a significant role as counter-weight to IMF influence. Its often lax lending requirements have led some countries, such as Angola in 2006, to eschew all previously planned IMF loans.

Sino-African relations
In recent years, the People's Republic of China has built increasingly stronger ties with African nations. China is currently Africa's second largest trading partner, after the United States. As of August 2007, there were an estimated 750,000 Chinese nationals working or living for extended periods in different African countries. China is picking up natural resources ² oil, precious minerals ² to feed its expanding economy and new markets for its burgeoning enterprises. In 2006, two-way trade had increased to $50 billion. Not all dealings have involved direct monetary exchanges. In 2007, the governments of China and Congo-Kinshasa entered into an agreement whereby Chinese state-owned firms would provide various services (infrastructure projects) in exchange for access to an equivalent amount of materials extracted from Congolese copper mines. Human rights advocates and opponents of the Sudanese government portray China's role in providing weapons and aircraft as a cynical attempt to obtain petroleum and natural gas just as colonial powers once supplied African chieftains with the military means to maintain control as they extracted natural resources. According to China's critics, China has offered Sudan support threatening to use its veto on the U.N. Security Council to protect Khartoum from sanctions and has been able to water down every resolution on Darfur in order to protect its interests in Sudan.

13 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

South Korea's land acquisitions
Rich governments and powerful multinationals from South Korea are rapidly buying up the rights to millions of hectares of agricultural land in developing countries in an effort to secure its own long-term food supplies. The fact that South Korea is no longer "importing" food and resources that is being cultivated overseas implies that these lands are effectively Korean. This amounts to agricultural imperialism, a new form of neocolonialism. South Korea's largely mountainous land area of just over 100,000 square kilometer houses a population of nearly 50 million, yet the country's highly industrialized trillion dollar economy was almost as large as the economy of the entire African continent in 2007. Hence, the South Korean government is now using its massive financial resources to purchase cheap land overseas for energy and food, in order to fuel one of the world's fastest growing advanced economies. South Korea's RG Energy Resources Asset Management CEO Park Yong-so stressed that "the nation does not produce a single drop of crude oil and other key industrial minerals. To power economic growth and support people's livelihoods, we cannot emphasize too much that securing natural resources in foreign countries is a must for our future survival."The head of the Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), Jacques Diouf, has warned that the controversial rise in land deals could create a form of "neo-colonialism", with poor states producing food for the rich at the expense of their own hungry people. In 2008, the South Korean multinational Daewoo Logistics secured 1.3 million hectares of farmland in Madagascar, half the size of Belgium, to grow maize and crops for befouls. Roughly half of the country's arable land, as well as rainforests of rich and unique biodiversity, were to be converted into palm and corn monocultures, producing food for export from a country where a third of the population and 50 percent of children under 5 are malnourished, using workers imported from South Africa instead of locals. Those living on the land were never consulted or informed, despite being dependent on the land for food and income. The controversial deal played a major part in prolonged anti-government protests on the island that resulted in over a hundred deaths.]Shortly after the Madagascar deal, Tanzania announced that South Korea was in talks to develop 100,000 hectares for food production and processing for 700 to 800 billion won. Scheduled to be completed in 2010, it will be the largest single piece of agricultural infrastructure South Korea has ever built overseas. In 2009, Hyundai Heavy Industries acquired a majority stake in a company cultivating 10,000 hectares of farmland in the Russian Far East and a wealthy South Korean provincial government secured 95,000 hectares of farmland in Oriental Mindoro, central Philippines, to grow corn. The South Joelle province became the first provincial government to benefit from a newly created central government fund to develop farmland overseas, receiving a cheap loan of $1.9 million for the Mindoro project. The feedstock is
14 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

expected to produce 10,000 tones of feed in the first year for South Korea. South Korean multinationals and provincial governments have also purchased land in Sulawesi, Indonesia, Cambodia and Burgan, Mongolia. The South Korean government itself announced its intention to invest 30 billion won in land in Paraguay and Uruguay. Discussions with Laos, Myanmar and Senegal are also currently underway. The South Korean government's strategy is quickly yielding results and despite predicting that farmland is shrinking on the country, the government announced in August 2009 that South Korea would enjoy a 10% increase in rice production in 2009, the first since 2005, yet there are already pile-ups of mountains of rice purchased by the government to keep rice prices stable.[36] Other approaches to the concept of neocolonialism Although the concept of neocolonialism was originally developed within a Marxist theoretical framework and is generally employed by the political left, the term Neocolonialism is also used within other theoretical frameworks.

Cultural theory
One variant of neocolonialism theory critiques the existence of cultural colonialism, the desire of wealthy nations to control other nations' values and perceptions through cultural means, such as media, language, education and religion, ultimately for economic reasons. One element of this is a critique of "Colonial Mentality" which writers have traced well beyond the legacy of 19th century colonial empires. These critics argue that people, once subject to colonial or imperial rule, latch onto physical and cultural differences between the foreigners and themselves, leading some to associate power and success with the foreigners' ways. This eventually leads to the foreigners' ways being regarded as the better way and being held in a higher esteem than previous indigenous ways. In much the same fashion, and with the same reasoning of better-ness, the colonized may over time equate the colonizers¶ race or ethnicity itself as being responsible for their superiority. Cultural rejections of colonialism, such as the Negritude movement, or simply the embracing of seemingly authentic local culture are then seen in a post colonial world as a necessary part of the struggle against domination. By the same reasoning, importation or continuation of cultural mores or elements from former colonial powers may be regarded as a form of Neocolonialism.

Post colonialism theory
Post colonialism is a set of theories in philosophy, film, political sciences and literature that deal with the cultural legacy of colonial rule. Post colonialism deals with cultural
15 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

identity in colonized societies, referencing neocolonialism as the background for contemporary dilemmas of developing a national identity after colonial rule: the ways in which writers articulate and celebrate that identity (often reclaiming it from and maintaining strong connections with the colonizer); the ways in which the knowledge of the colonized (subordinated) people has been generated and used to serve the colonizer's interests; and the ways in which the colonizer's literature has justified colonialism via images of the colonized as a perpetually inferior people, society and culture. Theories of postcolonial studies include Subaltern Studies (specifically its postcolonial manifestations), Frantz Fanon's " psychopathology of colonization", and filmmakers of the Latin American Third Cinema (such as Tomas Gutiérrez Alea of Cuba or Kidlat Tahimik of the Philippines).

Critical theory
While critiques of Post colonialism/neocolonialism theory is widely practiced in Literary theory, International Relations theory also has defined Post colonialism as a field of study. While the lasting effects of cultural colonialism is of central interest in cultural critiques of neocolonialism, their intellectual antecedents are economic theories of neocolonialism: Marxist Dependency theory and mainstream criticism of capitalist Neoliberalism. Critical international relations theory frequently references neocolonialism from Marxist positions as well as post positivist positions, including postmodernist, postcolonial and feminist approaches, which differ from both realism and liberalism in their epistemological and ontological premises.

Conservation and Neocolonialism
There have been other critiques that the modern conservation movement, as taken up by international organizations such as the World Wide Fund for Nature, has inadvertently set up a neocolonialist relationship with underdeveloped nations.

The mechanisms of neo-colonialism IN order to halt foreign interference in the affairs of developing countries it is necessary to study, understand, expose and actively combat neocolonialism in whatever guise it may appear. For the methods of neo16 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

colonialists are subtle and varied. They operate not only in the economic field, but also in the political, religious, ideological and cultural spheres. Faced with the militant peoples of the ex-colonial territories in Asia, Africa, the Caribbean and Latin America, imperialism simply switches tactics. Without a qualm it dispenses with its flags, and even with certain of its more hated expatriate officials. This means, so it claims, that it is µgiving¶ independence to its former subjects, to be followed by µaid¶ for their development. Under cover of such phrases, however, it devises innumerable ways to accomplish objectives formerly achieved by naked colonialism. It is this sum total of these modern attempts to perpetuate colonialism while at the same time talking about µfreedom¶, which has come to be known as neo-colonialism. Foremost among the neo-colonialists is the United States, which has long exercised its power in Latin America. Fumblingly at first she turned towards Europe, and then with more certainty after world war two when most countries of that continent were indebted to her. Since then, with methodical thoroughness and touching attention to detail, the Pentagon set about consolidating its ascendancy, evidence of which can be seen all around the world. Who really rules in such places as Great Britain, West Germany, Japan, Spain, Portugal or Italy? If General de Gaulle is µdefecting¶ from U.S. monopoly control, what interpretation can be placed on his µexperiments¶ in the Sahara desert, his paratroopers in Gabon, or his trips to Cambodia and Latin America? Lurking behind such questions are the extended tentacles of the Wall Street octopus. And its suction cups and muscular strength are provided by a phenomenon dubbed µThe Invisible Government¶, arising from Wall Street¶s connection with the Pentagon and various intelligence services. I quote: µThe Invisible Government ... is a loose amorphous grouping of individuals and agencies drawn from many parts of the visible government. It is not limited to the Central Intelligence Agency, although the CIA is at its heart. Nor is it confined to the nine other agencies which comprise what is known as the intelligence community: the National Security Council, the Defense Intelligence Agency, the National Security Agency, Army Intelligence, Navy Intelligence and

17 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Research, the Atomic Energy Commission and the Federal Bureau of Investigation. µThe Invisible Government includes also many other units and agencies, as well as individuals, that appear outwardly to be a normal part of the conventional government. It even encompasses business firms and institutions that are seemingly private. µTo an extent that is only beginning to be perceived, this shadow government is shaping the lives of 190,000,000 Americans. An informed citizen might come to suspect that the foreign policy of the United States often works publicly in one direction and secretly through the Invisible Government in just the opposite direction. µThis Invisible Government is a relatively new institution. It came into being as a result of two related factors: the rise of the United States after World War II to a position of preeminent world power and the challenge to that power by Soviet Communism... µBy 1964 the intelligence network had grown into a massive hidden apparatus, secretly employing about 200,000 persons and spending billions of dollars a year. [The Invisible Government, David Wise and Thomas B. Ross, Random House, New York, 1964.] Here, from the very citadel of neo-colonialism, is a description of the apparatus which now directs all other Western intelligence set-ups either by persuasion or by force. Results were achieved in Algeria during the April 1961 plot of anti-de Gaulle generals; as also in Guatemala, Iraq, Iran, Suez and the famous U-2 spy intrusion of Soviet air space
18 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

which wrecked the approaching Summit, then in West Germany and again in East Germany in the riots of 1953, in Hungary¶s abortive crisis of 1959, Poland¶s of September 1956, and in Korea, Burma, Formosa, Laos, Cambodia and South Vietnam; they are evident in the trouble in Congo (Leopoldville) which began with Lumumba¶s murder, and continues till now; in events in Cuba, Turkey, Cyprus, Greece, and in other places too numerous to catalogue completely. And with what aim have these innumerable incidents occurred? The general objective has been mentioned: to achieve colonialism in fact while preaching independence. On the economic front, a strong factor favoring Western monopolies and acting against the developing world is inter-national capital¶s control of the world market, as well as of the prices of commodities bought and sold there. From 1951 to 1961, without taking oil into consideration, the general level of prices for primary products fell by 33.l per cent, while prices of manufactured goods rose 3.5 per cent (within which, machinery and equipment prices rose 31.3 per cent). In that same decade this caused a loss to the Asian, African and Latin American countries, using 1951 prices as a basis, of some $41,400 million. In the same period, while the volume of exports from these countries rose, their earnings in foreign exchange from such exports decreased. Another technique of neo-colonialism is the use of high rates of interest. Figures from the World Bank for 1962 showed that seventy-one Asian, African and Latin American countries owed foreign debts of some $27,000 million, on which they paid in interest and service charges some $5,000 million. Since then, such foreign debts have been estimated as more than £30,000 million in these areas. In 1961, the interest rates on almost threequarters of the loans offered by the major imperialist powers amounted to more than five per cent, in some cases up to seven or eight per cent, while the call-in periods of such loans have been burdensomely short. While capital worth $30,000 million was exported to some fifty-six developing countries between 1956 and 1962, µit is estimated that interest and profit alone extracted on this sum from the debtor countries amounted to more than £15,000 million. This method of penetration by economic aid recently soared into prominence when a number of countries began rejecting it. Ceylon, Indonesia and Cambodia are among those who turned it down. Such µaid¶ is estimated on the annual average to have amounted to $2,600 million between 1951 and 1955; $4,007 million between 1956 and 1959, and $6,000 million between 1960 and 1962. But the average sums taken out of the aided countries by such donors in a sample year, 1961, are estimated to amount to $5,000 million in profits, $1,000 million in interest, and $5,800 million from non-equivalent exchange, or a total of $11,800 million extracted against $6,000 million put in. Thus, µaid¶ turns out to be another means of exploitation, a modern method of capital export under a more cosmetic name.

19 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Still another neo-colonialist trap on the economic front has come to be known as µmultilateral aid¶ through international organizations: the International Monetary Fund, the Inter-national Bank for Reconstruction and Development (known as the World Bank), the International Finance Corporation and the International Development Association are examples, all, significantly, having U.S. capital as their major backing. These agencies have the habit of forcing would-be borrowers to submit to various offensive conditions, such as supplying information about their economies, submitting their policy and plans to review by the World Bank and accepting agency supervision of their use of loans. As for the alleged development, between 1960 and mid-1963 the International Development Association promised a total of $500 million to applicants, out of which only $70 million were actually received. In more recent years, as pointed out by Monitor in The Times, 1 July 1965, there has been a substantial increase in communist technical and economic aid activities in developing countries. During 1964 the total amount of assistance offered was approximately £600 million. This was almost a third of the total communist aid given during the previous decade. The Middle East received about 40 per cent of the total, Asia 36 per cent, Africa 22 per cent and Latin America the rest. Increased Chinese activity was responsible to some extent for the larger amount of aid offered in 1964, though China contributed only a quarter of the total aid committed; the Soviet Union provided a half, and the East European countries a quarter. Although aid from socialist countries still falls far short of that offered from the west, it is often more impressive, since it is swift and flexible, and interest rates on communist loans are only about two per cent compared with five to six per cent charged on loans from western countries. Nor is the whole story of µaid¶ contained in figures, for there are conditions which hedge it around: the conclusion of commerce and navigation treaties; agreements for economic co-operation; the right to meddle in internal finances, including currency and foreign exchange, to lower trade barriers in favor of the donor country¶s goods and capital; to protect the interests of private investments; determination of how the funds are to be used; forcing the recipient to set up counterpart funds; to supply raw materials to the donor; and use of such funds a majority of it, in fact to buy goods from the donor nation. These conditions apply to industry, commerce, agriculture, shipping and insurance, apart from others which are political and military. So-called µinvisible trade¶ furnishes the Western monopolies with yet another means of economic penetration. Over 90 per cent of world ocean shipping is controlled by me imperialist countries. They control shipping rates and, between 1951 and 1961, they increased them some five times in a total rise of about 60 per cent, the upward trend continuing. Thus, net annual freight expenses incurred by Asia, Africa and Latin America
20 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

amount to no less than an estimated $1,600 million. This is over and above all other profits and interest payments. As for insurance payments, in 1961 alone these amounted to an unfavorable balance in Asia, Africa and Latin America of some additional $370 million. Having waded through all this, however, we have begun to understand only the basic methods of neo-colonialism. The full extent of its inventiveness is far from exhausted. In the labor field, for example, imperialism operates through labor arms like the Social Democratic parties of Europe led by the British Labor Party, and through such instruments as the International Confederation of Free Trade Unions (ICFTU), now apparently being superseded by the New York Africa-American Labor Centre (AALC) under AFL-CIO chief George Meany and the well-known CIA man in labor¶s top echelons, Irving Brown. In 1945, out of the euphoria of anti-fascist victory, the World Federation of Trade Unions (WFTU) had been formed, including all world labor except the U.S. American Federation of Labor (AFL). By 1949, however, led by the British Trade Union Congress (TUC), a number of pro-imperialist labor bodies in the West broke away from the WFTU over the issue of anti-colonialist liberation, and set up the ICFTU. For ten years it continued under British TUC leadership. Its record in Africa, Asia and Latin America could gratify only the big international monopolies which were extracting super-profits from those areas. In 1959, at Brussels, the United States AFL-CIO union centre fought for and won control of the ICFTU Executive Board. From then on a flood of typewriters, mimeograph machines, cars, supplies, buildings, salaries and, so it is still averred, outright bribes for labor leaders in various parts of the developing world rapidly linked ICFTU in the minds of the rank and file with the CIA. To such an extent did its prestige suffer under these American bosses that, in 1964, the AFL-CIO brains felt it necessary to establish a fresh outfit? They set up the AALC in New York right across the river from the United Nations. µAs a steadfast champion of national independence, democracy and social justice¶, unblushingly stated the April 1965 Bulletin put out by this Centre, µthe AFL-CIO will strengthen its efforts to assist the advancement of the economic conditions of the African peoples. Toward this end, steps have been taken to expand assistance to the African
21 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

free trade unions by organizing the African-American Labor Centre. Such assistance will help African labor play a vital role in the economic and democratic up building of their countries.' The March issue of this Bulletin, however, gave the game away: µIn mobilizing capital resources for investment in Workers Education, Vocational Training, Co-operatives, Health Clinics and Housing, the Centre will work with both private and public institutions. It will also encourage labor-management co-operation to expand American capital investment in the African nations.¶ The italics are mine. Could anything be plainer? Following a pattern previously set by the ICFTU, it has already started classes: one for drivers and mechanics in Nigeria, one in tailoring in Kenya. Labor scholarships are being offered to Africans who want to study trade unionism in of all places-Austria, ostensibly by the Austrian unions. Elsewhere, labor, organized into political parties of which the British Labor Party is a leading and typical example, has shown a similar aptitude for encouraging µLabor-management co-operation to expand . . . capital investment in African nations.' But as the struggle sharpens, even these measures of neo-colonialism are proving too mild. So Africa, Asia and Latin America have begun to experience a round of coups d'etat or would-be coups, together with a series of political assassinations which have destroyed in their political primes some of the newly emerging nation¶s best leaders. To ensure success in these endeavors, the imperialists have made widespread and wily use of ideological and cultural weapons in the form of intrigues, man oeuvres and slander campaigns. Some of these methods used by neo-colonialists to slip past our guard must now be examined. The first is retention by the departing colonialists of various kinds of privileges which infringe on our sovereignty: that of setting up military bases or stationing troops in former colonies and the supplying of µadvisers¶ of one sort or another. Sometimes a number of µrights¶ are demanded: land concessions, prospecting rights for minerals and/or oil; the µright¶ to collect customs, to carry out administration, to issue paper money; to be exempt from customs duties and/or taxes for expatriate enterprises; and, above all, the µright¶ to provide µaid¶. Also demanded and granted are privileges in the cultural field; that Western information services are exclusive; and that those from socialist countries are excluded. Even the cinema stories of fabulous Hollywood are loaded. One has only to listen to the cheers of an African audience as Hollywood¶s heroes slaughter red Indians or Asiatic to
22 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

understand the effectiveness of this weapon. For, in the developing continents, where the colonialist heritage has left a vast majority still illiterate, even the smallest child gets the message contained in the blood and thunder stories emanating from California. And along with murder and the Wild West goes an incessant barrage of anti-socialist propaganda, in which the trade union man, the revolutionary, or the man of dark skin is generally cast as the villain, while the policeman, the gum-shoe, the Federal agent ² in a word, the CIA ² type spy is ever the hero. Here, truly, is the ideological under-belly of those political murders which so often use local people as their instruments. While Hollywood takes care of fiction, the enormous monopoly press, together with the outflow of slick, clever, expensive magazines, attends to what it chooses to call µnews. Within separate countries, one or two news agencies control the news handouts, so that a deadly uniformity is achieved, regardless of the number of separate newspapers or magazines; while internationally, the financial preponderance of the United States is felt more and more through its foreign correspondents and offices abroad, as well as through its influence over inter-national capitalist journalism. Under this guise, a flood of antiliberation propaganda emanates from the capital cities of the West, directed against China, Vietnam, Indonesia, Algeria, Ghana and all countries which hack out their own independent path to freedom. Prejudice is rife. For example, wherever there is armed struggle against the forces of reaction, the nationalists are referred to as rebels, terrorists, or frequently µcommunist terrorists'! Perhaps one of the most insidious methods of the neo-colonialists is evangelism. Following the liberation movement there has been a veritable riptide of religious sects, the overwhelming majority of them American. Typical of these are Jehovah¶s Witnesses who recently created trouble in certain developing countries by busily teaching their citizens not to salute the new national flags. µReligion¶ was too thin to smother the outcry that arose against this activity, and a temporary lull followed. But the number of evangelists continues to grow. Yet even evangelism and the cinema are only two twigs on a much bigger tree. Dating from the end of 1961, the U.S. has actively developed a huge ideological plan for invading the so-called Third World, utilizing all its facilities from press and radio to Peace Corps. During 1962 and 1963 a number of international conferences to this end were held in several places, such as Nicosia in Cyprus, San Jose in Costa Rica, and Lagos in Nigeria. Participants included the CIA, the U.S. Information Agency (USIA), and the Pentagon, the International Development Agency, the Peace Corps and others. Programmers were drawn up which included the systematic use of U.S. citizens abroad in virtual intelligence activities and propaganda work. Methods of recruiting political agents and of forcing µalliances¶ with the U.S.A. were worked out. At the centre of its programmers lay the

23 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

demand for an absolute U.S. monopoly in the field of propaganda, as well as for counteracting any independent efforts by developing states in the realm of information. The United States sought, and still seeks, with considerable success, to co-ordinate on the basis of its own strategy the propaganda activities of all Western countries. In October 1961, a conference of NATO countries was held in Rome to discuss problems of psychological warfare. It appealed for the organization of combined ideological operations in Afro-Asian countries by all participants. In May and June 1962 a seminar was convened by the U.S. in Vienna on ideological warfare. It adopted a secret decision to engage in a propaganda offensive against the developing countries along lines laid down by the U.S.A. It was agreed that NATO propaganda agencies would, in practice if not in the public eye, keep in close contact with U.S. Embassies in their respective countries. Among instruments of such Western psychological warfare are numbered the intelligence agencies of Western countries headed by those of the United States µInvisible Government¶. But most significant among them all are Moral Re-Armament QARA), the Peace Corps and the United States Information Agency (USIA). Moral Re-Armament is an organization founded in 1938 by the American, Frank Buchman. In the last days before the Second World War, it advocated the appeasement of Hitler, often extolling Himmler, the Gestapo chief. In Africa, MRA incursions began at the end of World War II. Against the big anti-colonial upsurge that followed victory in 1945, MRA spent millions advocating collaboration between the forces oppressing the African peoples and those same peoples. It is not without significance that Moose Thumbed and Joseph Kasavubu of Congo (Leopoldville) are both MRA supporters. George Seldes, in his book One Thousand Americans, characterized MRA as a fascist organization µsubsidized by . . . Fascists, and with a long record of collaboration with Fascists the world over. . . .¶ This description is supported by the active participation in MRA of people like General Carpenter, former commander of NATO land forces, and General Ho Ying-chin, one of Chiang Kai-shek¶s top generals. To cap this, several newspapers, some of them in the Western; world, have claimed that MRA is actually subsidized by the CIA. When MRA¶s influence began to fail, some new instrument to cover the ideological arena was desired. It came in the establishment of the American Peace Corps in 1961 by President John Kennedy, with Sergeant Shriver, Jr., his brother-in-law, in charge. Shriver, a millionaire who made his pile in land speculation in Chicago, was also known as the friend, confidant and co-worker of the former head of the Central Intelligence Agency, Allen Dulles. These two had worked together in both the Office of Strategic Services, U.S. war-time intelligence agency, and in the CIA.

24 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Shriver¶s record makes a mockery of President Kennedy¶s alleged instruction to Shriver to µkeep the CIA out of the Peace Corps¶. So does the fact that, although the Peace Corps is advertised as a voluntary organization, all its members are carefully screened by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI). Since its creation in 1961, members of the Peace Corps have been exposed and expelled from many African, Middle Eastern and Asian countries for acts of subversion or prejudice. Indonesia, Tanzania, the Philippines, and even pro-West countries like Turkey and Iran, have complained of its activities. However, perhaps the chief executor of U.S. psychological warfare is the United States Information Agency (USIA). Even for the wealthiest nation on earth, the U.S. lavishes an unusual amount of men, materials and money on this vehicle for its neo-colonial aims. The USIA is staffed by some 12,000 persons to the tune of more than $130 million a year. It has more than seventy editorial staffs working on publications abroad. Of its network comprising 110 radio stations, 60 are outside the U.S. Programmers are broadcast for Africa by American stations in Morocco, Eritrea, Liberia, Crete, and Barcelona, Spain, as well as from off-shore stations on American ships. In Africa alone, the USIA transmits about thirty territorial and national radio programmers whose content glorifies the U.S. while attempting to discredit countries with an independent foreign policy. The USIA boasts more than 120 branches in about 100 countries, 50 of which are in Africa alone. It has 250 centers in foreign countries, each of which is usually associated with a library. It employs about 200 cinemas and 8,000 projectors which draw upon its nearly 300 film libraries. This agency is directed by a central body which operates in the name of the U.S. President, planning and coordinating its activities in close touch with the Pentagon, CIA and other Cold War agencies, including even armed forces intelligence centers. In developing countries, the USIA actively tries to prevent expansion of national media of information so as itself to capture the market-place of ideas. It spends huge sums for publication and distribution of about sixty newspapers and magazines in Africa, Asia and Latin America. The American government backs the USIA through direct pressures on developing nations. To ensure its agency a complete monopoly in propaganda, for instance, many agreements for economic co-operation offered by the U.S. include a demand that Americans be granted preferential rights to disseminate information. At the same time, in trying to close the new nations to other sources of information, it employs other pressures. For instance, after agreeing to set up USIA information centers in their
25 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

countries, both Togo and Congo (Leopoldville) originally hoped to follow a non-aligned path and permit Russian information centers as a balance. But Washington threatened to stop all aid, thereby forcing these two countries to renounce their plan. Unbiased studies of the USIA by such authorities as Dr R. Holt of Princeton University, Retired Colonel R. Van de Veldt, former intelligence agents Mural Dyer, Wilson Wizard and others, have all called attention to the close ties between this agency and U.S. Intelligence. For example, Deputy Director Donald M. Wilson was a political intelligence agent in the U.S. Army. Assistant Director for Europe, Joseph Philips, was a successful espionage agent in several Eastern European countries. Some USIA duties further expose its nature as a top intelligence arm of the U.S. imperialists. In the first place, it is expected to analyze the situation in each country, making recommendations to its Embassy, thereby to its Government, about changes that can tip the local balance in U.S. favor. Secondly, it organizes networks of monitors for radio broadcasts and telephone conversations, while recruiting informers from government offices. It also hires people to distribute U.S. propaganda. Thirdly, it collects secret information with special reference to defense and economy, as a means of eliminating its international military and economic competitors. Fourthly, it buys its way into local publications to influence their policies, of which Latin America furnishes numerous examples. It has been active in bribing public figures, for example in Kenya and Tunisia. Finally, it finances, directs and often supplies with arms all anti-neutralist forces in the developing countries, witness Thumbed in Congo (Leopoldville) and Pak Hung Jib in South Korea. In a word, with virtually unlimited finances, there seem no bounds to its inventiveness in subversion. One of the most recent developments in neo-colonialist strategy is the suggested establishment of a Businessmen Corps which will, like the Peace Corps, act in developing countries. In an article on µU.S. Intelligence and the Monopolies¶ in International Affairs (Moscow, January 1965), V. Chernyavsky writes: µThere can hardly be any doubt that this Corps is a new U.S. intelligence organisation created on the initiative of the American monopolies to use Big Business for espionage. It is by no means unusual for U.S. Intelligence to set up its own business firms which are merely thinly disguised espionage centers. For example, according to Chernyavsky, the C.I.A. has set up a firm in Taiwan known as Western Enterprises Inc. Under this cover it sends spies and saboteurs to South China. The New Asia Trading Company, a CIA firm in India, has also helped to camouflage U.S. intelligence agents operating in South-east Asia. Such is the catalogue of neo-colonialism¶s activities and methods in our time. Upon reading it, the faint-hearted might come to feel that they must give up in despair before such an array of apparent power and seemingly inexhaustible resources.

26 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Fortunately, however, history furnishes innumerable proofs of one of its own major laws; that the budding future is always stronger than the withering past. This has been amply demonstrated during every major revolution throughout history. The American Revolution of 1776 struggled through to victory over a tangle of inefficiency, mismanagement, corruption, outright subversion and counter-revolution the like of which has been repeated to some degree in every subsequent revolution to date. The Russian Revolution during the period of Intervention, 1917 to 1922, appeared to be dying on its feet. The Chinese Revolution at one time was forced to pull out of its existing bases, lock stock and barrel, and make the unprecedented Long March; yet it triumphed. Imperialist white mercenaries who dropped so confidently out of the skies on Stanleyville after a plane trip from Ascension Island thought that their job would be µduck soup¶. Yet, till now, the nationalist forces of Congo (Leopoldville) continue to fight their way forward. They do not talk of if they will win, but only of when. Asia provides a further example of the strength of a people¶s will to determine their own future. In South Vietnam µspecial warfare¶ is being fought to hold back the tide of revolutionary change. µSpecial warfare¶ is a concept of General Maxwell Taylor and a military extension of the creed of John Foster Dulles: let Asians fight Asians. Briefly, the technique is for the foreign power to supply the money, aircraft, military equipment of all kinds, and the strategic and tactical command from a General Staff down to officer µadvisers¶, while the troops of the puppet government bear the brunt of the fighting. Yet in spite of bombing raids and the immense build-up of foreign strength in the area, the people of both North and South Vietnam are proving to be unconquerable. In other parts of Asia, in Cambodia, Laos, Indonesia, and now the Philippines, Thailand and Burma, the peoples of ex-colonial countries have stood firm and are winning battles against the allegedly superior imperialist enemy. In Latin America, despite µfinal¶ punitive expeditions, the growing armed insurrections in Colombia, Venezuala and other countries continue to consolidate gains. In Africa, we in Ghana have withstood all efforts by imperialism and its agents; Tanzania has nipped subversive plots in the bud, as have Brazzaville, Uganda and Kenya. The struggle rages back and forth. The surging popular forces may still be hampered by colonialist legacies, but nonetheless they advance inexorably. All these examples prove beyond doubt that neo-colonialism is not a sign of imperialism¶s strength but rather of its last hideous gasp. It testifies to its inability to rule any longer by old methods. Independence is a luxury it can no longer afford to permit its subject peoples, so that even what it claims to have µgiven¶ it now seeks to take away. This means that neo-colonialism can and will be defeated. How can this be done?
27 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Thus far, all the methods of neo-colonialists have pointed in one direction, the ancient, accepted one of all minorities ruling classes throughout history ² divide and rule. Quite obviously, therefore, unity is the first requisite for destroying neo-colonialism. Primary and basic is the need for an all-union government on the much divided continent of Africa. Along with that, a strengthening of the Afro-Asian Solidarity Organization and the spirit of Bandung is already under way. To it, we must seek the adherence on an increasingly formal basis of our Latin American brothers. Furthermore, all these libratory forces have, on all major issues and at every possible instance, the support of the growing socialist sector of the world. Finally, we must encourage and utilize to the full those still all too few yet growing instances of support for liberation and anti-colonialism inside the imperialist world itself. To carry out such a political programmed, we must all back it with national plans designed to strengthen ourselves as independent nations. An external condition for such independent development is neutrality or political non-alignment. This has been expressed in two conferences of Non-Aligned Nations during the recent past, the last of which, in Cairo in 1964, clearly and inevitably showed itself at one with the rising forces of liberation and human dignity. And the preconditions for all this, to which lip service is often paid but activity seldom directed, is to develop ideological clarity among the anti-imperialist, anti-colonialist, proliberation masses of our continents. They and they alone, make, maintain or break revolutions. With the utmost speed, neo-colonialism must be analyzed in clear and simple terms for the full mass understanding by the surging organizations of the African peoples. The AllAfrican Trade Union Federation (AATUF) has already made a start in this direction, while the Pan-African Youth Movement, the women, journalists, farmers and others are not far behind. BOlstered with ideological clarity, these oorganizationsclosely linked with the ruling parties where libratory forces are in power, will prove that neo-colonialism is the symptom of imperialism¶s weakness and that it is defeatable. For, when all is said and done, it is the so-called little man, the bent-backed, exploited, malnourished, bloodcovered fighter for independence who decides. And he invariably decides for freedom.

28 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

The myth of Neo-colonialism
More than three decades after most African nations became independent; there is no consensus on the legacy of colonialism. With most African countries still only tottering on their feet and many close to collapse, some people ask whether the problem is due to Africa's colonial experience or inherent adequacies of the African? For apologists of colonialism the answer is simple. Whatever may have been the shortcomings of colonial rule, the overall effect was positive for Africa. Sure, the colonial powers exploited Africa¶s natural resources but on the balance, colonialism reduced the economic gap between Africa and the West, the apologists argue. Colonialism laid the seeds of the intellectual and material development in Africans. It brought enlightenment where there was ignorance. It suppressed slavery and other barbaric practices such as pagan worship and cannibalism. Formal education and modern medicine were brought to people who had limited understanding or control of their physical environment. The introduction of modern communications, exportable agricultural crops and some new industries provided a foundation for economic development. Africans received new and more efficient forms of political and economic organization. Warring communities were united into modern nation-states with greater opportunity of survival in a competitive world than the numerous mini entities that existed before. Africa is in political and economic turmoil today, defenders of imperialism say, because it failed to take advantage of its inheritance from colonial rule. It was, they summaries, Africa¶s inadequacies that made colonization necessary and the outcome of post-independence self-rule suggest that the withdrawal by the colonial powers was premature. Critics of colonialism dismiss such arguments as racists. They maintain that colonial rule left Africans poorer than they were before it began. Not only were African labor and resources super-exploited, the continent¶s capacity to develop was undermined. Guyanese historian Walter Rodney in his book µHow Europe Underdeveloped Africa¶ contends that under colonialism "the only thing that developed was dependency and underdevelopment." As far as Rodney and other critics were concerned "The only positive development in colonialism was when it ended." Under imperial rule African economies were structured to be permanently dependent on Western nations. They were consigned the role of producers of primary products for processing in the West. The terms of trade in the western controlled international market discriminated against African nations who are unable to earn enough to develop their economies.

Colonialism bred political crisis
In disrupting pre-colonial political systems that worked for Africans and imposing alien models, colonialism laid the seeds of political crisis, say its critics. By redrawing of the map of Africa, throwing diverse people together without consideration for established
29 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

borders, ethnic conflicts were created that are now destabilizing the continent. The new nation-states were artificial and many were too small to be viable. Less than a third of the countries in Africa have populations of more than 10 million. Nigeria, the major exception to this, was imbued with ingredients for its self-destruction. Western multiparty democracy imposed by colonial powers polarized African societies. "It was the introduction of party politics by colonial administration that set off the fire of ethnic conflicts in Nigeria," wrote one Itodo Ojobo in the New Nigerian newspaper in 1986. It is difficult to give an objective balance sheet on colonialism. Those who contend that it made no positive impact are as dogmatic as those who present it as the salvation of Africa. What is unequivocal is that it was an imposition of alien rule. Whatever may have been its pluses and minuses, colonialism was a dictatorial regime that denied peoples¶ right of self determination. It brought death, pain and humiliation to millions of its victims. The notion that colonialism was a civilizing mission is a myth - the system was propelled by Europe¶s economic and political self- interest. However, to meet their economic and administrative needs colonial powers built some infrastructure, like railway to carry export commodities, and they educated a few Africans to help them run the colonies. But nowhere in Africa were positive contributions made to any substantial extent. Countries like Nigeria and Ghana, which were among the better endowed colonies, were left with only a few rail lines, rudimentary infrastructure and a few thousand graduates. This was better than others. For instance, the Portuguese left their colonies with very little. At independence in 1975, Mozambique had only three dozen graduates. If the legacies of the different colonial powers were rated by Africans today, the powers that bequeathed the greatest amount of western culture to its colonies would likely score most votes. Only reactionary aristocrats in northern Nigeria would today thank the British for keeping out western education in their region. It is clear to most northerners that they were placed at a disadvantage to the south by the educational gap between the two regions. When Flemish missionaries in the Belgium Congo learnt African languages to teach local children in their mother tongues, the children did not thank them. Young Congolese protested repeatedly and demanded to learn French because this was the way to gain access to the wider world. It is impossible to say what would have been the shape of contemporary African history had colonial rule never taken place. Some Western historians have argued that most less developed regions of the world, particularly Africa, lacked the social and economic organization to transform themselves into modern states able to develop into advanced economies. "If they had not become European possessions the majority would probably have remained very much as they were," wrote Cambridge historian D.K. Field house. African nationalists dismiss this claim. "It is not true that Africa couldn¶t have developed without colonialism. If it were true, then there is something wrong with the rest of world
30 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

which developed without it," the late Nigerian politician Moshood Abiola told a conference in 1991. Africans point out that Japan, China and parts of Southeast Asia were never colonized, yet they are today major world economies. These countries, however, had certain attributes in the nineteenth century that enabled them to adapt more easily to modernization than might have traditional African societies in the same period. The Asian nations had more educated labor force and were technologically more advanced. Most importantly, their ruling classes were more ideologically committed to social progress and economic development. It is, of course, a presumption that modernization is desirable. The fact that western society is more complex than traditional African society does not necessarily mean that it is better. Complexity does not equal human progress. Pre-colonial African societies were materially less developed than societies in other regions of the world, but they were no less balanced and self-contained than any elsewhere. Africans were no less happy or felt less accomplished than Europeans or Japanese. Who is to say whether people living in agrarian societies are less developed as human beings than inhabitants of industrialized ones? However, had Africa not been colonized, the likelihood is that its elites would still have wanted to consume the products and services of western industrial nations. It is unlikely that African chiefs and traders would have been content with the simplicity of communal life to shut off their communities from Western advances. If during the slave trade, rulers and traders happily waged wars and sold fellow humans to buy beads, guns and secondhand hats, one can only imagine what they would have done if faced with offers of cars, televisions, MacDonald¶s etc. Undoubtedly, without colonization African societies would still have sought industrialization and western type modernization, as have peoples in virtually every other region in the world. As there is no basis to assume that Africans would have independently developed electricity, the motor engine and other products of advanced technologies, it is fair to suppose that if Africa had not been colonized it would today still have to grapple with problems of economic development. Africa would have needed to import western technology and therefore would have had to export something to pay for it. Like other pre-industrial societies, African nations would invariably have had to trade minerals and agricultural commodities for western manufactures. So Africa¶s position in the international economy, particularly as a producer of primary products for industrialized countries, should not be blamed solely on colonialism. It is largely a function of unequal development.

31 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Real or false Independence
Many African nationalists and critics of colonialism see the independence gained from the withdrawing colonial powers as only partial liberation. Some call it µfalse independence¶. Full or real freedom, they believe, will come with economic independence. African nations are said to be currently in a phase of neo-colonialism - a new form of imperial rule stage managed by the colonial powers to give the colonized the illusion of freedom. At the 1961 All-African People¶s Conference held in Cairo neocolonialism was defined as "the survival of the colonial system in spite of the formal recognition of political independence in emerging countries which become the victims of an indirect and subtle form of domination by political, economic, social, military or technical means." The implication is that western powers still control African nations whose rulers are either willing puppets or involuntary subordinate of these powers. The main economic theories supporting the neo-colonialism concept come from the dependency school developed in the late 1950s by Marxist economists who initially focused on Latin America. According to them poor countries are satellites of developed nations because their economies were structured to serve international capitalism. The natural resources of the satellites are exploited for use in the centre. The means of production are owned by foreign corporations who employ various means to transfer profits out of the country rather than invest them in the local economy. So what these countries experience is the µdevelopment of underdevelopment¶. The unequal relations between developed and underdeveloped countries make economic progress impossible for the latter until they break economic links with international capitalism. Only by becoming socialist can they hope to develop their economies. Some theorists went further to postulate that revolution in dependent countries would not be enough because of the structure of world capitalism made any national development impossible. Only the ending of capitalism at the centre would permit underdeveloped nations to achieve development. As desirable as it would be for African nations and indeed the world to become socialist, the experiences of former Third World nations that have transformed into advanced economies, made the generalisations of the dependency school less credible in the 1990s. However, there is still the tendency to view post-fifteenth century African history solely in terms of the continent¶s subjugation by western nations. History is discerned as a plot; a cut and dry conspiracy by white nations to keep black peoples subordinated. Grey areas are overlooked. African involvement in the making of their own societies is discounted in favor of a view that focuses on outsiders as the active element. Blaming all of Africa¶s problems on colonialism and the machination of neo-colonialists strikes a cord with many educated Africans angry at the west because of its historical humiliation and exploitation of their continent. Western-bashing also plays on the guilt of
32 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

white liberals who are happy to bear the burden of the historic sins of their ruling classes. Some right wing whites, still regretting the end of the Empire, may be flattered by it because it acknowledges the all-embracing supremacy of the white man. Simple clear cut µthem and us¶ explanations of complex developments are rarely helpful. Focusing on imperialism has drawn attention away from internal forces that are crucial to the understanding of the African condition and which, unlike external demons, can be changed ordinary Africans. At every Organization of African Unity summit African leaders and ministers who have looted their nations¶ coffers are applauded for speeches that mix cries against regional marginalization and criticism of the IMF with insincere pleas for African unity and calls for debt forgiveness. Not so long ago these reactionary leaders only had to spice their speeches with some anti-imperialist rhetoric to be acclaimed at home and abroad as defenders of their people. It took little effort for reactionary leaders to sell themselves to their own people and to liberals in the West as representatives for the oppressed. There was an expectation that leaders from the Third World would by the fact that they were from the oppressed be radical in their vision for their people and indeed the world. It was somewhat similar to the popular perception of the Black Nationalist movement in the U.S. in the 1960s and 1970s. As long as black nationalists verbally attacked whites, they qualified as militants. It did not seem to matter that some of these so-called black radicals were reactionary in relation to other social groups, including abusing black women. A few were down right crooks who exploited poor blacks and for whom politics was merely an opportunity for individual gain. The fatalistic view that Africa is caught in a neo-colonial straitjacket has hampered the growth of popular political movements for social and economic change in the continent. The message often implied by people who stress external causes of underdevelopment is that nations must endure poverty until there is a revolution that pulls them out of the international capitalist orbit. If African nations are trapped in underdevelopment, there appears to be little point in seeking internal change. This pessimism perhaps helps to explain why few political movements in Africa campaign for fundamental social and economic transformation. Opposition and pro-democracy groups tend to limit themselves to condemning state corruption and human rights abuses. At independence former colonies became free nations, able to chart for themselves whatever course they had the ability and determination to follow. They could have, as some did, nationalize foreign owned corporations. They could have stopped primary commodity exports and ended imports from the West. Of course, such radical policies would have consequences. But these were more likely to have involved the elite losing the benefits of foreign aid than Western powers sending in gunboats to kill ordinary Africans. If Cuba, only a few kilometers from the capitalist mega-power, the U.S., could pursue an independent economic agenda and survive, there is no reason why African nations could not have done the same. They did not because it was not in the interest of their rulers to do so and not because they were shackled by neo-colonialism.
33 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

Integration into global market
The prime legacy of colonialism was the integration of colonies into the international capitalist economy. The main force keeping economies in the global system and sustaining imperialism is the market itself. For people with the means to pay the market is a very seductive place, offering everything and anything. It enables African elites to consume products of western civilization without having to go through the difficult and long-term process of building the productive base of their societies. It is far easier to shop in the global market than try to build industries yourself. When considering the economic conditions of people in the world it is useful to think of them as belonging to different layers in the global pyramid. At the bottom are the absolute poor, the majority of humanity who are too impoverished to participate fully in the economic, cultural and political life of their society. At the apex of the pyramid is a tiny minority of super-rich. In between are layers of people of varying degrees of wealth and access to local markets and the global economy. The richest fifth of the world¶s population consumes more than eighty per cent of global wealth. Most Africans are in the bottom fifth, consuming less than 1.5 per cent of global wealth. There are a few African elites among the top fifth and many more are scrambling to get there. The wealth pyramid is a better way of considering income distribution than seeing it strictly in national terms. For instance, to say that Nigeria is poor because its GDP per capita income is less than $300 per annum says nothing about the affluence of the country's rich minority that feed off its resources to maintain its position high on the global pyramid. Africa¶s poor gained little or nothing from colonialism. But its elites bloomed as a result of it. They were given a ladder to climb the global pyramid. African millionaires, who today live on the upper layers of the pyramid with bank accounts in Western capitals, certainly owe their fortune to colonialism. Without opportunities created by the linking of Africa to the western world, it is unlikely that indigenous ruling classes would have catapulted themselves from pre-capitalist levels of wealth to modern bourgeoisie affluence. So the answer to the often posed question, µdid Africans benefit from colonialism¶ is, the elites definitely gained while the poor majority did not. Having tasted life as consumers in the international market, African elites became ardent believers in the global economy. Imperial powers no longer needed to administer their colonies, at least not for reasons of economics. Local ruling classes would out of their own volition keep their nations in the market and direct the bulk of their national resources and capital to the west.

34 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

The strength of the global market is its attractiveness to classes of men and women who have the wealth to participate in it. For the wealthy, the market offers the means to realize all material dreams. For those who aspire to become rich, it is the "open sesame". The market is an alluring, even corrupting force that requires strong ideological or moral commitment to resist. It was its appeal that eventually subverted socialist regimes in the former Eastern Bloc and is now transforming China. Much of the trouble in Africa today stems from a scramble to climb the global pyramid.

The idea of progress
The most subversive act of colonialism was to introduce into the minds of Africans and peoples of other pre-capitalist societies the idea that material progress and prosperity were possible for the masses of people. Ordinary people in pre-colonial times assumed that their material conditions were fixed. A good harvest may provide a few more yams to eat but the idea that living conditions could be fundamentally altered was alien. The prospect that rather than trek miles to fetch water, running water could be piped into homes was unknown. With colonialism came the idea of progress - that humanity is capable of improving its condition of existence - today can be better than yesterday and tomorrow better than today. After or even before people¶s basic needs are met, there is an endless world of consumer products and services for self-satisfaction. Africans learnt that they live in a world that offers a variety of experiences that were beyond their wildest dreams. Like people elsewhere in the world, they want what the West has. More than anything else, it has been peoples¶ desire for material improvement and wealth that has given western civilization its overwhelming strength. Its main power has not come from its armies or colonial administrators or even its multi-national corporation bosses. It is the simple fact that most people in the world believe in material progress and desire most of the things the West has to offer. Coca cola sells in 200 countries and the brand is recognized by the majority of humanity not because it was physically forced upon the world but because through the power of advertising people have taken the drink as a symbol of progress and modernization and of course many people like the sugary elixir. It was the allure of modernity, with its promise of greater material self-fulfillment that subverted African societies during colonialism. It was not the handful of European troops sent to conquer and maintain colonial order that was irresistible, but the power western materialism. Subjugated Africans may not have liked the arrogance of the colonizers, but they wanted the civilization that the Europeans had to offer. Virtually every nation in the world, whether colonized or not, has had to deal with western hegemony. Antonio Gramsci defined hegemony as an order in which a certain way of life and thought is dominant and one concept of reality prevails throughout
35 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

society. The dominant ideology permeates every facet of human existence - taste, morality, and customs, religious and political principles. Since the nineteenth century the West has defined human development and set the pace of change which others have followed. The West has not imposed its will on the world by force but by the sheer attractiveness of its civilization and the belief in the desirability of material progress and prosperity. It is able get people in other nations to desire what it desires and thereby manipulates their aspirations. This is the bedrock of imperialism. It is what enables it to control and use the resources of underdeveloped nations in a manner advantageous to the developed nations and at the expense of the economies of underdeveloped countries. The dilemma facing Africans is how to deal with the overwhelming presence and power of western civilization. If the desire of Africans for modern facilities - electricity, pipe borne water, cars, modern medicine, television etc., is legitimate, then we should accept the position of 19th century evolutionists that western civilization is of a higher material order to African civilization. It is able to meet the new aspirations of Africans, which traditional society cannot. Putting aside for a moment the physical unpleasantness of colonialism, it can be argue that its failing was not to have sufficiently transformed African society and laid solid foundations for modernization. It introduced the idea of material progress, but did not give people the tools to build the new civilization that would enable them to realize their new dreams. Africans came through the colonial experience full of desire for modernity but without the wherewithal to create the coveted civilization. Besides the shortage of skills and infrastructure, Africans lacked an appreciation of the total and complex nature of the transformation from simple agrarian society to modern technological civilization. Having blamed Africa's material backwardness on colonialism, independence African thinkers and leaders believed that the removal of the external force would automatically result in modern development. There was little understanding that modernization required radical internal changes.

Modernization requires internal changes
The 19th century German philosopher Karl Marx thought imperialism could play a progressive role by creating in underdeveloped countries the basis for a similar process of industrialization that took place in the West. He thought that colonial powers should destroy primitive pre-capitalist cultures and lay the material foundation for modern western society. For Marx all societies were destined to be like Europe. "The country that is more developed industrially only shows to the less developed, the image of its own future," he wrote. Some African nationalists accuse Marx of ethnocentrism. These nationalists do not understand that modernization is as much a cultural phenomenon as a technological achievement. Marx was correct - it is impossible for a pre-industrial culture to create and sustain an industrial civilization.

36 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

The idea that societies head in the same general direction seems proven by the development of the global economy. Nations that have made economic progress have irrespective of ideology, undergone similar processes. Development has involved capital accumulation, industrialization, the transformation of productive forces through machine technology and the introduction of factory systems of production. It entailed urbanization, the rationalization of thought and changes in social beliefs and institutions, including family life. Investment in physical and human capital has been indispensable. In all developed countries, the economy was given primacy in the political system. Perhaps most importantly, development has been underpinned by certain values, including efficiency, hard work, precision, honesty, punctuality, thrift, obligation to one¶s duty and wealth creation. All modernization involved a move away from traditionalism There have been differences in the methods of organization adopted by modernizing nations. Under socialism, the means of production were state-owned and emphasis placed on ideology in the mobilization of workers as against private ownership and wage labor under capitalism. Nevertheless, both socialists and capitalists followed the same fundamental steps to economic development. "Development" said the American economist J.K. Galbraith "is the faithful imitation of the developed." African nationalists find this basic idea difficult to accept. Despite the failure of African Socialism there remains a belief among some African thinkers and writers that there is an African way to development that is different from the European path. No one has been able to describe this African way in any detail. However, the search for an African model continues. Some liberal western writers have supported the notion that Africa is a special case and not subject to the laws that govern societies in other regions of the world. British economist Michael Barratt Brown in his book µAfrica¶s Choices¶ said his old friend Basil Davidson had in his book µThe Black Man¶s Burden: Africa and the Curse of the NationState¶ given him a clue to the explanation of Africa¶s development problem. "African society was different and apparently immune to economic rationality which is the basic assumption of European political economy," said Brown. I am not sure how Davidson shows Africa¶s immunity from economic rationality. In his book Davidson argued that Africa¶s crisis is due to it being forced by colonialism to abandon its traditional systems and values for unsuitable western institutions. Brown also quotes several African writers who believe that an African way to development exists. They included Hassan Zonal of Morocco who wrote "The African model exists and is alive but it is not a model of economic rationality." I do not know how economic non-rationality can possibly result in development, which occurs in the material world and not the spiritual domain. Development is not abstract art, where any combination of brush strokes and colors can pass as a completed picture. What we have seen in Africa is a tragedy in which intellectual opposition to the West has prevented African thinkers from developing a coherent ideology for change. Ironically, in

37 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

its penchant to criticize colonialism and defend the integrity of traditional African society, African political and economic thought has been trapped by its own myths. The search for an alternative model continues, but it is unlikely that one will be found. It is an uncomfortable truth that if the objective is to improve the material conditions of the people, then most of the institutions and values introduced into Africa during colonialism are more conducive to modernization than are many traditional ones. Modern institutions and principles such as representative democracy, judiciary, banking, factories, provide more effective means for meeting the new desires of Africans than what existed in precolonial societies. Every society, whether capitalist or socialist, that has developed has used the same set of institutions. What differentiate modern societies are the ethics and rules applied in the operation of the institutions. Leaving aside variances in ideology and cultural style, there is a single modern civilization in the world. The same features of this civilization exist in every nation that has modernized. Similarly, values that are venerated in modern nations are alike. They include efficiency, innovation, inquisitiveness and time-keeping. Even social customs are similar. For instance, monogamy, women¶s rights, individual freedom are the accepted standard in most societies. Nineteenth century evolutionists may have been correct. Nations have evolved to share the same civilization. In the move to the new way of life modern nations left behind preindustrial institutions, customs and beliefs. So where does this leave us in terms of evaluating the impact of colonialism? European powers had no right to exploit Africans and impose their culture on other people. But having been drawn into a more advanced civilization Africans and other non-westerners have to master the new civilization to strengthen them and benefit from the advantages.

China¶s Neo-colonialism
On 1 January 2010, the China-Asean (Association of Southeast Asian Nations) Free Trade Area went into effect. Touted as the world¶s biggest Free Trade Area, CAFTA is billed as having 1.7 billion consumers, with a combined gross domestic product of $5.93 trillion and total trade of $1.3 trillion. Under the agreement, trade between China and six Asean countries (Brunei, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore and Thailand) has become duty-free for more than 7,000 products. By 2015, the newer Asean countries (Vietnam, Laos, Cambodia and Burma) will join the zero-tariff arrangement. The propaganda mills, especially in Beijing, have been trumpeting this new free trade deal as µbringing mutual benefits¶ to China and Asean. A positive spin on CAFTA has
38 | P a g e Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

also come from President of Philippines, Gloria Arroyo, who hailed the emergence of a µformidable regional grouping¶ that would rival the US and the European Union. The reality, however, is that most of the advantages will probably flow to China. At first glance, it seems like the bilateral relationship has been positive. After all, demand from a Chinese economy growing at a breakneck pace was a key factor in Southeast Asian growth beginning around 2003, after a period of low growth following the 1997/1998 Asian financial crisis.

Counting on China
During the current international recession, Asean governments are counting on China, who¶s GDP in the fourth quarter of 2009 rose 10.7 per cent, to pull them out of the doldrums. Yet the picture is more complex than that of a Chinese locomotive pulling the rest of East Asia along with it on a fast track to economic nirvana. Low wages, many in Southeast Asia fear, have encouraged local and foreign manufacturers to phase out their operations in relatively high-wage Southeast Asia and move them to China. There appears to be some support for this. China¶s devaluation of the Yuan in 1994 had the effect of diverting some foreign direct investment (FDI) away from Southeast Asia. For Chinese officials, the benefits to China of free trade with Asean are clear. The aim of the strategy, according to Chinese economist Angang Hu, is to more fully integrate China into the global economy as the µcenter of the world¶s manufacturing industry.¶ The trend of Asean losing ground to China accelerated after the 1997 crisis. In 2000, FDI in Asean shrank to 10 per cent of all investment in developing Asia, down from 30 per cent in the mid-1990s. The decline continued in the rest of the decade, with the UN World Investment Report attributing the trend partly to µincreased competition from China¶. Trade has been another, perhaps greater, area of concern. Massive smuggling of goods from China has disrupted practically all Asean economies. For instance, with some 70-80 per cent of shops selling smuggled Chinese shoes, the Vietnamese shoe industry has suffered badly. Now there are fears that CAFTA will simply legalize smuggling and worsen the already negative effects of Chinese imports on Asean industry and agriculture.

39 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

A central part of the plan was to open up Asean markets to Chinese manufactured products. In light of growing popularity of protectionist sentiments in the US and European Union, Southeast Asia, which absorbs only around 8 per cent of China¶s exports, is seen as having tremendous potential to absorb more Chinese goods. China¶s trade strategy is described by Hu as a µhalf-open model¶ that is µopen or free trade on the export side and protectionism on the import side¶.

Worrying trends
Despite brave words from Arroyo and other Asean leaders, it is much less clear how their countries will benefit from the Asean-China relationship. Certainly, the benefits will not come in labor-intensive manufacturing, where China enjoys an unbeatable edge by the constant downward pressure on wages exerted by migrants from a seemingly inexhaustible rural work force that makes an average of $285 a year. Certainly not in high tech, since even the US and Japan are scared of China¶s remarkable ability to move very quickly into high-tech industries even as it consolidates its edge in labor-intensive production.

40 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

All modern empires have had limits to their spheres of influence and have faced rivals with the capacity and the will to displace them. Now, in the case of the most recent empire-the United States-these two characteristics have disappeared. The United States presently has no rival in its domination of the international system. It is indeed the first global empire, and for better or for worse, the fate of the rest of the international system depends largely on its character and evolution. The United States already has a long history as an imperial power. Yet, for most U.S. citizens, the rest of the world has scant importance. At the same time, U.S. citizens are aware that their country was the victor in the Cold War and that, for the time being, no other nation represents a serious military threat. A recent Gallup poll shows that the four major problems that concern most Americans have nothing to do with foreign policy, as was indeed the case from the Second World War until the fall of the Berlin Wall. The four problems that dominate the U.S. agenda today are: family values and ethics, criminal violence, education, and controlling privately owned weapons (The New York Times, Aug. 1, 1999). Although the lack of interest in the rest of the world is a long-standing American trait, the feeling of complete national security is relatively new. The size of the United States, first of all, and its wealth make it almost inevitable that for most of its citizens the world boils down to their turf-in other words, their country or region. Isolationism has long existed in U.S. society, although the imperial impulse usually has won out over those who want nothing to do with other countries. For example, President Woodrow Wilson pushed the country at the last minute, and very successfully, into the First World War against the wishes of the majority. For a time, Soviet studies in the United States absorbed a great deal of attention, resources, and talent. Today, however, the CIA and other specialists in international security and espionage receive most of their funding for protecting industrial secrets or pursuing the pirates who hurt Nike, Calvin Klein, and hundreds of other firms. The remaining political spies have lowered their guard so much that when the CIA planned the American bombing of Belgrade, it did not realize that one of the targets it chose was not a facility of the Serbian government but rather the Chinese embassy.

41 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

The new twist in the international system is the absence of challenges to American hegemony. The great empires of the modern era always faced powerful rivals that forced them to invest huge amounts of material and human resources in preserving their areas of dominance and their economic advantages. This mounting expenditure on armies, administrators, colonial wars, and wars between empires ultimately caused the demise of each of these historic empires. The exception to the rule is the United States, which is in the unusual position of dominating the international system without having to respond, in practice, to anyone except itself. In this regard, the United States is the last remaining sovereign nation. Not even a great nation like China can claim Taiwan, because Washington will intervene. Since the United States does not have a military rival, it no longer has to spend a substantial portion of its surpluses on an arms race. Washington today has a budget surplus. Consequently, the political battle between Congress and the president is over how to allocate those billions of dollars that no longer have to be earmarked for the military. Should they be given back in the form of tax cuts for the wealthy, as the right would like, or should they be invested in the Social Security system for the less wealthy, as the president proposes? That president can impose his will today by using force in both the Balkans and in Iraq, almost without incurring U.S. casualties. By virtue of its enormous technological superiority in air warfare, a bomber can leave its base in the United States, drop its bombs on Serbia, and return home safe and sound in a little more than 30 hours, in time for its crew to sleep in their own beds. The only rivals that the United States has today are in the economic realm: Europe and Japan. Although Russia has many atomic weapons, it can hardly pay its army and has no surplus to invest in new military technology. Today, only China shows the will to begin to narrow the military technological gap with the United States. Only China is the great potential rival of the United States. The relative lack of interest of the American people in the world around them has a real basis: They are their own principal market. And this enormous domestic market continues to ride a wave of prosperity and expansion that has few precedents.

42 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Institute of Business Management

International Relations

One result of U.S. political and economic leadership at the end of the millennium is a society of superfluous consumption that is reaching levels that seem not only immoral but absurd as well. For example, young engineers and the managers of high-tech companies in California are so fond of BMWs that importers cannot fill all the orders. In Palo Alto, a not particularly impressive home that went on the market a few months ago for $2 million was sold within a week for $3 million, because buyers abounded. On Tiburon peninsula, no one finds it absurd that there is a store that specializes in gifts for dogs and cats. Bill Gates, the creator of Microsoft, is expanding his fortune at such a pace that by the time the size of his holdings is published in the annual list in Forbes Magazine, it is already obsolete. The concentration of income inside the United States is striking, but it pales in comparison with the concentration worldwide to which the economic system headed by the United States has given rise. Estimates are today that the wealthiest 20 percent of the world's population accounts for 86 percent of income, while the poorest 20 percent must make do with just 1 percent. In short, political democracy and the rule of law are the dominant values in the global empire of the United States, and there is no point in denying this great contribution to global civilization. But the other side of the system presided over by the United States is the brutally unfair distribution of wealth in this world: The very few have increasingly more, but all too many have very little and will have proportionately even less in the future, because for now there is nothing to stop this dynamic of fundamental injustice.

43 | P a g e

Neo-colonialism

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful