Marcelo Ramon Lascano Although this seems obvious and redundant, it is necessary to distinguish with certainty what is said about what it actually does. Political distinction is essential to correctly interpret simple or complex issues, and especially to give a reasonable opinion on specific issues pertaining to multitudes. In this spirit, the meeting in London under the auspices of the G-20 leaves many unknowns and uncertainties. On one side argues globalization as a panacea while the other does not lay entrenched protectionist attitudes, so that the equation does not close.
The claim of consistency reflects the need to introduce a dose of realism to avoid repetition of mishaps that could delay the passing of the current crisis. The standard is also to understand what happens in the economy and in international forums convened to address the troubling aspects of economic life. The expectations that accompanied before and after the meeting in London on April 2, as their findings reveal some interesting results which will over time.
Going to the permanent. Competition and the positions at the meeting confirmed the fragmentation experienced by the major global economic power. New players put pressure and discrepancies with new strength and energy almost like a stage route was not of such magnitude. The Anglo-Saxon world, comprising the U.S. and the United Kingdom, European Union faces an ostensibly led by Germany and France. China, meanwhile, suddenly and without rhetoric defies the international leadership of the dollar but not for you, considering their financial assets denominated in U.S. currency. Japan and Russia are less intransigence, and emerging, in turn, whisper discomfort but not touching the board.
Thus, the issue appears polarized into two areas or groups of recommendations. Offensives financed with tax debt to stem the fall in economic activity and employment, on the one hand and the pressing need to discipline the international financial system and national systems, on the other, considered in the case of EE. UU. directly responsible for the current situation and the turmoil that moved in varying degrees to the planet.
U.S. strategy and expressed the first Europeans, led by the countries mentioned, the second, always in a context of conflict for some of the 27 members of the European Union. All this confirms what is known and that is not recognized, namely a weakening of the process of globalization, especially if it was a financial and cultural, now shows the true face of a disguised trade protectionism outside the efforts of the WTO in recent years to mitigate the trend. This approach explains why China now passed to the forefront in defending free trade. Is that it is vital to their interests and hegemonic aspirations.
Japan and Russia, without going into details observers appeared before ecumenically important actors. But play the game from the side of the policy practiced by great powers. Both powers are looking to the U.S. from the particularities of their respective relationships. Japan is a partner in its historical and military and economic security is linked with the superpower since the days of General Mac Arthur for more than six decades. Always afraid of any china or Russian offensive that might compromise their interests.
Finally, Russia and China also have old accounts that consistently updated mutual mistrust. U.S. arbitrate in half in silence. China invests their savings in treasury bonds and spending funds the explosive passage of the Americans, part of which goes to buy Chinese goods at low prices and pass to unzip the price indices of their debtors. Moreover, U.S. multinationals operating in Asia properly. Understanding with Russia is geopolitical. Reciprocal provocations fail to weaken their influence in every area and less to support any new competitors. It is as if another nostalgic and limited govern the bipolarity which collapsed between 1989 and 1981 after the fall of the Berlin Wall and the abolition of the USSR.
China and has recently broken with strength and temperament. Guardian unmistakable from the dollar very quickly moved up to challenge the privilege means that a single currency will serve as a main reference for international transactions and as a reserve international liquidity. The challenge, in fact, an expression set-up against protectionism, because it is to press for neutralizing the influence of trade union interests of the ruling party, closely associated with the historic U.S. protectionism.
Strictly speaking, this issue was over when one considers the specific agenda of the G-20, but the need “side is a heretic.” Also, the offensive china also shows the current symbiotic relationship that encourages a noisy but mutually performing, given that China and the U.S. in recent years have built a relationship which goes beyond the singularity of the economy.
Brazil, quickly become the flagship of the South American region and referring to the U.S., are also rebelling against the tide of protectionism, as is de rigueur, it will affect their export potential, in turn weakening the autonomy of countries external debt our neighbors who aspire to lead smart. The significant enhancement that will receive the IMF can hardly alleviate the difficulties that the warrant if other things remain unchanged. In the absence of an inconvenience Argentina, for example, would receive some $ s2.500 million coming fine but do not resolve external vulnerability in some way.
As is clear from this description, the complaint actually a scene where actors and audience take a few illusions and commitments. But the crisis can only be overcome with time, perseverance and the commitment to always avoid the disintegration which over half a century ago denounced Gunnar Myrdal, Swedish that awarded the Nobel Prize in Economics and unjustly forgotten. The final outcome of the meeting will be over time. What is certain is that the face of globalization-up will be more transparent and protectionism aborts declaim their advantages eroded his image will not always immaculate.
