Countries like Malaysia that were once colonised are rightly sensitive about their independence. Their leaders constantly worry about newer and subtler forms of colonialism. Although no modern country has yet been re-colonised, nonetheless such fears still resonate in the Third World.

For Malaysia, the immediate post-Merdeka years were consumed by this phobia. We went to extremes in eradicating reminders of our former British masters. Some of the measures were merely childish and inconvenient, like changing familiar geographic names.

Others were more far reaching. Thus our previously excellent education system, the legacy of the British, was jettisoned just to get rid of the colonial aroma. Fortunately we did not descend to pulling down statues or blasting historical landmarks.

The decades since have not dimmed our irrational fears. We still see neocolonialism in various guises, the latest being globalisation. While a healthy skepticism towards it is understandable, paralysing fear is not.

For if we are not an active participant in or ignore globalisation, we risk being left out. Granted, globalisation is fraught with risks and dangers, being left out is no fun either. The Laotians, being in the backwaters of this global mainstream, may be spared the recent Asian economic contagion, but not many would wish to trade places with them.

Paper money superfluous

Globalisation is the increasing integration of markets, economies and other institutions into one world standard. While many clamor to join this mainstream, just as many resist. Globalisation is enthusiastically embraced by those steeped in the ways of the new economy.

Its detractors include such America-first advocates as Pat Buchanan, as well as the Mahathirs of the Third World. Such bewildering alliances and confluences reflect the complexity of this phenomenon.

Globalisation is not a new concept. Imperialism was one form, based essentially on the white man's burden to enlighten the dark world. The ensuing economic bounty to the colonisers, however, is not to be dismissed.

For Muslims, globalisation is not an alien concept. Islam itself is global in outlook and perspective, transcending tribal and national identities. The Muslim ummah (community) is the most diverse culturally and ethnically, but united by a collective sense of oneness.

Islam accepts and celebrates this diversity. Indeed, the concept of race or nation-state is foreign in Islam.

Modern technology accelerates globalisation. Events in the remotest corners of the globe are immediately beamed to the living rooms of America and elsewhere.

The instantaneous and free flow of capital reduced money to mere bits that blipped around at the speed of light on the Internet, seeking the highest return. They make paper money superfluous, and they do not bear the portrait of any king or president.

Peoria, not Poona

What the West fears most about globalisation is its leveling effect. It means that uneducated Americans will fare as poorly as illiterate Indonesians, but at the same time, skillful Indian programmers can compete equally with their American counterparts.

The much-coddled and highly unionised American workers panic when they discover that Mexicans earning a fraction of the wages could do the same work as efficiently and skillfully.

Manufacturing jobs are not the only ones heading south. Typists in India transcribe transcriptions at many American hospitals. The dictation is digitised, encrypted, and then transmitted via Internet to India, where it is downloaded and transcribed, and then re-transmitted back to America, ready for the patient's chart by the next morning.

The services of many American corporations are also increasingly contracted out to the Third World. Phone inquires are answered not by Americans but by Indians in India who have been trained to speak and respond like Americans. They even assume typical American names like Debbie and Patty, and fully prepped in the minutiae of Americana so customers at the other end of the line think they are speaking to someone in Peoria, and not Poona.

The data entry works of many companies are being done in places like Jamaica. With such opportunities afforded by globalisation, it is hard to imagine it as a major, wicked scheme perpetrated by the West to victimise or oppress the Third World.

Quality and returns

Another criticism of globalisation is its tendency for homogenisation, or worse, Western hegemony. The usual example cited is the ubiquity of McDonald's restaurants worldwide. But this is a misreading.

McDonald's is popular in India despite Indians being vegetarians; it serves vegetable burgers instead. Thus what is popular is not the hamburger or McDonald, but the concept of a fast, tasty and affordable meal served in a hygienic environment. That is the universal value, cherished by vegetarian Indians and chopstick-using Chinese.

When Malaysians bank at Citibank rather than at the local variety, it is because Citibank's services are superior. Nationalism is a very distant consideration. This applies to Malaysians as well as Japanese and Americans. Japanese are the biggest buyers of American

Treasury notes because they consider that to be superior investments, not because they are particularly fond of Americans. What is valued is not America, rather quality and best returns.

Foreign banks in Malaysia should be allowed to expand. To those nationalistic economists who feel that banks and other 'commanding heights' of the economy should be locally or publicly owned, ponder this. Does anyone miss Bank Bumiputra now that it is finally put out of its misery?

I would have sold that bank to the highest bidder, and if that turned out to be a foreigner, so be it. I would also sell MAS, Pernas, Petronas and other 'nas-es', and use the proceeds to improve our schools and send bright young Malays to Harvard and Wharton.

They would then return with such basic business skills as when borrowing foreign currencies, adequately hedge them. Such elementary concepts are taught in the first semester of business school.

Rational choice

Independence, for nations as well as individuals, is definitely overrated. It is much easier to be independent and to maintain your independence when you are strong, smart and successful. Paradoxically, when you all three, you find that you depend more on others, that is, more inter-dependent.

America is the largest, strongest and most self-sufficient economy; it could easily afford to be insular. If the Arabs were to shut off their oil, there will always be the Alaskan oilfields and the vast coal deposits.

If the dollar tanks, ordinary citizens would not suffer. Sure Lexuses and Mercedeses may be more expensive, but there will always be Lincolns and Cadillacs. But instead of being closed, the American economy remains the most open. As a result, its citizens enjoy the highest standard of living.

Citizens of the Cayman Islands go through periodic referenda on whether they should be independent, and each time they choose not to. Having seen what happened to Jamaica and elsewhere, that is indeed a rational choice.

Had the Chinese in Hong Kong been polled, most would choose to remain with the 'white devils' rather than 'unite' with their Communist brothers.

Sink or swim

While the accounting of benefits and costs of globalisation depends very much on one's perspective, there is no question that it is a relentless, inevitable tidal wave. One is more likely to survive and even thrive, if prepared.

A non-swimmer will be swept away and drowned by this wave, but a skillful surfer will exhilaratingly ride its crest. We would be better off preparing and adapting to this new reality instead of wasting energy on thwarting the inevitable.

We should concentrate on preparing our citizens to be better swimmers and surfers, or at the very least, to provide them with kayaks. We only hurt ourselves by striking out at a phantom enemy.