The Group of Seven leading industrialized nations is a circus of fop and flop. Its governments have been unable to pursue disciplined or consistent fiscal and monetary policies. Now, when market interdependence is replacing realpolitik, the G-7 should be reformed. It should add on a council of ministers like the European Community's, a brainy, vocal secretariat and a wide-ranging agenda. This broader and deeper structure could help turn the G-7 into a liberal concert of powers.
Building a Post-Cold War Architecture
With the collapse of the Soviet Union a critical test facing the world is whether the liberal democratic states can build cooperative relations in the absence of a unifying threat. The answer so far is not encouraging. Economic coordination and collective action among the major industrial powers are rare these days. The problem is not just one of coordinating economic policy but also of laying a new political foundation for post-Cold War cooperation. The world stands at the brink of a new era and its major statesmen in Europe, Japan and the United States are having trouble with the "vision thing." Their inability to grapple with post-Cold War architecture constitutes an enormous failure of imagination and responsibility.
What currently passes for policy coordination is the so-called Group of Seven process of the largest industrial democracies. As a mechanism for synchronizing economic policy to exert leadership over the world economy, this process is largely a failure, so much so that at this year's World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland, the noted economist C. Fred Bergsten remarked that "the G-7 is dead."
The absence of meaningful policy coordination stands in stark contrast to the pomp of annual G-7 summits. Year after year the leaders of the United States, Germany, Japan, France, Great Britain, Canada and Italy meet in a ritualized photo opportunity. A huge intergovernmental operation churns out bland official communiqués that paper over dysfunctions in the global economic system, or vague joint commitments to growth and prosperity that substitute for actual accord. Such shallow protocol is inadequate for dealing with real tensions arising from trade conflicts, global economic malaise or alliance burden-sharing.
This is a premium article
You must be a Foreign Affairs subscriber to continue reading. If you are already a print subscriber, click here to activate your online access.
Log In
Buy PDF
Buy a premium PDF reprint of this article.Related
Is our international monetary system heading toward a sudden collapse as in 1931, or toward the fundamental reforms needed to cure its most glaring and universally recognized shortcomings? Or will it continue to drift precariously from crisis to crisis, each one dealt with by belated rescue operations and the spread of restrictions and currency devaluations? Judging from past history, official statements and even intentions are unlikely to provide reliable answers to these questions, for they are more often designed to reassure than to enlighten. The Governor of the Bank of England, Sir Leslie O'Brien, candidly confessed to a Cambridge audience last spring: "I am rapidly qualifying as an instructor on how to exude confidence without positively lying." Another reason is that major changes in the international monetary system have rarely been the result of conscious planning. They have most often been the by-products of broad historical forces or accidents, defying contemporary forecasts and official intentions.
Financial abuses -- money laundering, tax evasion, and rogue banking -- have been around for as long as there have been finances to abuse. But globalization is creating new challenges as borders dissolve. New technologies enable tiny, remote countries to make quick money through their underregulated banking systems. Recent multilateral initiatives have started to attack the problem. But if the Bush administration fails to follow through on reforms, the entire effort could fall apart.
Miss Prism, instructing Cecily Cardew to read her Political Economy, added a warning to omit the chapter on the Fall of the Rupee: "It is somewhat too sensational Even these metallic problems have their melodramatic side," And so they do; but my story will not do it justice. I believe that the story of international money, and of our own balance of payments, allows no place for villains and little, even, for fools. To be specific: my contention is that the difficulties which we have faced in international finance have not been the result of American wickedness or irresponsibility or foolishness, or, indeed, of the wickedness of mythical short men in Zurich or mystical tall men in Paris.
