By Dragan Vitorovic
University professor Andrew Heywood was right stating that the globalization is not a single process, but a multiple processes that may often display divergent paths.
The Group of 20 leaders, even if they did not read Heywood’s works, can confirm this, as could be seen in the Mr. Abe’s speech. Prime Minister of Japan pointed out that
it is difficult to find a solution, in one stroke, regarding a variety of challenges
and, that this year’s summit managed to set the “sustainable and future-oriented growth path”.
The meeting of twenty most important political entities has shown that the global policies are often difficult to articulate and to implement, despite the seemingly achieved consensus in many fields. The twentieth year of Group of Twenty, founded in 1999, besides having certain symbolism, was marked by ambitious proposals and far-reaching policy goals. In an era of complex interdependence, the significantly expanded initial agenda of G20* would require tremendous and coordinated efforts.
The critics would say that the responsibilities of the Group of Twenty are constantly increasing, while the discourse remains the same, often pledging too much.
While the prevalent, dominant message sent from Osaka promised the fair free-trade, open markets, and transparent investments, combined with the light discouragement of protectionist policies, the meeting stressed the other issues as well. Namely:
-The summit did not manage to send a clear message regarding the protectionism. The most powerful actor, the US, exercised its influence to sideline this topic. However, the World Trade Organization states that G20 countries, since 2008, have added 1583 protectionist policies, abolishing only 387, for the same period.
-The growth levels globally are stable, accompanied by the downside risks. States are fully equipped to address possible risks to global economic performance.
-The geopolitical tensions are on the rise, influencing negatively the predictability of trade.
The summit has outlined the commitment of the states to use all available policy tools, having sustainable and balanced growth as the ultimate policy goal, thus decreasing the inequality levels globally. Ten percent of the global population is living in absolute poverty, down from 40 percent in 1980.
Digital flow and trade flows should be free-float, linking the traditional and digital economy. Mr. Abe proposed sharing of effective and efficient policies and regulations allowing for the expansion and innovation in the digital economy, naming it “Osaka Track”.
Supposedly, “Osaka Track” would offer the enhanced rule-making framework on the digital economy in the close future. However, similarly, as in the traditional economy, some states follow different rules and regulations in the digital domain, concerning data storage, data sharing, and data flow, as in the case of China and India. Additionally, the rule of law should uphold online as it is offline, increasing the safety on the Internet, as stipulated in the G20 meeting in Hamburg in 2017.
The climate change policies followed the G20 prescriptions from the previous year, having 19 members adhering to the Paris Accord and the United States “remaining committed to the development and deployment of advanced technologies to continue to reduce emissions and provide for a cleaner environment”.
Arguably, this may signal that the American exceptionalism is alive and well, although not satisfying the environmental groups on this specific policy issue.
On the Big Margins
One of the biggest interests to the policymakers and the general public during the G20 summit was the future developments on the trade war between the US and China. Two superpowers managed to form the truce, which is far from the trade deal, but it was enough to influence financial markets positively. Many global stakeholders are carefully monitoring the events, waging the future policy path of trade and tech giants.
It is argued that Mr. Trump is using the trade war as the extension of a political campaign, so some kind of low-tension between the superpowers will be resumed, despite Mr. Trump’s depiction of China as “the strategic partner” during his speech in Osaka. Mr. Trump’s relative unpredictability, expressed in his tweets, speeches, and actions, is surprisingly useful in disorienting both the US allies and competitors.
While China sees the US demands, concerning proposed changes in Chinese industrial policy, as hostile attempts that intrude into China’s sovereignty, the United States is well aware that other global issues, such as events in the South China Sea and the Korean peninsula, can hardly be resolved without Chinese participation.
The trade war between the United States and China will continue to send mixed signals to the concerned stakeholders, once again confirming the interconnectedness of state and non-state actors. The policies proposed in Osaka will certainly be put to a test in the close future, paving a way for various forms of the international political struggle. In polarized and turbulent global (dis)order, the politics may become great again.
*The Group of 20 includes Argentina, Australia, Brazil, Canada, China, France, Germany, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, South Korea, Turkey, the United Kingdom, the United States., and the European Union. Besides states’ and EU representatives, the top decision-makers from the World Bank, the IMF and the UN Secretary-General regularly attend the summit.
(The opinions expressed in this article are solely those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of World Geostrategic Insights).