Download - Center for Social Sciences

corruption monitoring in the international donor organizations.Situation as such may be quite easily interpreted in terms of general political motivation of thewhole system of global development transfer. Naturally leaders of the both WB and IMF as well asleaders of the leading donor countries are quite well aware of fact that successful integration of 5/6 ofglobal population into the economic space which the remaining 1/6 created proceeding from its owninterests is hardly possible. They are also well aware of the fact that for many developing countries(especially African) carrying out the real market reforms is impossible on principle. In this case all thesestrongly remind the process that in the late USSR was dubbed as “building the socialism bypassing thecapitalist development stage”.Especially for the US all this basically (directly or through international financial institutions)presents continuation of the foreign policy, albeith using different methods. Whether the money theylend is going to bring upon some real economic progress in any given country is of a relatively littleimportance. The main objective is to keep the ruling regimes in such countries loyal to the US. It’sespecially true as regards such weak countries that on principle may pose the threat to the US nationalinterest by falling into hands of various kinds of terrorists for instance. 29Besides any donor country is subjected to a strong pressure of its own civil society (especiallyNGOs), which consider that developed countries are answerable for developing world, for its povertyand underdevelopment. In addition the given model of global economic integration in general as well asdevelopment transfer in particular are so deeply ingrained into the system of global internationalrelations that their restructuring in order to increase their efficiency may turn very painful both for thedonors as well as for “consumers” of their support.Still against the rather gloomy picture of the global development transfer there are number of arather successful countries that managed to overcome dependency on the developed world and areobviously aiming at the leading positions in the modern global affairs. First of all these are so calledAsian Tigers and lately China and Malaysia. Factually the problem is that the most successfuldevelopment transfer is restricted to a rather small region of the world, while 3 of the mentionedcountries are China one or the other way (Mainland China, Taiwan and Hong-Kong), while population ofSingapore is also predominantly represented by ethnic Chinese as well as the most active ethnicminority in Malaysia.The main positive feature shared by all these countries is the social capital of the highest qualitybased on the highly motivated, diligent, disciplined labour force. Still they owe their success mainly tothe presence of extremely efficient, motivated governments. These governments purposefullyimplemented and continue to implement their own economic policies which in general have rather littleto do with recommendations and development models of the international donors, although they borrowhuge amounts of money from them. Although some Western economic experts characterize theireconomic policies as neo-liberal in reality we deal with various models of the state managed capitalism.On the whole these examples of successful market development show that fears of the evil Westernmoney-lenders that exploit the poor developing countries are to a large extent exaggerated. Almost anycountry with the efficient, strong, motivated government is able to put international donor organizationsinto position they should properly occupy – money lenders and assistants, not the developmentdictators. 30Thus it’s very important to understand that development transfer is primarily a two-way street – nodeveloped country and/or donor organization is able to impose any kind of positive transformations onany developed country if it is not ready to adopt them or (and this is more important) if the local rulingelites are not interested in such.The leading global players set terms and conditions of development transfer based on their ownpriorities and understanding of problems at hand. They are naturally eager to make the rest of the worldto adopt these terms and conditions as operating basis for their own development. On the other handthis is the direct responsibility of governments of developing countries to make sound decisions asregards models of development suitable for their countries; to review, revise and adopt the existingones or propose their own, original models. No leading global player is able to make decisions for thesegovernments; to make any country develop successfully, moreover can not do this on regional or globallevels. If country is not able to adopt and implement development policies, any outside assistance willgo for naught.29 Stuart E. Eizenstat, John Edward Porter, and Jeremy M. Weinstein, Rebuilding Weak States, Foreign Affairs,January/February 2005.30 Efficient government does not mean that it’s for instance incorrupt or transparent – as the world practice shows suchfeatures have little to do with the government efficiency. Very clean and transparent government may be quiteinefficient and vice versa.140