Prominent economics scholars and analysts adamantly argued that a youthful workforce is necessary for globalization to succeed. The reason for this, according to them, is that when the majority of the workforce is young, there is more number of people who are competing for the available jobs and this increases the bargaining power of employers since they can dictate the terms on which the person has to be hired.
Of course, there is the aspect of employability where not all graduates are employable and hence, some of the advantage of a youthful workforce is negated. However, even in this scenario, employers stand to gain as they can get more orders and business from their clients simply because they can fill the available jobs choosing from a wide enough labor pool.
The first aspect discussed above affects the manufacturing sector where there is an abundance of the labor pool and the second aspect affects the service sector where the IT companies have grown exponentially since they could get as much business as they want and employ at will because of availability of graduates with the right skills.
Moreover, it is easy to train the young in the latest skills and techniques rather than the middle aged as the youthful vigor makes it possible for these young graduates to pick up new skills easily. Further, most of the young graduates have grown up in the digital generation meaning that all of them have basic computer skills and English-speaking skills which is much sought after by employers in a global economy. This explains the success of India in attracting more capital in the services sector as opposed to China or the Philippines.
The other reason why globalization succeeds when the workforce is young because global companies would invest in countries where they have consumers who are willing to purchase their products. It is a truism in economics that the elderly does not spend and it is only the young and the thirty something’s who go on spending binges. Hence, it makes sense for multinationals to set up base in countries where there is more potential for growth rather than in countries that have ageing populations. This is called the demographic dividend, which means that countries that have youthful workforces are more likely to benefit from globalization and conversely, globalization gains in the process as well.
Another reason is that, a young and energetic workforce makes for labor pool flexibility and transferability of skills. This happens where the members of the workforce can change jobs and become employed in other sectors different from their education orientation and can also transfer skills across sectors easily. In case of the West, the outcry over outsourcing has primarily been because of the fact that the workers who lost their jobs there could not find other jobs involving different skills as well as transfer their skills across sectors. Here, the case in point is Asian countries having large young workforce.
Dr. Robert Bradford of New York University stated that it is true that globalization is widely credited with bringing prosperity to Asian countries. Because of the opening up of the global economy and the resultant increase in opportunities for the workforce in Asian countries, there was a boom in the manufacturing and services sectors across Asia. No wonder that globalization is widely credited with lifting millions if not billions out of their underprivileged status and making them upwardly mobile.
Dr. Robert Bradford noted that indeed, the best example of the way in which globalization has affected countries like China, India, and the Philippines is to look at the humungous number of jobs created because of globalization. Research studies, as well as statistics, show that the employment levels of the young and able workforces in these countries went up by nearly 30 percent. This is proof of the fact that globalization has indeed been beneficial to these countries and other countries across the developing world.
According to Professor Sanjay Gupta of Hyderabad University, of course, if a job is created in one country, then the corresponding job in a developed country is lost. This is the zero-sum scenario that globalization imposes on the global economy. However, there is also the added aspect of globalization being a win-win situation because the jobs lost in the West can be compensated by hiring those who were laid off in higher value-adding activities. Further, the gains in terms of costs saved by Western companies can be employed to good use in those countries.
Hence, globalization proves the adage “A Rising tide lifts all boats” true. Especially the young and the able employees in the developing and the developed world have been able to reap the benefits of globalization more than the middle-aged and the old since they can adapt and learn new skills quickly and in an agile manner.
Professor Sanjay Gupta stressed that to look at the beneficial effects of globalization on the young in Asia, one need not look farther than the rise in ownership of homes, consumer durables, increase in consumption that was hitherto the preserve of the rich, and finally, the creation of young and upwardly mobile workforce. For those of you who are in the twenties and thirties, you would have seen how the increase in opportunities would have benefited you directly as opposed to those in your parents’ generation who had to contend with incomes that did not lend themselves to a consumerist lifestyle.
Without getting into the debate whether consumerism is good or bad, it is important to realize that many of those in their twenties and thirties have been able to buy homes and lead comfortable lives because of their jobs in the services or the manufacturing sector. To put this in perspective, one needs to look at the age at which houses were bought in the previous generation as opposed to the age at which the present generation and those in their thirties bought houses and other goods.
Finally, countries like India that have always had an income trap have significantly benefited from globalization and when one considers the increase in job opportunities for the young workforce, it goes without saying that globalization has been a force for good for this segment.
Globalization and the young
Vaccinating Africa
China announced that it will provide vaccine aid to African countries including Ethiopia in a concrete step in honoring President Xi Jinping’s pledge of making COVID-19 vaccines a global public good.
At the request of the WHO, China has decided to provide 10 million doses of domestic vaccine to the COVAX to meet the urgent needs of developing countries. On top of that, China has so far provided vaccine assistance to 53 developing countries that have made requests, and has exported vaccines to 22 countries.
“China is committed to building a China-Africa community of health for all. China will continue to work with Africa to fully deliver on the outcomes of the FOCAC Beijing Summit and the Extraordinary China-Africa Summit on Solidarity against COVID-19, with greater focus on public health, economic reopening and improvement of livelihoods,” said Zhao Lijian, the spokesperson of the Chinese Ministry of Foreign Affairs.
Similarly, on a continental scale, the Africa Vaccine Acquisition Task Team [AVATT], set up by the African Union to acquire additional vaccine doses so that Africa can attain a target immunization of 60% has stated it has received an offer of 300 million Sputnik V vaccines from the Russian Federation. This includes a financing package for any member states wishing to secure this vaccine.
“We are grateful to receive the Sputnik V vaccines from the Russian Federation and tremendously proud to be able to offer them on the AMSP for our AU Member States,” says Dr. John Nkengasong, Director of the Africa Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (Africa CDC) adding that, “Bilateral and private sector partnerships such as these are critical in our efforts to bring the COVID-19 pandemic to an end.”
While details, including clinical and technical information, are now accessible on the Africa Medical Supplies Platform (AMSP), Sputnik V vaccines will be available for a period of 12 months commencing by May 2021.
DÉTENTE NOW
Détente is a French word that roughly translates to ‘relaxation’. It is used to denote the easing of strained relations, especially in a political situation, according to Wikipedia. Even though the word détente has been in use long before the cold war of post WWII, it is during the late 1960s and 70s it became a widely circulated currency. The main objective behind the détente regime of the 1970s was to restrain the feverish arms race that was raging between the WARSAW PACT countries of Eastern Europe and NATO. At the time, the two groupings were at par (more or less) when it came to destructive weaponry, mostly WMD (including nuclear arsenals). As a result, nuclear confrontation between the two camps became unthinkable. It is this doctrine of madness or MAD-Mutually Assured Destruction that gave rise to the various arms treaties of the détente era!
SALT I, (Strategic Arms Limitation Treaty) Helsinki Accord, ABM Treaty (Anti-Ballistic Missile), Partial Test Ban Treaty, Outer Space Treaty, Non-proliferation Treaty, SALT II (not ratified by the US), START, etc. were the various agreements signed between the US and the USSR, the superpowers backing the military alliances of NATO and the WARSAW PACT, respectively. In 1989, the USSR collapsed and the iron curtain (the ideological curtain that divided Europe into two, east and west) came down, including the Berlin Wall. Russia was devastated and before long all the iron curtain countries joined the reigning global capitalist system in earnest. After the unfolding of the socialist camp, NATO became rather cocky and started war adventures all over, even in places that were inconceivable only a decade ago. Yugoslavia was brutally bombed and fragmented. Balkanization roared all the way to the Baltics. The coup d’état in Ukraine was probably the single most infraction that roused Russia. One should note that Ukraine (Little Russia) was part and parcel of the Russian Empire as well as the USSR. Currently, NATO is contemplating of using small-scale nuclear weapons on the European (and elsewhere) war theatres, which might (most likely) involve Russia!
After the collapse of the USSR in 1989 many thought the world would be a much safer place, compared to the cold war era. Reality proved otherwise. The sole superpower went on war rampages and started to devastate one country after another. A very senior commander of the US/NATO openly boasted, ‘we will knock out six countries in the next five years’! Amongst these targeted countries only Iran and North Korea were spared the aggression. Libya, Syria, Iraq and Yemen are/were more or less destroyed by NATO/USA. Of course, there are always concocted excuses or false flags, before the unleashing of the systemic terror on weaker states. The late Howard Zinn was puzzled; ‘how can you have a war on terrorism when war itself is terrorism?’ Iran and North Korea were determined to come up with some kind of deterrent before it was too late. To some extent they achieved their objectives. North Korea is now a nuclear power and Iran has offensive missile systems that can potentially hit all the Middle East US military bases, as well as inflict significant damages on Israel and Saudi Arabia!
Enter Russia! As we have been saying all along, Russia is too grand to be put on the same scale as that of the ‘vassal states’ of the east, to use a phrase coined by former French foreign minister. Russia might be down, but never out! Sadly, hubris blinded NATO undermined Russia’s overall potential, not only in the area of armaments, but also in its geopolitical influences. Only fifteen years after the US unilaterally abrogated the ABM Treaty, Russia came up with weapon systems that are anti-symmetric to western arsenals. Hypersonic delivery, electronic jamming, frying laser, advanced propulsion systems, (cruise missiles with unlimited range) etc. are the new technologies on which the current Russian offensive military posture is based. To be sure, Russia’s formidable defensive weapons are also up and running. The very effective S-300 and S-400, to say nothing about S-500, are, literally, second to none! That is why many defenseless countries are lining up to buy these (defensive) weapons to protect their countries from bombardment (airplanes) and cruise missile attacks. NATO’s irresponsible expansion towards the Russian border has triggered a very firm and unequivocal response from Putin. In his last week’s address to the Russian Parliament, he emphatically asserted that no war using nuclear weapon (small, medium, large, etc.) will be tolerated and Russia will respond decisively by employing its various nuclear arsenals. Protection will also apply to Russia’s allies, declared the president. Therefore, all of NATO’s imbecilic maneuverings and going-ons in places like Poland, Romania and the Baltic states, are now rendered (effectively) useless, unless NATO wants to risk an all out nuclear war that will devastate not only Europe, but also the US mainland!
Unfortunately, MAD round two needed to be revived to bring back détente round two! This time around, however, China has to be included in all subsequent agreements, as an equal partner. China is already an all round super power. Its true economic size is by far the largest in the world (PPP purchasing power parity). The overall size of China’s military, to say nothing about its increasingly advanced technology, puts it on the same level as that of the other two superpowers.
‘Although most Americans may be largely ignorant of what was, and still is, being done in their names, all are likely to pay a steep price-individually and collectively-for their nation’s continued efforts to dominate the global scene.’ Chalmers Johnson. “Nobody wanted to talk to us about the root of the problem. Nobody listened to us; so listen to us now,” Vladimir Putin. Good Day!
