The failure in consolidating the free trade agreement in Cancun has just brought about clamors for other alternatives for the free trade agreement. Globalization is quite inevitable and so is trading. Trading maybe in the form of goods and services or the transfer of cultural heritage and other useful information. I have two major points to bring out in this article. First of all I believe that Globalization and International trading is basically good and it is only personal interest that grounds globalization and international trading to an opportunistic, apathetic nature. Second of all I do agree with many Asian leaders that there could be other alternatives for free trade, in which I’ll be discussing in this article, the innovated trading competition.
Globalization is just a result of the advancement in technology and the increase in surplus capital in many countries around the world. Globalization could in fact even out the resources if properly managed. In promoting an altruistic Globalization, if such a radical concept can be achieved, one must be able to consider two factors as was manifested in some of the articles written by Corazon Alma de Leon of the Civil Service Commission in the Philippines, these are: the formation of programs that will hit the primary target needs and players or implementers that could properly execute such programs. While creation of tentative practical programs maybe hard enough, finding good implementers of these programs would be like Walt Disney’s Finding Nemo in the vast ocean of the political system. APEC Business Leaders often times, do not bring out good programs in the forum. Some of the leaders, who do bring out programs, are just meant to benefit their own countries. What we need are the vicissitude of programs such as “help thy neighbor policy” as implemented by Mahathir Mohammad in Malaysia. This implies that there could be a promotion of fair-trading, just like in a chess game, by playing a handicap competition, where advance players remove some of their chess-figures that can be used to immediately beat the novice opponent. This also implies possible investments that can be made by more advanced countries to be able to strengthen other countries. This kind of deals will, as Mahathir says, bring benefit for both parties. APEC Business Leaders when attending the Forum should not think only of their countries need but rather view the totality of the Asia-Pacific Economic Scenario. It is a reality that many leaders who participate in the APEC are incomplete leaders.
Some of these people are just transactional, meaning here and now, forget about other countries, forget about tomorrow, kind of leaders. What we need are more transformational leaders that will participate in the table, these are leaders with a vision and the passion to rally the region to that vision. Economics, surely, is not only about the Short-term but rather it deals more about Long-term issues; thus, leaders and programs should be in-line with the formation of an Asia-Pacific goal congruence and the prevention of countries with their own vested interest weaken other countries by imposing currency devaluation since weak players will also weaken advance players in the long-run.
In Filipino terms, if there is one rotten fruit that is mixed with a basket of fresh fruits, in the long-term, all the fruits will eventually be rotten as well. Thus, there should not exist any rotten oriented inclination of any countries in the APEC Forum and if possible the treatment of those which could be considered as rotten, whether on monetary or fiscal policies.
Innovated competition is an alternative for Free Trade Competition. While Free Trade Competition could also be called as wild, a Fair Trade Competition could only be called but one word, Fair. Fair Trading would involve other countries playing a handicap trading game with other country players. These imply that advance countries would have to let novice countries take some advantages as was discussed earlier. The players of whatever countries should have one common vision, that is, to have the best game possible. Thus, it should not be the goal of member countries to beat other countries to death, rather to be able to help and strengthen other countries so as to benefit their own country in the future. Innovated competition is similar in the Fair Trade Competition only because it allows for the beneficiation of other countries other than own country.
Innovated competition on the other hand has one added spice to the Trading Ingredient, that is, the creation not only of fiscal or monetary policies that will enable other countries to participate evenly, but also the reengineering of the systems and procedures that are established in different industries in different countries. It is a radical concept, but Innovated competition simply implies the eradication of the concept of countries over the concept of global citizenship. This further implies that different industries, as Adam Smith previously stated in the Wealth of Nations, should be independent from Government restrictions. Industries across the Asia-Pacific Region should help one other, partnership and not engulfing small industries is the key to make such trading proposition a reality. The innovated competition is not really a new idea, Henry Ford has earlier used it in the creation of the Assembly Line that lowered the cost of automobiles and resulted to the creation of an Assembly Line. Thus, it should be the aim of Partnered Industries to benefit mankind as a whole. However Ford was able to do it a couple of decades ago, why can’t APEC Business Leaders implement the same. The answer is clear and but a word: Greed.
APEC Business Leaders should not view Cancun as the end of the chess match. Why should it end when there are many other things to do? Juan Dela Cruz is a novice player in this match; he has his alternatives to choose the move that could give him the optimal economic result. But his actions are limited on his experience. It should be the goal of Juan Dela Cruz not to win the game but rather to have a fair game; such goal should also be transcended in other countries. I believe a country have to make its sacrifices. If the Philippines are the pawn that would empower the whole Asian region once it is eaten, then let it be so. It is not winning the game that counts rather, playing it.
For in reality, countries are all kings and pawns at the same time. While they have an advocacy for preservation, a more significant advocacy that would promote development and regional unity is sacrifice.
« return.