The World Economy After the Cold War
Explains (1) the post-Cold War advent of a world security regime in which "the Big Three of economics" (USA, Europe, Japan) "supplant the Big Two of nuclear competition" (2) the economic bloc rivalries that this must inevitably bring with it, and the sorts of instability that might ensue. Suggests various internal reforms and external initiatives which might serve to reduce these.
C. Fred Bergsten is Director of the Institute for International Economics, former Assistant Secretary of the Treasury for International Affairs (1977-81) and Assistant for International Economic Affairs to the National Security Council (1969-71), and author of 18 books on a wide range of international economic issues. Copyright (c) 1990 by C. Fred Bergsten.
We're sorry, but Foreign Affairs does not have the copyright to display this article online.
Related
America's economy is in its eighth year of sustained growth, transcending the German and Japanese "miracles." This is no fluke. America's unique brand of entrepreneurial capitalism is based on a series of advantages that explain the stunning success of the 1990s and provide the basis for extending this winning streak. These strengths include deft managers, technological innovation, and a culture that values rugged individualism -- all fueled by finance capital that can nimbly meet the needs of a globalized, rapidly changing economy. Furthermore, the era of the deficit is over. Pessimists who warn of inflation should be ignored; American business leaders understand that today's low level of inflation is self-perpetuating. America's prosperity is structural, not transient, and its lead over Europe and Asia will only widen with time. America had the twentieth century. It will also have the twenty-first.
The United States is addicted to dollar devaluation. As a result, America has a false, euphoric sense of progress in its competition with Japan for key markets.
Does the current financial crisis resemble Japan's "lost decade" of the 1990s? It may be even worse, argues Robert Madsen. Not so, replies Richard Katz.
