The term neocolonialism was coined by Kwame Nkrumah, a former President of Ghana to explain the political, social and economic control which can be propagated culturally, linguistically and economically.
The overall objective of the control is to enhance and promote the culture of the neocolonialist state(s) among the citizens of the targeted countries so as to get access to markets, labor and raw materials for corporations based in the neocolonialist state(s).
The key pillars of neocolonialism therefore include globalization, capitalism and imperialism. Neocolonialism is contrasted with colonialism, which implies direct military and political control of one state by another in a ruler-ruled relationship (Bauer and Holowinska 72).
Neocolonialism goes hand in hand with the concept of global divide which divides the world into global north and global south. The powerful nations popularly known as the first world make up the global north.
Such countries include the United States (US) and its allies who control the United Nations (UN) and are also members of the G8. The global north accounts for a quarter of world’s population but controls three quarters of world’s income. The citizens of such countries have access to education, health and shelter (Sartre 18).
The global south on the other hand comprises the developing or undeveloped countries majorly in Africa, Asia and Latin America. These countries account for three quarters of world’s population but they only control a quarter of the world’s income. In the global south, the access to health, education and shelter is usually a privilege of the few.
However, the global divide is not mainly influenced by geographical location of a country. If a country in Africa is able to compete economically with other western powers, it is put under the category of global north. Similarly, if a country in Europe is poor, it is put under the category of global south. In other words, the defining criteria is the economic stability of a country, not its geographical location.
Theoretical models for explaining neocolonialism
Idealism theory
In international relations and foreign policy, idealism is a political philosophy which entails the advancement of a particular ideology (political, social or economic) both at home and abroad, with the aim of promoting and safeguarding the interests of citizens of a country and those of citizens in other countries.
Examples include the fight against poverty, HIV/AIDS and advocacy for democracy instead of dictatorship or authoritarianism as well as safeguarding of human rights.
Realism theory
This is a state centered international relations theory which looks at states as the key actors in international politics. The theory is based on the works of historical writers such as Rousseau, Machiavelli and Thucydides (Edkins and Vaughan-Williams 43). The main argument of realism is that international relations are characterized by anarchy, in which nations interact for their selfish interests.
Realism therefore negates the mutual understanding of nations in their relations and puts more emphasis on the struggle of nations to amass as much resources as possible in order to advance their own interests. With realism, economic success is the leading interest in international relations.
The US and its allies are known to promote democracy in many parts of Africa. However, a critical look at the issue shows that in most cases, the US is only interested in having democratic leaders who can help it gain access to markets and raw materials. Leaders who are not ready to cooperate are labeled as criminals, terrorists and unfit to hold office.
Such leaders and their countries are eventually slapped with economic sanctions and are also isolated by the international community. A good example is Robert Mugabe of Zimbabwe whose country has been isolated by the international community.
Globalization and neocolonialism
Globalization can be defined as the minimization of the differences between people of the world and the maximization of their similarities through interactions, cooperation and communication.
Before the world wars, the world was characterized by minimal interaction, communication, cross-border movements and language homogeneity. However, after the world wars, this situation changed. The changes were mainly triggered by the desire of nations of the world to unite in various spheres of development, mainly the economy, education, employment, environment and governance.
The main driving forces of globalization were however the advancement in Information and Communication Technology (ICT), improved transport systems, liberalized trade as well as liberalized immigration policies. Globalization has made it possible for any person to work, study, marry and stay in any part of the world irrespective of his or her culture.
After the world wars, a new form of globalization emerged. This was triggered by the new desire to unite the world through the three main development pillars, namely social, political and economic pillars.
Many states thought that the world wars were mainly caused by poor interaction between the nations, arguing that many countries did not care harming others as a result of the old economic philosophy which pegged development on elimination of rivals rather than the cooperation between stakeholders.
The contemporary form of globalization is characterized by the liberalization of trade, the emergence of multinational corporations as well as emergence of global institutions like the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and other UN affiliated institutions.
The advancement in ICT has transformed the world into a global village. Through ICT and improved means of transport, people are more than ever able to do business with each other without any form of barriers.
The developed countries have been in the forefront in propagating the idea of globalization. These countries led by the US usually view the developing countries as their imperial territories. They always ensure that there are in place rules and regulations governing the economic, social and political endeavors of the developing countries (Gills and Thompson 175).
They know that with a global culture in place, they are able to remain ahead by using resources from the developing and the undeveloped countries for their economic, social and political progress (Baylis, Smith and Owens 90).
The developing countries are known as the markets of the western culture. Culture in this context is taken to mean business, educational, political and governance ideas. Many developing countries in Africa are known to have embraced what is referred to as export based agriculture at the expense of subsistence agriculture. This has led to recurrent food shortages in many developing countries (Buckman 42).
The trend began in early 1980s through what were referred to as Structural Adjustment Programs (SAPS), which required countries in Africa and Asia to embrace economic development at the expense of social and political development (Kelsey 95).
This led to the ever rising levels of poverty and population growth rates in the developing world, forcing them to comply with the policies of the new world order for the fear of economic and political sanctions from the developed countries (Konadu-Agyemang 219).
The undeveloped countries are those which have high poverty levels and illiteracy. Most of these countries are found in Africa and are described as living in the wrong civilization or being uncivilized. These countries are the best dumping sites for western culture. Most of the undeveloped countries are characterized by poor governance, ethnic strife and lack of basic social amenities.
Many analysts have however argued that the poverty and lack of infrastructure in the undeveloped countries can be attributed to the imperial nature of their relationships with their developed counterparts.
Forms of Neocolonialism
Colonialism was very popular during the 19th century when the British, the US and other western powers scrambled for resources for their industries in the developing and undeveloped countries.
They used the ideas of religion and education to penetrate and gain control over the countries especially in Africa where there were no formal governments and institutions. Some western powers even went ahead to use the Africans as slaves due to ignorance of the African people.
With time, colonization was slowly brought to an end following the end of world wars. However, what the Africans and the developing countries did not know was that only flags of their countries changed.
Some political analysts have described the independence of many African and Asian countries as “independence of the flag”, meaning that even though the countries are independent, they can only exercise that independence to the extent of self governance alone.
What this means is that the countries are literally colonized but through ideas. It can therefore be argued that even though many developing countries were granted permission to govern themselves, their former colonies still maintained high economic, social and political dominance in their former colonies.
One of the ways in which neocolonialism has been propagated is through what is referred to as the odious debt. This is a debt which is incurred when a loan is given to a poor country but fails to benefit the citizens due to corruption by the leaders. Such countries also lack a clear economic policy to regulate investment, taxation and foreign debt.
The developed countries benefit from the debts because they charge high interest rates on the loans, which are not used for the economic progress of the poor countries but are misappropriated by the corrupt leaders. These dictators in return become loyal to the countries which give them the loans and thus the developed countries get an opportunity to exploit the markets, labor and raw materials of the developing countries.
There are also double standards even on genuine loans when it comes to repayment. When a country like the US gives a loan to another country like Germany or France, the loan is repaid with very little interest or even interest free.
However, when the same loan is given to a developing country, it is repaid with interest which is three to five times higher than what France or Germany would pay. The aim is to ensure that the developing countries do not become economically independent.
Neocolonialism is also propagated using international institutions like the IMF. This institution was formed with an aim of liberalizing the world’s economy to enable the developing countries get loans for their development (Kegley 46).
However, the problem with the IMF is that it gives loans to the developing countries with strings attached. One example to illustrate this is Jamaica, which was given a loan by IMF in 1977 to reconstruct the economy which had disintegrated in 1970.
However, the condition of the loan was that Jamaica was supposed to eliminate all labor laws and especially the law on minimum wage. This paved way for exploitation of the citizens by multinational corporations which underpaid the citizens of Jamaica.
The idea of International Law and neocolonialism
International law refers to the set of laws or principles which govern the relationships between sovereign states (Fichtelberg 76). It was initially formed to govern the manner in which nations related to each other with a view of improving their relationships in regard to specific issues. International law initially took the form of treaties and agreements between states, which were either bilateral or multilateral.
The protection of human rights moved the international law to create the international criminal court to try the perpetrators of crimes against humanity.
Since its formation, the court has investigated several perpetrators of crimes against humanity like Charles Taylor of Liberia, Slobodan Milosevic of Yugoslavia and has issued a warrant of arrest against Sudanese president Omar Al Bashir for the chaos and atrocities in the Darfur region of the Sudan.
However, the court has attracted criticism from political analysts who have accused it of double standards in that it only targets the developing countries.
The super powers of the world like the US, which refused to be a signatory to the Rome statute which formed the court, have never been subjected to the court’s jurisdictions despite the fact that they have committed crimes of aggression against other states like the Iraq invasion in 2003.
My prescription on how the international community should deal with the issue of neocolonialism is for international institutions such as the UN and its affiliated institutions to ensure that the international law is followed to the letter.
The UN in particular should seek to empower the developing and undeveloped countries with social, political and economic resources for them to resist any attempts of neocolonialism by the US and its allies.
Works Cited
Bauer, Franziska, and Magdalena Holowinska. Colonialism and Neo-Colonialism. München GRIN: Verlag GmbH, 2009. Print.
Baylis, John, Steve Smith, and Patricia Owens. The Globalization of World Politics: An Introduction to International Relations. Oxford: Oxford University Press, 2010. Print.
Buckman, Greg. Globalization: Tame it or Scrap it? : Mapping the Alternatives of the Anti-Globalization Movement. London: Zed Books, 2004. Print.
Edkins, Jenny, and Nick Vaughan-Williams. Critical Theorists in International Relations. London: Routledge, 2009. Print.
Fichtelberg, Aaron. Law at the Vanishing Point: A Philosophical Analysis of International Law. Farnham GU9 7PT: Ashgate Publishing, 2005. Print.
Gills, Barry, and William Thompson . Globalization and Global History; Rethinking Globalizations. London: Routledge, 2006. Print.
Kegley, Charles. World Politics: Trend and Transformation. Boston, MA: Cengage Learning, 2009. Print.
Kelsey, Jane. International economic regulation. Sheffield: Ashgate Publishers, 2002. Print.
Konadu-Agyemang, Kwado. IMF and World Bank Sponsored Structural Adjustment Programs in Africa: Ghana’s Experience, 1983-1999.Voices in Development Management. Sheffield: Ashgate Publishers, 2001. Print.
Sartre, Jean-Paul. Colonialism and Neocolonialism. New York: Routledge, 2001. Print.