Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The world economic crisis "turned the G20 summit for global economic cooperation into a snake pit"

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Better Believe It Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-10 11:31 PM
Original message
The world economic crisis "turned the G20 summit for global economic cooperation into a snake pit"
The knives behind the smiles
Lee Sustar explains how the intractable problems of the world economy have turned the G20 summit for global economic cooperation into a snake pit.
November 12, 2010

INTERNATIONAL ECONOMIC cooperation has given way to a currency war as the leaders of the Group of 20 (G20) leading economies meet in South Korea--and the U.S. is expanding the conflict by taking aim at China.

The stakes in this battle are high. The U.S. is not only pursuing short-term relief for its weak economy, but it's struggling to contain the influence of China, India and other newly industrializing countries that have shifted the global balance of economic power. So whatever the official outcome of the summit, economic rivalries will intensify, wrapped in nationalism, trade protectionism and, in the U.S., endless China-bashing.

Thus, in Seoul, the raging currency war overshadowed diplomacy. By undertaking what's known as competitive devaluations of their currencies, the world's major economic powers are trying to make their own exports cheaper relative to their rivals. The motivation: A huge overhang of excess capacity across the whole world economy.

In this environment, countries are worried that major companies and even whole industries could be wiped out by intensifying international competition. By trying to make their own currencies cheaper, they hope to protect their own corporations at the expense of their rivals--which is why this policy, used during the Great Depression of the 1930s, is also known as "beggar thy neighbor."

The currency war, therefore, is but a prelude to a wider trade war. "Not all economies can have a net export improvement," wrote economist Nouriel Roubini. "This zero-sum game in currencies and net exports means one country's gain is some other country's loss, and a competitive devaluation war has ensued."

Read the full article at:

http://socialistworker.org/2010/11/12/knives-behind-the-smiles

This is a socialist/Marxist opinion on the G20 summit. I found it surprisingly well written and pretty much agreed with most of the views expressed in the article. It didn't read like some old sectarian Marxist tract. I think we are still in an early stage of the world economic crisis.



Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
EmilyKent Donating Member (753 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-10 11:47 PM
Response to Original message
1. The G20 is over with.
And nothing like that happened.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-10 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #1
3. The G20 didn't agree on anything substantive, that I am aware of
So a currency war (a stealthy one) is probable.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EmilyKent Donating Member (753 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-10 11:58 PM
Response to Reply #3
4. They declared what 'currency war' there was,
over with.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
daleo Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-15-10 11:55 PM
Response to Reply #4
12. Well, if they say so
After all, who could doubt a proclamation from a summit meeting.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-15-10 12:00 AM
Response to Reply #3
5. Correct
Nobody would back the U.S. in making China up its currency value. Which means a global trade war could be on the horizon.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EmilyKent Donating Member (753 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-15-10 12:01 AM
Response to Reply #5
6. Did much better than expected.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
leftstreet Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-15-10 12:03 AM
Response to Reply #6
7. A trade war, not a currency war
n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
EmilyKent Donating Member (753 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-15-10 12:04 AM
Response to Reply #7
8. That's not likely to happen either.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
FarCenter Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Sun Nov-14-10 11:52 PM
Response to Original message
2. With a trade deficit of more than $500 billion a year, the US is on a fast downslope
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
xchrom Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-15-10 12:28 AM
Response to Original message
9. Recommend
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Catherina Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-15-10 12:48 AM
Response to Original message
10. Juan Cole did a very good piece on this too. Rec'd
I recommend people the whole article.


Obama in Asia: Meeting American Decline Face to Face
by Juan Cole

....

Beyond being a goodwill ambassador for ten days, Obama is seeking sales of American-made durable and consumer goods, weapons deals, an expansion of trade, green energy cooperation, and the maintenance of a geopolitical balance in the region favorable to the United States. Just as the decline of the American economy hobbled him at home, however, the weakness of the United States on the world stage in the aftermath of Bush-era excesses has made real breakthroughs abroad unlikely.

Add to this the peculiar obsessions of the Washington power elite, with regard to Iran for instance, and you have an unpalatable mix. These all-American fixations are viewed as an inconvenience or worse in Asia, where powerful regional hegemons are increasingly determined to chart their own courses, even if in public they continue to humor a somewhat addled and infirm Uncle Sam.

...

A Superpower With Feet of Clay

Just how weakened the United States has been in Asia is easily demonstrated by the series of rebuffs its overtures have suffered from regional powers. When, for instance, a tiff broke out this fall between China and Japan over a collision at sea near the disputed Senkaku Islands, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton offered to mediate. The offer was rejected out of hand by the Chinese, who appear to have deliberately halted exports of strategic rare-earth metals to Japan and the United States as a hard-nosed bargaining ploy. In response, the Obama administration quickly turned mealy-mouthed, affirming that while the islands come under American commitments to defend Japan for the time being, it would take no position on the question of who ultimately owned them.

Likewise, Pakistani politicians and pundits were virtually unanimous in demanding that President Obama raise the issue of disputed Kashmir with Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh during his Indian sojourn. The Indians, however, had already firmly rejected any internationalization of the controversy, which centers on the future of the Muslim-majority state, a majority of whose inhabitants say they want independence. Although Obama had expressed an interest in helping resolve the Kashmir dispute during his presidential campaign, by last March his administration was already backing away from any mediation role unless both sides asked for Washington's help. In other words, Obama and Clinton promptly caved in to India's insistence that it was the regional power in South Asia and would brook no external interference.

This kind of regional near impotence is only reinforced by America's perpetual (yet ever faltering) war machine. Nor, as Obama moves through Asia, can he completely sidestep controversies provoked by the Afghan War, his multiple-personality approach to Pakistan, and his administration's obsessive attempt to isolate and punish Iran. As Obama arrives in Seoul, for instance, Iran will be on the agenda. This fall, South Korea, a close American ally, managed to play a game of one step forward, two steps back with regard to Washington-supported sanctions against that energy-rich country.

...

China is the last major country with a robust energy industry still actively investing in Iran, and Washington entertains dark suspicions that some of its firms are even transferring technology that might help the Iranians in their nuclear energy research projects. This bone of contention is likely to form part of the conversation between Obama and President Hu Jintao before Thursday’s G20 meeting of the world’s wealthiest 20 countries.

Given tensions between Washington and Beijing over the massive balance of trade deficit the U.S. is running with China (which the Obama administration attributes, in part, to an overvalued Chinese currency), not to speak of other contentious issues, Iran may not loom large in their discussions. One reason for this may be that, frustrating as Chinese stonewalling on its currency may seem, they are likely to give even less ground on relations with Iran -- especially since they know that Washington can’t do much about it. Another fraught issue is China’s plan to build a nuclear reactor for Pakistan, something that also alarms Islamabad’s nuclear rival, India.

...

http://www.tomdispatch.com/post/175319/tomgram%3A_juan_cole%2C_the_asian_century/#more
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
notesdev Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Mon Nov-15-10 01:55 AM
Response to Original message
11. Good thing we sent snakes
Guess it all turned out to be appropriate. Someone say "hi!" to Timmy for me?
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Thu Dec 26th 2024, 04:41 PM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC