The participation of developing countries in the process of globalization enables them to make better use of their comparative advantages, introduce advanced technologies, attract foreign capital, and acquire managerial expertise. It also helps reduce monopolies and enhance competition in markets. Yet while globalization offers opportunities for development, it also presents major risks that depend largely on the awareness and competence of governments in defining their role within this interconnected world. This includes improving labor skills according to international standards, focusing on the country’s competitive advantages across all sectors, making optimal use of national resources and wealth, and ensuring fair redistribution of wealth, all within the framework of good governance and internationally recognized standards.
Everything around us demonstrates that we are living in the midst of economic globalization, where it is impossible to deny humanity’s dependence on products originating from all corners of the globe. The iPhone, for example, is a product manufactured across 40 countries: its design and software are developed in the United States; processors come from Taiwan and South Korea; screens from South Korea and Japan; batteries from China; rare minerals from Australia and the Congo; certain plastic components from Malaysia and Vietnam; while final assembly takes place in China or India.
A Boeing aircraft consists of approximately 2.5 million parts manufactured in 40 countries: the wings are made in Japan; parts of the fuselage in Italy; doors in France; landing systems in Britain and France; software in India; and the horizontal tail sections in Italy and South Korea. Likewise, a Tesla electric vehicle contains between 10,000 and 20,000 parts, depending on the model, sourced from 20 to 30 countries.
To better explain the meaning of globalization and how it can be used to raise the negotiating leverage of nations, there is perhaps no clearer example than the recent remarkable scene when the world was surprised by the number of major American business leaders and corporate executives who accompanied President Trump to China. That economic delegation gave tremendous momentum to the meeting between the two global powers. The companies represented in the delegation had a combined value exceeding $18 trillion gathered in one hall, in addition to $13 trillion in managed assets from BlackRock and Blackstone.
“When $18 trillion in corporate power enters the room, globalization becomes geopolitical influence.”
Dr. Osama Kadi
Globalization provides companies with a competitive advantage by enabling them to obtain raw materials at lower prices and operate closer to markets, thereby reducing supply-chain costs. It also allows firms to benefit from lower labor costs compared to industrialized nations. More importantly, it facilitates the transfer of technical expertise from advanced economies to developing and emerging countries.
Singapore hosts more than 81,300 foreign-owned companies, including over 7,000 multinational corporations that use the city-state as a regional headquarters for managing operations across Asia and the Pacific. South Korea hosts more than 18,000 foreign companies, Vietnam around 23,000, and Malaysia nearly 5,000. These countries and others successfully attracted such corporations by providing favorable investment climates and governance environments. In return, these companies transfer technology, create jobs, and contribute to workforce development, ultimately raising workers’ incomes and living standards.
Of course, globalization is not limited to goods alone; it also encompasses services. For example, many American companies have relocated customer service centers and information technology operations to India. Under the North American Free Trade Agreement, U.S. automotive companies shifted operations to Mexico due to lower labor costs, generating employment opportunities and improving living standards there. China stands as a prominent example of a country that greatly benefited from globalization, as does Vietnam, where globalization contributed to rising rice prices and improved conditions for poor farmers.
The benefits of economic globalization under sound national governance are clearly reflected in the numbers. Singapore’s national income rose from less than $2 billion between 1970 and 2025 to approximately $527 billion. Even more striking is South Korea’s rise from $9 billion to $1.86 trillion. Malaysia increased from around $4 billion to $437 billion, while Vietnam grew from $14 billion in 1980 to $494 billion in 2025. Even Rwanda, a small country whose national income did not exceed $1.6 billion in 2000, saw it rise to $16 billion by 2025.
Globalization emerged within an unfair global economic system and, on its own, cannot achieve justice. Developing countries therefore face a dilemma: if they withdraw from globalization, they risk economic stagnation; if they participate, they may become dependent on advanced economies. Consequently, fair distribution of globalization’s gains must be guaranteed. This requires accelerating economic reforms, as global competition today depends on the efficiency of economic systems and institutions. Developing nations must reduce direct government intervention in the economy, strengthen the rule of law and intellectual property protections, improve infrastructure, and achieve economic stability. At the corporate level, governance systems must be developed and efficiency and productivity improved. At the industrial level, investment in education, technology, and human capital development is essential, alongside modernization of economic structures.
Employment plays a decisive role in driving economic growth and prosperity and is influenced by several factors, including the presence of foreign-controlled companies, foreign branches, and multinational corporate groups.
After losing six decades of development, suffering systematic economic destruction, the forced displacement of 13 million Syrians, the killing of its people, and the looting of its wealth, Syria now has only one viable development path: building partnerships with the world and creating the best possible climate for both domestic and foreign investment. The goal must be to create the largest possible number of jobs for the Syrian workforce, elevate educational curricula, especially advanced technical and vocational education, and guarantee free education and healthcare to achieve a dignified standard of living. Achieving this requires strong banking infrastructure, modern and dynamic laws, and a parliament capable of abolishing legislation that obstructs economic development and reconstruction. It also requires a governance environment that guarantees transparency, combats corruption, enforces the rule of law, and enables Syria to rank highly across economic, political, human rights, media freedom, and economic freedom indicators.
“Syria’s recovery will not be built through isolation, but through governance, investment, and global partnerships.”
Dr. Osama Kadi
The latest report by Reporters Without Borders confirms that Syria in 2026 ranked 107th after having stood at 179th out of 180 countries before 2025, an improvement of 72 positions in just one year. Politically, Syria improved from 170th to 103rd place, a gain of 67 positions. This signals the beginning of what could become a Syrian economic miracle, further reflected by a surplus of approximately $50 million in the country’s first post-liberation budget and expectations that national income could rise from around $7 billion in 2024 to $33 billion in 2026.
The extraordinary Syrian people will demonstrate to the world that the industrial and agricultural genes inherited from the historic Silk Road civilization can achieve within ten years what no nation emerging from the devastation of a genocidal war has achieved before. Especially since the development vision rests upon three pillars: education, particularly high-technology vocational education, industry, including agro-industrial manufacturing, and technology. In addition, balanced development must be adopted by investing in all economic sectors without neglecting any of them. A law should also be enacted granting governors’ greater freedom to develop their provinces, ensuring that no region is neglected and fostering healthy competition among provinces to showcase their competitive advantages. Ultimately, the combined competitive strengths of Syria’s provinces will secure the country’s place on the map of economic globalization.
الشكر الكبير لكم و الشكر موصول للمستشار الدكتور اسامة قاضي.