|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : World
Economy
The growing irrelevance of the G8 summit
By Nick Beams
16 June 2004
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email the
author
The inaugural summit of the major capitalist powersthe
grouping now known as the G8 and including Russiawas held
in France in 1975. It was convened to develop a global response
to the oil price shock of 1973-74 and the development of the deepest
global recession, to that point, since the 1930s Depression.
At that summit, and those which immediately followed, there
were developed co-ordinated, although limited, responses to the
problems of the world capitalist economy. But those days have
long gone.
Last weeks summit, held on Sea Island, off the coast
of Georgia in the US, was convened amidst rising oil prices and
concern over their impact on a world economy that is largely dependent
on rising indebtedness in the United States and an investment
boom in China.
However, it is a measure of the irrelevance of the G8a
product of both the inability and the unwillingness of the major
powers to advance a co-ordinated economic programthat these
issues were barely mentioned, let alone discussed, at last weeks
meeting. Consequently it was little more than a very expensive
photo opportunity, sandwiched between the D-Day commemorations
and the Ronald Reagan funeral.
Even before the summit began it had been largely written off.
An editorial in the Financial Times noted that while the
global economy would be high on the list of concerns
of the heads of governments, whatever they think and say
at this uncertain juncture, the one sure thing is that there is
not much they can do. The G8 could do little except
watch and hope that the rise in oil prices does not derail an
unbalanced but still welcome global recovery.
Once the summit began, the Bush administration sought to build
on the unanimous UN Security Council decision to rubber-stamp
its puppet interim government in Iraq as Bush called for a greater
involvement of NATO in Iraq. However, his remarks revealed continuing
differences as French president Jacques Chirac voiced his objections.
I do not think that it is NATOs job to intervene in
Iraq, he said. Moreover, I do not have the feeling
that it would be either timely or necessarily well understood.
I see myself with strong reservations on this initiative.
Some of the economic conflicts over Iraq were revealed in the
discussion over debt relief. Because it has no outstanding debts
owed to it, the Bush regime is calling for Iraqs estimated
foreign debt of around $120 billion, owed to other governments,
to be wiped out. It argues that because the debt was accrued by
the Saddam Hussein dictatorship the slate should be wiped cleanan
argument which was totally rejected in an earlier period when
the Western powers insisted that the Bolsheviks pay the debts
incurred by the czarist autocracy in full.
In the case of Iraq, the Bush regime is anxious that rather
than oil revenue being used to pay France, Russia and other creditors,
it should be used to finance reconstruction and other infrastructure
projects, for which US firms will be given the most lucrative
contracts.
The debt relief issue brought objections from Chirac, who pointed
out that the US was extending far greater debt relief to Iraq
than was being extended to the highly indebted and impoverished
countries of Africa. They received no new concessions on debt,
or on trade access from the summit.
As far as the Iraqi debt issue is concerned, a Russian official,
speaking on behalf of President Putin, pointed to the underlying
issues. Russia was ready to agree to the wiping out of 65 percent
of the Iraqi debt in return for access for Russian businesses
to Iraq. He quoted Putin as telling Bush that our flexibility
will depend on yours and the capacity of our businesses to work
in Iraq.
When it came to the world economy, discussion followed the
script agreed on at the finance ministers meeting held in
May. That meeting noted that recovery in the global economy is
proceeding rapidly, hailed the development of more
flexible labour, product and capital markets, and reaffirmed a
commitment to early progress on and early conclusion of
the Doha round of trade discussions in the World Trade Organisation
without making any specific commitments.
There was one disagreement, however. The US briefing singled
out growth rates in the eurozone as lagging behind the rest of
the G8 and the emerging markets. This brought a reply
from Chirac that US deficits could endanger world growth. Chirac
said that he and some other leaders were concerned about the possible
consequences of the large US budget and trade deficit for the
future and notably on interest rate developments.
There is plenty to be worried about. Following the summit,
the latest US figures showed that the monthly trade deficit had
blown out to an all-time record of $48 billion, well above what
had been expected. The trade figures are only the sharpest expression
of the historically unprecedented imbalances in the world economy
as growth is sustained by rising US indebtedness, financed by
massive purchases of American financial assets by the Asian central
banks.
But these issues were passed over at the summit. Instead there
was a display of unity, as the heads of government zipped about
the island on hi-tech golf buggies, Bush posed with German Chancellor
Gerhard Schroeder, and Bush and Chirac exchanged pleasantries
over the qualities of American cuisine, with special praise for
a cheeseburger.
There seems to be a law of inverse proportionality operating
at the G8 summits: the more serious the issues confronting the
world economy, the less they are able to be even discussed, let
alone be tackled through the development of co-ordinated policies.
This is a product of two processes: the vast movements of finance
capital which are increasingly beyond the control of any government
or group of governments on the one hand, and the sharp antagonisms
among the major capitalist powers on the other.
See Also:
G7 papers over growing problems
[9 February 2004]
G8 summit: a widening
gap between reality and rhetoric
[3 June 2003]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |