|
WSWS : News
& Analysis : World
Economy
Great power tensions dominate G8 summit
By Chris Marsden
7 July 2005
Use
this version to print
| Send this
link by email | Email
the author
Britains presidency of the G8 summit of major industrial
nations, taking place this week in Scotland, is being used by
Prime Minister Tony Blair as a propaganda vehicle to restore popular
support for his government, focusing on his proposals to forgive
African debt and double government aid. This has been backed by
an effort to exploit public concern for the plight of the poor
through the officially sponsored Live 8Make Poverty
History round of demonstrations and rock concerts.
The closer it has come to decision time, the more such promises
have been shown to be empty rhetoric, and the more impossible
it has become to sustain a posture of concern for either Africa
or the environment.
The G8 summit looks set to achieve very little regarding debt
relief for Africa and even less on the other supposed main theme
of discussion, climate change.
Instead, a paltry measure of debt forgiveness and even smaller
rises in aid pledgeswhich may never materialiseare
being hyped as world-changing initiatives. It is also being made
clear that talk of liberalising trade is a one-way street, in
which the Western powers demand that Africa opens its markets
to the major corporations while markets for agricultural produce
in the United States, Europe and Japan remain protected by tariffs
and subsidies.
In a similar fashion, discussion on the threat of global warming
has focused on drawing up a resolution that downplays the issue
sufficiently to satisfy the Bush administration and sidesteps
Washingtons rejection of the Kyoto agreement on limiting
carbon emissions.
The focus on Africa is in large part a smokescreen to divert
attention from the more fundamental concerns of the G8 at a time
of acute crisis.
The G8 nationsthe United States, Japan, Britain, Canada,
France, Germany, Italy and Russiaare more divided than ever
before. The wounds opened up in diplomatic relations by the Iraq
war have not healed. The increasingly unilateralist course pursued
by Washington on both the military and economic fronts has combined
with growing difficulties facing the global economy to exacerbate
tensions between all the imperialist powers. This promises to
make the summit at the prestigious Gleneagles Hotel near Edinburgh
more fractious and divided than its predecessors, no matter what
public pose is adopted, and precludes any common international
agreement of genuine substance.
These annual summits originated in response to the collapse
of dollar-gold convertibility and fixed currencies in 1971, and
the ensuing oil crisis and global economic recession of the early
1970s. Under the leadership of the United States, the G6 (joined
later by Canada and Russia) first met in 1975 to elaborate a coordinated
approach to global economic problems.
Such coordination is no longer possible. The breakdown of the
post-war economic expansion, compounded by the collapse of the
Soviet Union and end of the Cold War, have undermined the economic
and political foundations of the relative equilibrium that characterized
relations between the US and its European and Asian imperialist
counterparts that prevailed for most of the second half of the
twentieth century.
Never since the establishment of the Atlantic Alliance in the
1940s have relations between the US and its nominal allies in
Germany and France been as fractious and embittered as today.
The unilateralist and militarist policy of Washington is the single
most destabilising factor in contemporary world affairs.
The United States is openly pursuing a strategy of global hegemony,
which involves a shift from support for European integrationthe
general line followed by successive post-war American administrations,
Democratic and Republicanto the Bush administrations
policy of fomenting divisions within Europe, a policy directed
in particular against France and Germany.
This shift in American policy, being carried out with the collaboration
of Britain, has thrown the European Union into unprecedented crisis.
This weeks G8 summit takes place in the aftermath of referenda
in France and the Netherlands which registered decisive defeats
for the European Union constitution, followed by the collapse
of EU budget talks, placing a question mark over the very existence
of the EU, as well as the common European currency, the euro.
US-led wars in Iraq and Afghanistan are raging, with no end
in sight, even as Washington prepares new provocations against
other potential targets of military action, including Iran, North
Korea and Syria.
The world economy is gripped by financial instability and mounting
signs of stagnation. These problems are compounded by soaring
oil prices.
On the eve of the G8 summit, the Bank for International Settlements
(BIS) warned of growing external and internal imbalances
in the world economyfocusing on global indebtedness and
conflicts over trade and interest rates.
It warned that the widening US balance of payments deficit
was a serious longer-term problem that could eventually
lead to a disorderly decline of the dollar, associated turmoil
in other financial markets, and even recession and a resurgence
of protectionist pressure.
With Europes economies verging on recession, negotiations
on global trade, ongoing since December 2001, have been virtually
stalled because of a refusal by the major powers to eliminate
subsidies and other protectionist measures. They are to be reviewed
at a meeting scheduled for Hong Kong in December 2005.
None of these pressing issues have even been given a prominent
place on the public agenda of the G8 summit, although the heads
of state have agreed to discuss the rise in oil prices. The draft
communiqué does not specifically mention oil prices, but
at a meeting in London last month, G8 finance ministers warned,
Sustained high energy prices are of significant concern
since they hamper global economic growth.
Another issue of contention is the demand that China revalue
the yuan, which Washington claims is being kept artificially low.
The US is pushing hard for a discussion at Gleneagles, with Bush
insisting, Well be talking about our economies. Theres
always a nice discussion about currency, for example, an interesting
part of the dialogue.
German Chancellor Gerhard Schröder is also calling for
global regulation of hedge funds, highly speculative investment
instruments that are unregulated in the US and which, Germany
argues, threaten the stability of some German companies.
On the issue of African debt, Steve Tibbett of Action Aid complained,
It is shocking that the government is using millions of
poor people to score a PR coup. Look behind the rhetoric and the
reality falls far short... So far the UK government is largely
serving up spin and hype.
John Hilary of War on Want said, The paltry deal on the
table at Gleneagles is an insult to poor people the world over.
The charity said that $125 billion, not $25 billion, is needed
in increased aid to meet development goals, and that the G8 will
pledge only to reduce debt service, not abolish debts themselves.
The deal agreed last month offers debt relief only for money
owed to the World Bank, the African Development Bank, and the
International Monetary Fund (IMF). It is worth around $2 billion
yearly, but is on offer to only 18 poor countries which have total
debts of around $40 billion and have met strict demands for free
market reforms that will only worsen poverty and indebtedness
in the long term.
At every point, the discussion surrounding the G8 summit has
highlighted the differences and conflicts among the major powers.
Blairs hopes that he would win support from Bush for his
proposals on Africa and on global warming in return for Britains
participation in the Iraq war were dashed even before the summit
began. Bush told ITV television, I go to the G8 not really
trying to make [Tony Blair] look bad or good, but I go to the
G8 with an agenda that I think is best for our country...
I really dont view our relationship as one of quid
pro quo. Tony Blair made decisions on what he thought was best
for keeping the peace and winning the war on terror, as I did.
American initiatives toward Africa demand an enhanced role
for the private sector, especially in pharmaceuticals, and much
aid is tied to a demand that it be used to purchase US goods,
mainly foodanother form of subsidy to US agribusiness. These
conditions are so proscriptive that of $4 billion pledged to date
(supposedly to double to $8 billion), only $400,000 has so far
actually reached sub-Saharan Africa, with only four countries
qualifying.
When he was pushed on opening up US markets to Africa, Bush
replied that he would abandon US farm subsidies only if the European
Union was prepared to scrap its Common Agricultural Policy (CAP).
This was not only a cynical posture, but was meant to reinforce
the demand for CAP reform being voiced by Blair against his French
and German rivals.
Within Europe too, tensions are acute in the aftermath of the
collapse of the European Unions constitution ratification
process and the failure to agree an EU budget. President Jacques
Chirac is openly hostile to Blair, whom he blames for sabotaging
the budget discussions by demanding that subsidies to French farmers
be cut. In the run-up to Gleneagles on July 3, Chirac met with
Schröder and Russias Vladimir Putin. In front of the
press, he said of the British, You cant trust people
who cook as badly as that and added that Britains
only contribution to European agriculture was Mad Cow Disease.
For their part, German officials have accused Blair of exploiting
the summit to improve his public image at home. Schröder
is refusing to increase Berlins aid budget for Africa from
1.8 billion euros a year to 2.4 billion euros, and Italy and Canada
are also hostile to the demands placed on them by Blair.
Providing another indication of conflicts behind the scenes,
the British government let it be known that an attempt to include
a timetable for phasing out export subsidies for farm produce
had failed to win over either the French or the Americans.
On global warming, Bush told ITV that he would oppose anything
like the 1997 UN Kyoto Protocol involving legally binding reductions
on carbon emissions, which was not ratified by the US. He said,
If this looks like Kyoto, the answer is no... The Kyoto
treaty would have wrecked our economy, if I can be blunt.
He added that the G8 leaders should move beyond the Kyoto
debate and consider new technologies as a means of reducing
emissions.
Partly in order to bring the US on board, the core of the G8
proposals on climate change is for a fund to help developing countries
such as India and China invest in clean energy. The main thrust
of the clean energy demand is to urge a switch to nuclear power,
with all the attendant dangers, as opposed to fossil fuels.
All of the government heads meeting in Scotland preside over
administrations that are unpopular and crisis-ridden. President
Bush faces growing domestic opposition to the occupation of Iraq
and his administration has succeeded in arousing enmity toward
America the world over without historic precedent. Blair only
scraped back into power in May with the lowest share of the popular
vote in history. The entire government strategy of Frances
President Jacques Chirac was roundly rebuffed by the no
vote in the referendum on the European Union constitution. Germanys
Schröder has been forced to call an early general election
following a series of defeats in state and local elections.
It is a measure of the hatred felt towards these leaders and
their isolation from the concerns of the mass of the worlds
population that the summit once again resembles an armed camp,
with all routes leading to the Gleneagles conference centre cut
off and surrounded by three cordons of police checkpoints.
See Also:
A warning to the G-8 from the bankers'
bank
[5 July 2005]
G8 agrees to paltry debt forgiveness
package
[15 June 2005]
Top of page
The WSWS invites your comments.
Copyright 1998-2008
World Socialist Web Site
All rights reserved |