1 Post-Soviet Globalization M. Peter van der Hoek Erasmus University, Rotterdam, Netherlands and Academy of Economic Studies, Bucharest, Romania 1. Introduction The fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989 and the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 are the most important events of the late 20 th century. Few observers foresaw these events. As late as in February 1989 fugitives trying to escape Eastern Germany were shot. In December 1990, when I was in Tallinn, Estonia, I discussed the situation in the Soviet Union with someone who had been correspondent in Moscow for a Swedish newspaper for over ten years. Thus, he knew the Soviet Union very well. Yet, he believed that the Baltics would not be able to secede from the Soviet Union, certainly not before the turn of the century. Only nine months later, however, this was exactly what happened after the failed coupe of August 1991. The Soviet Union collapsed and the Baltics regained their independence. This illustrates that predictions are very difficult to make even for those who are well informed. 1 In this paper I will not make predictions. However, I will not ignore the future either. I will focus on the current situation with regard to globalization from a historical perspective, while I will also look at possible future developments. The term globalization appeared in a dictionary for the first time in 1961, but the concept of globalization is not always clear (Ro- drik, 2001). In the literature concepts of globalization can be found that sometimes seem fuzzy. According to Levitt (1993) a global corporation “operates (…) as if the entire world (or major regions of it) were a single entity; it sells the same things in the same way everywhere”. This seems to describe a problem of a number of US companies operating in foreign markets rather than to define the concept of globalization in a meaningful way. Some US companies try to sell products that were developed for the home market in foreign markets. This is a far different approach compared to many Japanese companies, which develop products for for- eign markets and try to sell them in these markets. An example is the Lexus, a car that is widely sold in the US market. Emotional feelings seem sometimes more important than facts and rational arguments. When interviewed demonstrators against globalization do not always appear able to provide a meaningful definition. At the G8 meetings in Genoa in July 2001 a variety of protest groups marched on the streets to protest against globalization. Protesters also voice their opinions on the Internet. 2 They seem to have some influence on official institutions as well as companies. The next G8 meeting will most likely be held in some remote place. World Bank development projects have been abandoned. Starbucks has promised to sell “fair trade” coffee beans in its coffee shops. Clothing importers in the USA settled after they had been sued over working conditions in the American commonwealth of Saipan in the Pacific. The Internet has proved an important tool in organizing protest groups, which seem to have globalized faster than their target enterprises. However, a crucial question is who elected them? The governments they fight are in the end accountable to voters, but who holds the protest groups accountable? Globalization is sometimes used as synonymous to internationalization, which could be interpreted as increasing international interdependence. Globalization is also defined as a 1 According to Rodrik (2001) economists rank second to astrologers in their predictive abilities. 2 One example is www.destroyimf.org advertising itself as “a web resource for all those mobilising to end the poverty and injustice inflicted by global capitalism”. As the spelling suggests the movement seems to be org a- nized by European activists.