DANIEL GRISWOLD

 

Daniel Griswold is director of the Center for Trade PolicyStudies at the Cato Institute in Washington, D.C. Heis the author of numerous studies and articles on trade,immigration, and globalization, including the January2004 study “Trading Tyranny for Freedom: How OpenMarkets Till the Soil for Democracy,” available atwww.freetrade.org.

 

When trade and globalization are discussed inthe U.S. Congress and in the American media,the focus is almost entirely on the economicimpact at home—on manufacturing, jobs, and wages. Buttrade is about more than exporting soybeans and machinetools. It is also about exporting freedom and democracy.Since September 11, 2001, the Bush administrationhas articulated the argument that trade can and must playa role in promoting democracy and human rights in therest of the world. In an April 2002 speech, President Bushsaid, “Trade creates the habits of freedom,” and thosehabits “begin to create the expectations of democracy anddemands for better democratic institutions. Societies thatare open to commerce across their borders are more opento democracy within their borders.”TRADE, DEVELOPMENT, AND POLITICAL REFORMThe connection between trade, development, andpolitical reform is not just a throwaway line. In theory andin practice, economic and political freedoms reinforce oneanother. 

 

Political philosophers from Aristotle to SamuelHuntington have noted that economic development andan expanding middle class can provide more fertile groundfor democracy.Trade and globalization can spur political reformby expanding the freedom of people to exercise greatercontrol over their daily lives. In less developed countries,the expansion of markets means they no longer need tobribe or beg government officials for permission to importa television set or spare parts for their tractor. Controlson foreign exchange no longer limit their freedom totravel abroad. They can more easily acquire tools ofcommunication such as mobile phones, Internet access,satellite TV, and fax machines.As workers and producers, people in more opencountries are less dependent on the authorities for theirlivelihoods. For example, in a more open, marketdriveneconomy, the government can no longer depriveindependent newspapers of newsprint if they shoulddisplease the ruling authorities. 

 

In a more open economyand society, the “CNN effect” of global media andconsumer attention exposes and discourages the abuseof workers. Multinational companies have even greater incentives to offer competitivebenefits and wages in moreglobalized developing countriesthan in those that are closed.Economic freedom andrising incomes, in turn, helpto nurture a more educatedand politically aware middleclass. A rising business classand wealthier civil society create leaders and centersof influence outside government. People who areeconomically free over time want and expect to exercisetheir political and civil rights as well. In contrast, agovernment that can seal its citizens off from the rest of theworld can more easily control them and deprive them ofthe resources and information they could use to challengeits authority.

 

INCREASED DEMOCRATIZATION

As theory would predict, trade, development, andpolitical and civil freedom appear to be tied togetherin the real world. Everyone can agree that the world ismore globalized than it was 30 years ago, but less widelyappreciated is the fact that the world is much moredemocratized than it was 30 years ago. According tothe most recent survey by Freedom House, the share ofthe world’s population enjoying full political and civilfreedoms has increased substantially in the past threedecades, as has the share of the world’s governments thatare democratic.In its annual survey, released in December 2005,the human rights researchorganization reported that46 percent of the world’spopulation now lives incountries it classifies as “Free,”where citizens “enjoy openpolitical competition, a climateof respect for civil liberties,significant independent civiclife, and independent media.” That compares to the35 percent of mankind that enjoyed a similar level offreedom in 1973. The percentage of people in countriesthat are “Not Free,” where political and civil liberties aresystematically oppressed, dropped during the same periodfrom 47 percent to 36 percent. 

 

The percentage of thepopulation in countries that are “Partly Free” has remainedat 18 percent. Meanwhile, the percentage of the world’sgovernments that are democracies has reached 64 percent,the highest in the 33 years of Freedom House surveys.Thanks in good measure to the liberating winds ofglobalization, the shift of 11 percentage points of theworld’s population in the past three decades from “NotFree” to “Free” means that another 650 million humanbeings today enjoy the kind of civil and political libertiestaken for granted in such countries as the United States,Japan, and Belgium, instead of suffering under the kind oftyranny we still see in the most repressive countries.Within individual countries, economic and politicalfreedoms also appear to be linked. A 2004 study by theCato Institute, titled “Trading Tyranny for Freedom,”found that countries that are relatively open to the globaleconomy are much more likely to be democracies thatrespect civil and political liberties than those that arerelatively closed. And relatively closed countries are farmore likely to deny systematically civil and politicalliberties than those that are open.

 

FROM ECONOMIC REFORM TO POLITICAL REFORM

In the past two decades, a number of economies havefollowed the path of economic and trade reform leading topolitical reform. South Korea and Taiwan as recently as the1980s were governed by authoritarian regimes that did notpermit much open dissent. Today, after years of expandingtrade and rising incomes, both are multiparty democracieswith full political and civil liberties. Other countries thathave most aggressively followed those twin tracks of reforminclude Chile, Ghana, Hungary, Mexico, Nicaragua,Paraguay, Portugal, and Tanzania.

 

Kamel, the robot jockey, rides a racing camel in a test-run in Doha, Qatar, in April 2005. Qatar plans to replace the traditional child jockeys with robots.
 

In other words, governments that grant their citizensa large measure of freedom to engage in internationalcommerce find it increasingly difficult to deprive themof political and civil liberties, while governments that“protect” their citizens behind tariff walls and otherbarriers to international commerce find it much easierto deny those same liberties. 

 

Of course, the correlationbetween economic openness and political freedomacross countries is not perfect, but the broad trends areundeniable.The application for U.S. foreign policy is that tradeand development, along with its economic benefits, canprove to be powerful tools for spreading broader freedomsand democracy around the world.In mainland China, for example, economic reformand globalization give reason to hope for politicalreforms. After 25 years of reform and rapid growth, anexpanding middle class is experiencing for the first timethe independence of home ownership, travel abroad,and cooperation with others in economic enterprise freeof government control. The number of telephone lines,mobile phones, and Internet users has risen exponentiallyin the past decade. Millions of Chinese students andtourists travel abroad each year. 

 

That can only be goodnews for individual freedom in China, and a growingproblem for the government.Free trade and globalization can also play a role inpromoting democracy and human rights in the MiddleEast. In a May 2003 address outlining his plan for aMiddle East free trade area, President Bush said, “TheArab world has a great cultural tradition, but is largelymissing out on the economic progress of our time. Acrossthe globe, free markets and trade have helped defeatpoverty, and taught men and women the habits of liberty.”Economicstagnation in theMiddle East feedsterrorism, not becauseof poverty butbecause of a lack ofopportunity and hopefor a better future,especially amongthe young. Youngpeople who cannotfind meaningful workand who cannotparticipate in thepolitical process areripe pickings forreligious fanatics andterrorist recruiters. Anyeffort to encouragegreater freedom in the Middle East must include anagenda for promoting economic liberty and openness.

 

THE FUTURE

On a multilateral level, a successful agreementthrough the World Trade Organization (WTO) wouldcreate a more friendly climate globally for democracy andhuman rights. Less developed countries, by opening uptheir own, relatively closed markets and gaining greateraccess to rich-country markets, could achieve higher ratesof growth and develop the expanding middle class thatforms the backbone of most democracies. A successfulconclusion of the WTO Doha Development Round oftrade negotiations that began in 2001 would reinforce thetwin trends of globalization and the spread of political andcivil liberties that have marked the last 30 years. Failurewould delay and frustrate progress on both fronts formillions of people.

 

For the past three decades, globalization, humanrights, and democracy have been marching forwardtogether, haltingly, not always and everywhere in step, butin a way that unmistakably shows they are interconnected.By encouraging globalization in less developed countries,we not only help to raise growth rates and incomes,promote higher standards, and feed, clothe, and house thepoor; we also spread political and civil freedoms.