Archived Articles

Simeon Mitropolitski is a Canadian analyst, of Bulgarian origin, and a former syndicated columnist with the Bulgarian News Agency (BTA). He is the author of several hundred articles dealing with hot political and economic topics, both national and international.

He was part of the first group of Bulgarian intellectuals and students that began the opposition movement that finally put an end to the communist regime in this country in 1989, and in 1996-1997 participated in international observation teams during the elections in several Balkan countries - Romania, Albania and Bulgaria.

In 2002 Simeon and his family moved from Bulgaria to Canada where they live now in Montreal, province of Quebec. Simeon is a Master of Political Science from McGill University and a B.A. of Political Science and History.

Global Real Estate Project
News Index

Directories
  Int'l Realty
  US Realty

On the economic front the world now is stepping on much shakier ground than 2 years ago. The economic problems experienced by the most developed countries aren't yet overcome. The global trade liberalization prospects are gloomier than ever. Dozens of poor countries can't meet the ends without direct aid or trade stimulus. The global war against the terrorism leaves its traces on the custom checkpoints, making more and more difficult to increase the trade volumes.

During the most of 90's many things in the world economy seemed easy. The rates of growth were spectacular. The rates of trade growth were even more spectacular. The rich countries became richer; many poor countries became less poor. If someone didn't catch with the global movement of enrichment this was considered to be an anomaly rather than a norm. But the sea changed its direction. The global trade liberalization lost its huge momentum. Some opposing social forces, especially in the most developed countries have gained ground. The international trade, that in the past has contributed so much to the human welfare around the globe, suddenly came under attack. It was associated with any sort of social problems, beginning with the starvation in Africa and ending with the climate changes.

There are many and striking examples of how the trade liberalization both international and internal has changed for good the fate of many nations. In fact it's much more difficult to see any nation living under economic autarky enjoying similar quality of life as its neighbors living under a liberal trade regime. Look at North and South Korea or at Cuba and Florida, they all show the interdependence between the trade and the prosperity.

Or look at Mexico, a former third world country, where the international trade became so important following the NAFTA agreements with the United States and Canada. Recent statistics show that the manufacture sector is accounting for 90% of all exports. Out of these 90%, the half is produced by maquiladoras and the rest by other companies. Virtually all the major Mexican trading partners are among the most developed countries in the world, beginning with the United States. Since the middle of 90's Mexico has doubled its exports, it has also doubled its foreign-exchange reserves in the last 5 years. Mexico looks far better economically in almost any field than the other Latin America giant Brazil, the later having much stronger resource base but lacking the wish to open its markets. In the past both Brazil and Mexico were famous for their resource-driven economies. For Mexico it's increasingly becoming a matter of the past.

But there is a point almost none is going to notice, especially among the foes of the trade liberalization. If this liberalization ultimately brings more prosperity and welfare for the nations then any attempt to stop this process may have devastating effects on the social well-being in any place on the earth. For many nations this really makes the difference between life and death.

Instead of blocking the inevitable in long-term process of trade liberalization, the anti-globalization movement should try to manage this process together with the public authorities, making fairer and more equitable the distribution of the wealth. To fight against the trade is to fight against the personal computers trying to replace them with the old typing machines. Or trying to stop replacement of the old gramophones with the new CD players.

This very much reminds us of the Luddite movement in Britain from the early 19th century. Then thousands masked men stormed the factories smashing machines that were considered to be the main foe of the working class. The Luddites couldn't prevent the technological and economic progress as well as the present day Luddits can't stop the new progress and the trade liberalization as part of it. The only thing they can do is to obstruct for a time the movement and to cause unspeakable sufferings to so many human beings in the least developed countries.