Difficulties faced by developing countries
Dependence on developed countries
In order to consolidate their political independence after World War II, independent Asian, African and Latin American countries put the task of developing national economy and striving for industrialization in the first place. However, most developing countries are still in a subordinate position today because western developed countries stubbornly maintain the old international economic relations and exploit and control developing countries by using their technological and economic advantages. This dependence is manifested in the following aspects:
In the field of production, the pattern of international division of labor left over from colonial rule has not been fundamentally broken. Western developed countries monopolize the production of finished products, while developing countries are still raw material suppliers of former suzerain countries. Until the early 1980s, there were still many developing countries mainly producing raw materials and primary products, among which the primary products of more than 30 countries accounted for more than 90% of their total exports. This makes developing countries rely heavily on western developed countries in terms of capital, technology, manufactured goods and consumer goods. Moreover, with the development of scientific and technological revolution, transnational corporations, as the main tools for western developed countries to monopolize capital and promote economic hegemonism, have continuously expanded their direct investment in developing countries, and at the same time transferred some labor-intensive and capital-intensive industries to some developing countries and regions, becoming affiliated "processing factories" and "assembly factories" of developed countries. In the past, a single traditional division of labor has changed into a multi-level international division of labor system, with western developed countries at the highest level and most developing countries at the bottom.
In the field of technology, western multinational companies monopolize technology research and sales, resulting in developing countries' technological dependence on western countries. In technology transfer, western countries not only strictly restrict the transfer of advanced or key technologies to local companies in developing countries, or set up various unreasonable and unequal business practices to restrict the technological development of developing countries, but also often charge high technology transfer fees. According to statistics, among about 5 million patents registered worldwide, developing countries only account for 1%. Developed countries such as the United States, Europe and Japan control 80% of global technology transfer, of which the United States accounts for 50-65%. Developed countries take advantage of their monopoly position in the field of science and technology to charge developing countries $30-50 billion in patent fees every year.
In the field of trade, western monopoly capital tries its best to manipulate the international market, on the one hand, it sets up various discriminatory trade barriers for developing countries. At present, there are more than 1000 kinds of non-tariff barriers. On the other hand, it raises the prices of industrial products and depresses the prices of raw materials and primary products, thus seriously and unequally exploiting developing countries. From 1980 to 1989, the prices of primary products in developing countries dropped by 33%, and only 1989 lost 1065 billion dollars. Because most developing countries still mainly export primary products, and the export targets are mainly western developed countries, this makes them in a position of dependence on western countries in trade.
In the field of international finance, developing countries not only depend on western developed countries in monetary system, but also have no rights in capitalist international monetary system. In addition, the western developed countries also rely on the developed countries financially through government loans, loans from international multilateral institutions and international commercial banks. In addition, multinational banks in western developed capitalist countries set up branches in developing countries in an attempt to manipulate local social and economic life.
This dependence will inevitably increase the exploitation of developing countries by western developed countries and make developing countries pay a heavy price.
Trade deficit and serious losses. According to the relevant data of the United Nations, in bilateral trade, 1988 is reduced to 83 based on the unit export value of developing countries (in dollars) of 1980, while the export trade volume of developing countries of 1988 is 679 1 000 million dollars. In this case alone, the losses of developing countries exceeded $65.438 billion. From the perspective of imports, based on 1980, the import unit value index of developing countries rose from 1988 to 106.2, while the import volume of developing countries in that year was $639 1 billion. In other words, due to the rising import prices, developing countries have to pay more than $37 billion for this. The total loss of developing countries is $654.38+52 million.
Foreign debt increases and capital flows back. According to the International Monetary Fund, the external debt of developing countries has increased dramatically since the 1970s. The accumulated medium and long-term foreign debt increased from 1972 to 1988/0425 billion, and the short-term foreign debt was 1972 billion, totaling 12397 billion, an increase of1977 billion. Since 1970' s, the interest rate in the international financial market has been high, and the interest burden paid by developing countries is even heavier. 1972 paid less than $2.5 billion, and 1988 increased to $83.3 billion, an increase of more than 32 times. And since 1983, there has been a serious "capital flight" from developing countries to western developed countries. From 1983 to 1987, the capital of middle-income countries is $93 billion, while in 1988, it is as high as $50 billion. From 65,438+0,973 to 65,438+0,985, Latin American countries alone totaled $65,438+0,565,438+0 billion, accounting for more than 40% of the increase in foreign debt in the same period. There is an abnormal phenomenon that "the poor draw blood".
The profit of foreign capital increased. For example, from 1980 to 1985, the average annual profit rate of American companies' direct investment in developing countries is about 20%. Some of these profits are used for local reinvestment and some are remitted back to China. Since 1980s, the profits repatriated to China have exceeded the newly exported capital of these countries.
The consequences of this dependent position in the old international economic order have seriously affected the accumulation scale and speed of developing countries, which has seriously frustrated their efforts to develop national economy, so that they will still face many problems and challenges in the 1990 s, such as the impact of regionalization and collectivization; The inflow of funds is reduced, and the shortage of funds is difficult to solve; The foreign debt problem is serious; The gap between science and technology continues to widen; Talent shortage and brain drain; Backward industrial structure; The terms of trade continue to deteriorate; Population growth is much higher than that of developed countries; The ecological environment continues to be seriously damaged; The economic gap between North and South has widened.
In view of the dependent status of developing countries, since the 1960s and 1970s, the radical school of western development economics has put forward the center-periphery theory. This theory holds that: (1) capitalism has developed into a world system of center (developed countries) and periphery (developing countries), and peripheral countries are attached to the center countries and always in a subordinate position in the world capitalist system; (2) The economic mechanism connecting the center and periphery is unequal exchange and its value transfer. Central countries grab a lot of "surplus" from foreign countries through unequal exchange to promote their own development, while foreign countries are poor because of the loss of "surplus", so developed and underdeveloped are the products of capitalist system, which are mutually causal; (3) The development of peripheral countries can only be underdeveloped, because they provide raw materials and cheap labor to meet the needs of the capitalist world market, and they cannot be industrialized as independent capitalist countries in economic structure. The more they develop, the deeper their dependence on the central country; (4) Only by actively resisting the chains linking them (referring to peripheral countries) with the capitalist system in the world can we achieve our goal. The core of this theory is to demonstrate the root of underdevelopment and the economic relationship between developed and developing countries through the value transfer caused by unequal exchange. This theory of unequal exchange based on the labor theory of value profoundly exposes the exploitation and plunder of developing countries by imperialism, which is helpful to reveal the reasons for the underdevelopment of developing countries and the irrationality and injustice of the old international economic order. To some extent, it reflects the mood of third world countries and helps to promote the struggle of developing countries for establishing a new international order.
However, this theory can't see the internal motive force of the change and development of the post-war historical status of developing countries, exaggerates the negative role of external factors in the economic development of developing countries, ignores the production field, only pays attention to the exchange field, and blames the underdevelopment on unequal exchange. This theory fails to make a dynamic and dialectical analysis of capital accumulation all over the world. Regard the current basic situation of North-South economic relations as the "periphery" completely attached to the "center" without interdependence; This theory is also weak and simplistic in application. It rarely puts forward a set of ideas about economic development, but often falls into a simple logic: either cut off economic ties with developed countries and close the door; Or can only be in a subordinate position. In fact, the center-periphery theory advocates cutting off ties with developed countries. This is all unrealistic. Therefore, the essence of this theoretical defect is to obliterate the difference between colonial economy and national economy after independence, to obliterate the difference between bureaucratic capitalism and national capitalism, and to make a wrong estimation of the basic situation and nature of the current economic relations between North and South.
Developing countries must break the old international economic order and establish a new international economic order in order to completely get rid of their dependence on western developed countries. Change the production, consumption and trade pattern of the world economy, change the unequal and unreasonable international division of labor, improve the terms of trade and realize price indexation; Developed countries should provide official assistance to developing countries, increase technology transfer, and ensure that developing countries enjoy full and permanent sovereignty over their natural resources and can effectively control the development of their resources; Being able to restrict and supervise the activities of transnational corporations according to the principle of sovereignty; Necessary adjustments should be made to the existing systems and rules of international economic institutions, so as to change the helpless position of developing countries in international affairs and enable developing China countries to participate in the decision-making process of international economic affairs on an equal footing. Therefore, it is necessary to continue North-South dialogue and strengthen South-South cooperation. Only in this way can we truly establish a new international economic order based on the Five Principles of Peace.
The heavy debt burden of developing countries
After World War II, especially since the 1960s, more and more third world countries have embarked on the road of developing national economy by using foreign capital, which once promoted the economic development of third world countries and created the "economic miracle" of Brazil and the economic take-off of the "four little dragons" of Asia. However, since Mexico 1982 announced that it would stop paying the due principal and interest of foreign debts, many third world countries have experienced difficulties in paying their debts, especially Latin American countries led by Brazil, Argentina and Mexico. Although the third world countries themselves, creditor governments, international financial organizations and international commercial banks have taken a series of rescue measures, the foreign debt crisis of the third world countries has not been eradicated. After entering the 1990s, the debt problem is still a heavy burden for third world countries.
There are many reasons for the debt crisis in developing countries. It has both historical background and realistic roots; There are both external factors and internal reasons.
Historically, it is the direct result of colonialism. Long-term plunder and exploitation have led to abnormal economic structure and backward economic development in developing countries, which has widened the economic gap between North and South. The economic structure and operation mode of the capitalist world make western developed countries in a monopoly position in the fields of international production, world trade and monetary finance. This has enabled developing countries to achieve national independence, but they have not got rid of the status of being exploited and plundered.
From the external environment, the international environment has been extremely unfavorable to developing countries since 1970s: (1) was hit by two oil price rises 1973 and 1979. Due to the rising oil price, the import cost of developing countries that need to import oil has soared, and the debt burden has soared. 1973, the economic account deficit of non-oil-producing developing countries was only 1 1 billion dollars, and it rose to 37.6 billion dollars in 1974 and 46 billion dollars in 1975. The excess expenditure caused by the rise in oil prices alone increased from 1973 to 1982, an increase of $260 billion. If the interest paid for oil imports is also included, it will reach $335 billion. (2) The world economic recession has led to the deterioration of the terms of foreign trade of developing countries. In order to transfer the great crisis of 1979 to 1982, western developed countries have taken different forms of protectionist measures while strengthening foreign dumping. According to the data of the World Bank, if western trade protectionism leads to a decrease in Latin American export income 10%, the price paid by this region will be equivalent to the annual real interest on all its debts. At the same time, the prices of export products of developing countries, especially the prices of raw materials and primary products mainly exported by low-income countries, have fallen sharply, which has slowed down the growth of export income of developing countries and reduced their solvency. From 65438 to 0985, the price of primary products has fallen to the level of the Great Depression in the 1930s. Since 1932, the price of Latin American export commodities has fallen by 20%, and the export income of primary products of developing countries has decreased by billions of dollars on average every year. 1986, 16 The total foreign trade surplus of heavily indebted countries was reduced by at least half, from $29 billion to1300 million; (c) Interest rates in international financial markets have risen. Loans from developing countries are mainly provided by international commercial banks. After 1979, in order to overcome the increasingly serious inflation, western developed countries implemented a tight monetary policy, which led to an increase in interest rates in financial markets. For example, the interest rate in the United States rose from 6.8% in 1976 to 198 18.9% in 0, which led to an increase in the debt burden of debtor countries. In the case of 1982 alone, Brazil paid an extra $7.9 billion in debt interest due to the rise in real interest rates. Moreover, since the main debt of developing countries is dollar debt, the dollar exchange rate formed by high interest rates has risen sharply, greatly increasing the debt burden of developing countries. According to statistics, from an international point of view, for every percentage point increase in interest rates, debtor countries will pay an extra $4-5 billion in interest each year; (d) The increasingly exclusive emerging European single market, the North American Free Trade Area, the Asia-Pacific economic circle and the escalating international trade war make it difficult for developing countries to cope. At the same time, the capital flow within the group also reduces the investment in developing countries, which affects their economic development and makes it difficult for them to repay huge debts.
From the internal factors, the stagflation of economic development in developing countries and improper economic policies and measures are also important reasons for the debt crisis: (1) The economies of developing countries are generally stagflation. According to the statistics of ECLAC, from 1982 to 1987, the average economic growth rate of the whole region is only 1.5%. Inflation is getting worse. 1982 Latin American inflation rate was 47.5%, and 1988 has reached 223%. (B) the lack of unified management and control of foreign debt. When western banks dumped a lot of surplus capital such as petrodollars in the 1970s, a considerable number of developing countries mistakenly borrowed a lot of loans beyond their repayment ability, especially a large number of international private commercial loans, thinking that "good opportunities" had arrived. For example, in the 1970s, the foreign debts of Latin American countries were only a few billion dollars, and by the end of 1980s, they had all increased to hundreds of billions. At the same time, debtor countries have not comprehensively considered foreign debts according to the debt repayment amount, investment amount, interest rate, their respective length and duration, foreign exchange reserves and other related factors, and have not formulated a scientific foreign debt repayment strategy suitable for the national conditions, thus often paying attention to one thing and losing the other, forming a situation of borrowing new debts to repay old debts and borrowing new debts to repay old interests; (3) improper use of foreign debt funds, poor economic benefits of imported projects and low exchange rate. Projects supported by foreign debts are often large-scale and unrealistic long-term construction projects, and some borrowed projects have not formed any production capacity at all. For example, three nuclear power plants started in Brazil in the 1970s cost $3.5 billion, and so far they have failed to generate electricity. Therefore, the average repayment period of the total medium and long-term foreign debts of debtor countries is shorter than the payback period of these funds for projects. In addition, part of the foreign debt is used for luxury consumption. For example, during the period from 1970 to 1978 in Chile, the import of TV sets increased by 79.42%, and the import of cosmetics and perfumes increased by 6,500%. Foreign debt managers in other countries are corrupt and transfer foreign debt funds to private real estate or foreign securities investment. In this way, foreign debt has not brought about the growth of the country's overall production capacity, and it is difficult to cope with the sudden change of the world economic situation and to repay debts on time; (d) Large capital outflows from developing countries. The main reason is the loss of confidence in the domestic economy and currency. For debtor countries, the more debt accumulates, the more serious the debt crisis will be and the more domestic capital will flow out. The more domestic capital outflows, the less domestic funds, so the more foreign debts are needed. This has formed a vicious lending ring. According to the report of the World Bank, by the end of 1983, the total outflow funds of Argentina, Mexico and Venezuela were equivalent to 6 1%, 44% and 77% of the total foreign debt respectively. It is estimated that in the past few years, the capital outflow of Latin American countries is still equivalent to half of the foreign debt.
Based on the above analysis, in essence, the debt crisis of developing countries is caused by the long-term implementation of economic colonialism policies in developed capitalist countries after the war. Since 1982, the debt crisis of developing countries has been going on for 10 years. Its foreign debt situation has the following characteristics: (1) The total debt has expanded rapidly, and its solvency has continued to decline. The total debt of 1982 was $839 billion, and 1989 soared to129 billion, with an average annual growth rate of 6.7%. 65,438+0,990 exceeded $65,438+0,346,5438+0 billion, an increase of 2% over the previous year. According to the estimation of the International Monetary Fund, 1992 will increase to1388 billion US dollars, an increase of about 4% over the previous year. At the same time, some countries have experienced a liquidation crisis. Since 1986, Peru, Brazil, C? te d 'Ivoire, Zambia, Bolivia, Costa Rica, Dominica, Nicaragua, etc. Announced one after another to stop paying interest on foreign debts due; (2) The debt crisis involves a wide range, and the burden on resource exporting countries is heavier. In 1970, there were only 14 countries with debts above 10 billion dollars, and it increased to 63 countries in 1985. Countries with annual debts above $1000 billion did not exist in 1970, and there were 65435 countries in 1985. By the end of 1989, there were 3 1 countries in sub-Saharan Africa alone, with debts exceeding 1000 billion US dollars. The debt problem involves almost all developing countries. (3) The debt structure has undergone major changes and the loan conditions have deteriorated. Mainly manifested in two aspects: first, the focus of debt and creditor's rights has shifted from official debt and creditor's rights to private debt and creditor's rights respectively; The second is the increase of short-term debt. Due to the worsening economic situation and political instability in debtor countries, creditor banks are becoming more and more cautious about issuing long-term loans, and the conditions are becoming more and more harsh, resulting in a decrease in long-term loans and an increase in short-term loans. (4) The international debt pattern is characterized by the concentration of debtor countries and creditor countries. As debtor countries, Latin America and Africa are the "hardest hit areas". The foreign debt owed by Latin American countries accounted for 34% of the total foreign debt of developing countries in Kloc-0/989, reaching 434 billion US dollars. In the same year, the total foreign debt of African countries reached $250 billion, accounting for about 20% of the total foreign debt. Since 1982, more than half of the foreign debts of developing countries have been concentrated in 17 countries with the heaviest debt burden, and their total debts are still growing. The ratio of debt principal and interest payable to export income in that year was still 4 1.6%. Their total debt has always accounted for more than half of the gross national product of that year. Both of these indicators have exceeded the internationally recognized warning line of 25%. Among 17 heavily indebted countries, Latin America accounts for 12. Brazil, which ranks first among the heavily indebted countries of 17, had a debt of121300 million dollars at the end of 0987. The concentration of creditors is also very high. According to the statistics of the World Bank, among the total foreign debts of 1985 17 major debtor countries, the proportion of creditor's rights of American commercial banks is 24.5%. Among the commercial banks that provide loans to Central and South America 10 debtor countries, American commercial banks account for 40%, Japan accounts for 16% and Britain accounts for 15%. Therefore, as far as developed countries are concerned, it is the commercial banks in major developed countries that are involved in the debt problem. The high concentration of debt and creditor's rights has increased the instability of the international financial system. As long as one or two debtor countries refuse to pay or fail to pay, the American banking system will be hit first, and then the whole international monetary and financial system will be in turmoil, which may lead to a global financial crisis.
The debt crisis in the third world, which lasted for several years, not only affected the economic development of developing countries themselves, but also seriously affected the world economy, even political and social development.
The heavy debt burden has made the economic deterioration of developing countries very serious and has become a serious shackle of economic development. (1) The debt burden has seriously hindered the economic development of third world countries. In the1970s, developing countries used foreign debts to develop their production, while in the1980s, loans that could have been used to develop production had to be used to repay the principal and interest. Since 1982, there has been a strange phenomenon of capital backflow. Not only will developing countries not get the funds from developed countries, but their own funds will also flow back to developed countries. From 1982 to 1987, the capital loss in Latin America is as high as145.6 billion US dollars. During the period of 1988, Latin America paid US$ 26 billion in principal and interest, while the new loans received were only US$ 6 billion, which more than tripled. This situation has led to a series of disasters in many debtor countries, such as lack of domestic funds, production paralysis, financial market turmoil, sharp currency depreciation, increased inflation, increased unemployment and political turmoil, which has greatly reduced the economic growth rate of developing countries. (2) The debt crisis has seriously affected the foreign trade of developing countries. Developing foreign trade, introducing advanced technology and equipment, and carrying out technological transformation in backward sectors of the national economy are important ways for developing countries to develop their economies and the main sources of repaying their foreign debts. However, due to the increasing debt burden, many debtor countries have to use foreign exchange originally intended for importing production equipment and technology to pay the principal and interest of their debts. Coupled with the compression of production investment, the production capacity and foreign exchange earning capacity of developing countries have been declining. At the same time, the price of primary products earning foreign exchange by export is too low in the international market, which makes the export trade of developing countries in trouble; (3) The debt crisis has seriously affected the economic adjustment of third world countries. Since 1980s, in order to change the backward economic structure, many developing countries have formulated their own economic development strategies, such as introducing some advanced technologies and equipment and developing some new industries and projects. However, because most of the funds were used to pay off debts, some plans were forced to be cancelled or postponed indefinitely. Therefore, the debt crisis not only greatly reduced the current economic growth of developing countries, but also seriously affected their future economic take-off; (4) The debt crisis has deepened the dependence of developing countries on developed capitalist countries and weakened their autonomy. Heavy debts make it impossible for some developing countries to get out of the crisis on their own. Without loans from developed countries, they can neither repay the principal and interest of old debts, nor develop production, nor even survive. This not only weakens the ability of developing countries to resist the crisis passed on by developed countries, but also makes them fall back into the control and exploitation of developed countries. Western developed countries, led by the United States, use controlled international commodity market funds and the World Bank to put forward various preconditions to recipient countries in the form of "letters of intent" when some developing countries are in urgent need of funds due to economic difficulties, thus affecting their economic policies. As Argentine economist Aldo Ferrer pointed out: "Foreign debt poses a serious threat to sovereignty and the right of our people to self-determination."
Facing the severe debt crisis, since the mid-1980s, developing countries have taken a series of measures to adjust their economic structures and development strategies, such as slowing down their development and reducing their loans; Expand exports, reduce imports, and improve solvency through foreign trade exports; Implement a tight financial, foreign debt and foreign exchange management system; Wait a minute. The above measures reduced the financial deficit of debtor countries in the late 1980s to some extent, and improved their solvency. However, these measures have also had a serious negative impact, leading to a decline in productive investment, abnormal development of foreign trade and a decline in the level of domestic activities.
The debt crisis of developing countries has also had a serious impact on western developed countries. It not only threatens the stability of the international monetary and financial system, but also affects the economic development of developed countries, making western countries lose a large part of commodity markets. Therefore, in order to prevent the debt crisis of developing countries from impacting the international financial market and safeguard the economic and strategic interests in the third world, western developed countries and some international financial institutions have successively adopted and implemented a series of so-called "saving the debt crisis of developing countries" policies. Gong Ze Plan, Mitterrand Plan and Baker Plan were thrown out one after another, but all ended in failure. 1989 In March, US Treasury Secretary Brady announced the "Brady Plan", the central contents of which are: encouraging commercial banks to cancel some debts of debtor countries; Require international financial institutions to continue to provide new loans to debtor countries to promote their economic development; Improve solvency. Compared with the previous scheme, Brady plans to focus on the reduction of debt principal and interest, rather than borrowing new debts to repay old debts. This plan has changed the rigid position of the United States in the past, which means a major turning point in the US debt policy. The grim reality forced the American government to begin to admit that debt relief is the only way to solve the debt problem. Although this plan may cause private banks to reduce loans, and the extent to which it can be realized is still in doubt, it is a step forward from the past and provides a breakthrough for alleviating the debt crisis. But it should also be noted that the essence of American economic colonialism has not changed.
At present, the measures to reduce the debt of developing countries mainly focus on the following aspects: (1) debt capitalization. Foreign creditor banks sell their book debts at a discount. After bond buyers buy their debts, they convert them into the currency of debtor countries through local bank discounts, and then invest. The advantage for creditors is that they have found a way to use the loan at face value. The benefits to the debtor are: paying off part of the debt smoothly and reducing the debt burden. According to statistics, the debt capitalized by developing countries in the first half of 1988 reached $8.8 billion. However, debt capitalization has two negative effects that cannot be ignored: one is to aggravate inflation in debtor countries; The second is to strengthen foreign investors' control over debtor countries' economies. (2) Cash repurchase, a country repurchases debts with cash at a certain discount. One of the most famous is Bolivia's debt repurchase program. Bolivia repurchased 40% (US$ 335 million) of its commercial bank debt at an average discount rate of 89% in March 1988, and made similar arrangements in early 1989. At present, this method cannot be widely used because of the serious shortage of foreign exchange reserves in developing countries. (3) reduce the amount of debt repayment. Unconditionally cancel the debt fund owed by developing countries and lower interest rates. This practice is increasingly adopted by creditor countries.
As a third world country itself, in order to get rid of the heavy foreign debt burden, we must seize the favorable opportunity and take concrete measures to reverse the passive situation. Efforts should be made to (1) continue to adjust and reform the domestic economic structure, vigorously promote the export promotion strategy, overcome the debt crisis by expanding exports, and then use the export surplus for economic development; Seek diversification of foreign capital sources and keep economic development in direct proportion to solvency; Strive to create conditions from the system and policy, improve the efficiency of foreign capital utilization, and promote the improvement of domestic savings; (2) Developing South-South cooperation. Developing countries should unite to strengthen their negotiating ability with developed countries in the fields of international trade and international finance, improve the terms of international trade, and improve the conditions for borrowing and repaying debts; (3) Carry out North-South dialogue and actively promote the establishment of a new international economic order. In this process, developing countries should establish their own multinational companies and regional financial institutions to promote the solution of debt problems through South-South cooperation.
/kloc-in the 1990s, the debts of developing countries were reduced. For example, 199 1 year, the external debt of Latin American countries decreased by 2. 1% compared with the previous year. However, we should also see that it is unrealistic and impossible to completely solve the long-term global debt problem in a short time. For a long time, the debt problem will remain a heavy burden for developing countries. However, as long as developing countries make joint efforts from both domestic and international aspects, it is still full of hope to get rid of the debt dilemma.