Irfan Ul Haq Chishti
Our economic world is encountering radical rearmament of Protectionism as the national proclivities of financial reclusiveness and transactional traction of paranoid policymaking bear pragmatic testimony to its substantiated veracity. Reclining relics of Rome and recanting regimes of the yore endow credence to the plausibility of renunciation in the face of actualizing the imperatives of “National interest”. Reciprocally, the commercial world is rending asunder in economic estimations for the pursuit of preserving the fabric of individual international agents.
The phenomenon concerning the elopement of hitherto integrationist enlightenment with brigades of autarkical statism can be referred to as Economic Secularism. The prerogative of autonomous abnegations on the part of the states notwithstanding, the architectural inegalitarianism of the global world insinuates the exploitative conclusions engendered by the systematic relinquishment of prevalent financial dispensations. The episodic torpedoing of the tranquilizing trichotomy, germinated from the wombs of Washington Consensus, “Stabilize, Privatize and Liberalize” lends innuendoes of impending adumbration of financial globalization.
To substantiate the pronounced shattering of utopian Commercial Cosmocracy into discernible shards and cadavers of eulogised economic globalisation is worth forwarding to the fore. The blistering penchant for “Containment” prevalent within the occidental states can be envisaged through the statistical spectacle of CNBC which claims the consequential deceleration of trade quantum between America and China up to a whopping 14.5 percent this year alone.
This deteriorating oscillation of engagement among astronomically puissant economic scaffoldings of global trade compellingly elicits contentions. The impact of approaching the inferno of Corporate Fractionalization augurs deleterious for the peripheral states whose economic satiation is diametrically contingent upon the operational harmoniousness of orchestrated global trade relations.
Relationally, reclining in their strategically palatial citadels and enshrined within the insouciant castles, economically vibrant states are engaging in destructive de-coupling endeavours by erecting concretized embankments within the mercurial realm of globalization. The American Section 301 of Trade Act 1974 and its inordinate implementation has categorically asphyxiated its commercial arteries with the Middle Kingdom-China.
The cause for concern is the elemental ramifications of such commercial elusiveness for states in the throes of financial decrepitude. Under the equivocal aegis of national interests and amidst the atomical stakes of nuclear enshrinement countries have decided to tread the path of clandestine denunciations and placid pugnaciousness. The economic enchantment generated by the pursuance of commercial atomisation is the yield of materializing nationally bankable objectives. Nevertheless, to saddle the cart of culpability upon solitary shoulders may be synonymous with exculpating its antagonist counterpart thus diversification of incrimination appears to be an appealing recourse for progression.
Internationally, from the spectacles of Realism, the propensity for “Exceptionalism” factors is the cardinal tenet of state policies. Commercial Peace Theory postulates the abortive culmination of hostilities among financially embroiled states owing to their existential conditionalities of sustainable subsistence conditional to the solvency of their counterpart. Yet, the vaporization of this economic camaraderie by the warming ultraviolets of “national interest” offers the pernicious paradigm of expeditious autarky. The deceleration of trade engagement may yield dividends for the powerful states as their mutually antagonistic ventilation actualizes yet the fumes of this incandescent bifurcation would virtually adumbrate the velocity of trade requisite for the survival of starving stomachs within the impoverished alcoves of the world.