|
|
Reconfiguring
the World - Looking Back
BY
DIRK MESSNER
There
are years that stick in the memory because they are associated with
exceptional events: 1989 was the year the Berlin Wall fell, sounding the
knell of the East-West conflict, 2001 the year of the 9/11 terrorist
attacks, while 2008 will always be associated with the collapse of
Lehman Brothers and the crisis of the world financial market. 2011, too,
was a remarkable year, although or perhaps simply because it was not
marked by one major global event.
2011
was in fact characterised more by an escalation of global development
trends, indicating, as they interacted, that the whole playing field of
global development is on the move. A look back at 2011 opens up a view
of the future. The second decade of the 21st century will be a period of
profound global change.
The division of the world into North and South, into industrialised and
developing countries, into the leading nations of the West and the
"rest of the world" is finally a thing of the past. The
tectonics of power is undergoing fundamental change. Galloping national
debt is the salient feature of the second phase of the global financial
crisis.
Yet, for the first time since the end of the Second World War, it is not
the developing countries that are affected, but above all the OECD
countries. Two G7 countries, Italy and France, are having difficulty
obtaining money in the international financial markets. The EU is hoping
that the emerging economies will buy government bonds from European
countries to halt the crisis in the Euro zone. Things are looking no
better in the USA. For more than a decade the West's superpower has been
going into debt abroad, especially in China.
Upside down
The world has been turned on its head: the IMF, for many years the
developing countries' crisis manager and financial disciplinarian, is
now denouncing poor governance, unsound budgeting and crises of
confidence in the industrialised countries.
It is not unusual to hear Asian observers commenting with some
satisfaction on the structural weaknesses of the industrialised
countries, revealing their deep-seated annoyance that western experts
ascribed the Asian monetary crises of the late 1990s to irresponsible
"crony capitalism" and simply ignored the disparities and
pathologies in the international financial markets. The whole world is
now hoping that Asia will be the growth engine that drags the world
economy out of crisis.
The tectonic shifts of power in the world economy are, however, the
consequence not only of the debt crises in the industrialised countries
but also of more profound dynamics in the global economy. U.S. economist
Arvind Subramanian shows that, after the industrial revolution, the gap
between the western countries and almost all the developing countries
steadily widened.
Since the 1960s, however, the trend has gradually changed from
divergence to convergence. Between 1960 and 2000 twenty-one developing
countries grew more quickly than the USA, and between 2000 and 2007 the
number rose to 75, including over a dozen African economies.
Furthermore, the growth of the developing countries depends less and
less on economic linkages with the industrialised nations: for some
years it has been increasingly based on economic relations within the
group of non-OECD countries.
The new power constellation remains unclear. Since the Lehman Brothers
crisis the G7/8 has given way to the now more influential G20. Many
observers consider the interplay between the USA and China in a kind of
G2 to be the new centre of the world order. More plausible, in fact, is
a G0 configuration, in which a clear leadership structure no longer
prevails. The western countries have been weakened by their economic
crises. For the foreseeable future, China and other emerging economies
will be occupied with serious internal economic problems, which will
restrict their global governance capacities.
In this situation completely new alliances are emerging, as during the
climate summit in Durban. For the first time the EU and African
countries joined forces to fight for a global climate agreement, but
were thwarted in their efforts by the USA, Japan, Russia and Canada, all
G8 members.
The emerging economies' attempts to form an alliance failed: China
seemed prepared to compromise, but India took on the role of climate
hardliner. The G77 – as a coalition of developing countries – played
no part in Durban, unlike many international rounds of negotiations in
recent years. The G0 constellation would thus leave space for creative
alliances that bridged old North-South barriers, but it might equally
culminate in numerous trade blockades.
Arab Spring
2011 was also the year of the Arab Spring. Whether and how it will prove
possible in this region so close to Europe to combine political
liberalisation and Islam is very important for international policy.
What can Egypt, Tunisia and Libya learn from Turkey and Indonesia? (Read
Awakening in the spring, democracy in the autumn? Why Islam and
democracy are compatible.) Yet the message that people are striving for
freedom, human rights and legal certainty is likely not only to bewilder
the rulers of Syria, Saudi Arabia and Iran, but also to cause
uncertainty in the minds of authoritarian elites in other regions of the
world, such as China and Russia.
The next ten or twenty years are likely to reveal whether China in
particular is capable of stabilising its economic dynamism with
processes of political liberalisation or whether that giant nation will
slide into societal stagnation and instability. 2011 has also shown that
IT and social communication technologies are dual-use technologies. They
drive processes of economic innovation and are also the new tools of
civil movements. That link cannot be ignored forever either in Moscow or
in Beijing.
'Fukushima' was another world event in 2011. It symbolises that
obtaining energy from renewable energy sources is becoming one of the
foremost global development issues. It is the only way that the risks
associated with nuclear energy and the consequences of dangerous climate
change can be avoided.
Leaving behind the era of nuclear and fossil fuels will be far from
easy. In 2010/11 such countries as India, Indonesia, South Africa, South
Korea, China and Vietnam established highly ambitious programmes for
reducing greenhouse gas emissions, but continue to rely on coal and
nuclear energy (Read The renaissance of coal vs climate policy
necessities.) Germany will have to pursue an active energy foreign
policy if it is to persuade others of the economic, environmental and
democracy-compatible attractiveness of its development path.
A dreadful tragedy was acted out in Somalia, Ethiopia and Kenya in 2011
and is not over yet. Ten million people are at risk of dying of
starvation, yet hardly make the headlines in the world'’s press, let
alone the list of priorities drawn up by the G20 world leaders. The Horn
of Africa is a laboratory of the future. It is where state
disintegration, weak governance and extreme drought coincide and destroy
the foundations of human life.
An international community that has again shown itself in Durban to be
incapable of effectively combating climate change and is not getting to
grips with, or is even ignoring, the harbingers of dangerous climate
change to be seen in the Horn of Africa is not well prepared for the
decades to come.
Prof
Dr Dirk Messner is Director of Bonn-based German Development
Institute (Deutsches
Institut für Entwicklungspolitik – DIE)
[Source:
IDN-InDepthNews
| Analysis That Matters]
|