Connect with us

Economy

The Agenda of G20 Summit 2017

Published

on

Amid clashes between police and protesters, the top advanced nations known as Group of 20, or simply ‘G-20’ summit is getting underway on 7-8 July in the German port city of Hamburg with terrorism, global trade and climate change among the major issues on the agenda. From Paris Climate Accord to North Korean Nuclear threat, US-Russian ties to Indo-China strain, this G20 summit will witness the global superpowers in their worst, trying to make their best.

Germany’s G20 Presidency with three main focuses: Ensuring stability; improving viability for the future and Accepting responsibility.

 The city of Hamburg has boosted its police with reinforcements from around the country and has 20,000police officers on hand to patrol Hamburg’s streets, skies and waterways. The meeting follows skirmishes between police and protesters elsewhere in Germany’s second-biggest city. Police said that at least 76 officers were hurt, one of whom had to be taken to a hospital with an eye injury after a firework exploded in front of him. On Friday morning, dozens of protesters attempted to block cars from accessing the summit, being held at the trade fair grounds in downtown Hamburg, but they were quickly thwarted by police. Further away in the city’s Altona district, police said people set several parked cars alight and attacked a police station, though the situation quickly calmed down.

 The G-20 comprises Argentina, Australia, Brazil, China, Germany, France, Britain, India, Indonesia, Italy, Japan, Canada, South Korea, Mexico, Russia, Saudi Arabia, South Africa, Turkey, the United States and the European Union. Also attending the summit are the Netherlands, Norway, Spain, Guinea, Senegal, Singapore and Vietnam.

 The G20 is the main forum for international cooperation among the 20 leading industrialized nations and emerging economies in the fields of finance and economics. The G20 nations are together home to almost two thirds of the world’s population, as well as generating more than four fifths of global GDP, and accounting for three quarters of global trade.

 The host, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, says she hopes to find “compromises and answers” on a range of issues at the two-day meeting of leading industrial and developing nations. The G20 finance ministers will be focusing on achieving progress on the stricter regulation of financial markets, especially in the field of shadow banking.

In the run up to the G20 summit, numerous line minister meetings were held, in order to explore individual G20 issues in greater depth. Between January and May 2017, ministers responsible for finance, foreign affairs, labor affairs, health, agriculture and digital policy met. As was the case during the G7 Presidency, Angela Merkel met with representatives of civil society between March and June 2017; several dialogues took place, including events for the business community (Business20), non-governmental organisations (Civil20), trade unions (Labour20), the science and research community (Science20), think tanks (Think20), women (Women20) and youth (Youth20). The civil society organisations themselves are responsible for these meeting as well as for recommendations for Presidency, which will pick up on relevant G20 issues.

The G20 Summit, being hosted this year on July 7 and July 8 in Germany, which will see the coming together of 20 of the World’s biggest economies to discuss, debate and resolve various issue of global and continental importance. Many of the G20 nations have developed differences ranging from environmental issues to prevailing tensions or war-like situations, and are expected to use this platform to at least find a resolution acceptable to all.

While main issues to focus, given the global-political scenario, can be broadly divided into two general categories, primarily as Environmental and Political, here we will look at these in a bit detailed fashion. While the G20 Summit in its definition aims to strengthen the resilience of the global financial system and proper regulation of all financial markets, it also organizes bilateral talks among the members to discuss and if needed resolve differences, at the disposal of the two nations involved. The first meeting was hosted by Germany as well after the formation of the group in 1999.

Among the nations which are expected to directly take part in this metaphorical intervention of President Trump are British Prime Minister Theresa May and German Chancellor Angela Merkel. While May will reportedly express Britain’s full commitment towards the Paris agreement and in her one-on-one talks with him will stress how the accord should not be renegotiated, Chancellor Merkel who said that the US’s withdrawal from the agreement was ‘extraordinarily regrettable’ said that her sentiments will remain similar to what it was during her last meet with Trump.

The decision to exit the European Union is irreversible now and it has been accepted by all, citizens of Britain and the European Union alike. Given that this decision to exit the Union by Britain, popularly called BREXIT, will have obvious impact upon the economical set-up and future of both Britain and the Union, G20, which is primarily an economic platform might resolve a few issues which they may encounter. While it is true that the main focus might not be upon the BREXIT phenomenon, but ignoring the economic decisions might not be possible for either of the parties here.

 Top Issues likely to dominate Geopolitics at Hamburg would be as follows:

Stability of the global economy

Germany is happy to assume the G20 Presidency as of 1 December, and to host the G20 summit in July, declared Chancellor Angela Merkel in a video podcast on the German G20 Presidency. She cited the stability of the global economy as the “top issue”. a number of issues “related to development” will be given a very high profile, in particular fighting pandemics.

Ensuring stable and resilient national economies

The first pillar involves strengthening stable environments for the global economy and the financial system, but also promoting dynamic economic growth. Structural reforms are the lynchpin here. Germany’s G20 Presidency will continue cooperation on international financial and fiscal issues, employment, and trade and investment. The aim is to strengthen free and fair trade around the globe. The German government will also be working for sustainable global supply chains.

Fit for the future

Germany not only aims to ensure the stability of the global economy, but also, and this is the second pillar, to make it more fit for the future. One main concern is to make progress on realising the goals of the 2030 Agenda for Sustainable Development and the Paris Agreement on climate change.

It is every bit as important to discuss viable energy and climate strategies for the future. And the growing importance of digitalization for the global economy will play a prominent part in the discussions of the G20. To be fit for the future will also mean improving health care. The worldwide fight against antimicrobial resistance is part of this, as are efforts to put in place the mechanisms to prevent the outbreak of pandemics. And empowering women in the economy, in particular improving the quality of women’s jobs, is on the agenda. Angela Merkel will be working to give women in developing countries easier access to information and communication technologies.

Accepting responsibility – especially for Africa

Germany also intends to strengthen the G20 as a community of responsibility – and that is the third pillar. A priority concern is to achieve sustainable economic progress in Africa. German Presidency aims to take concrete steps to improve people’s living conditions in the long term and to put in place a stable environment for investment. And it aims to promote infrastructure development on the African continent. In June a separate conference entitled “Partnership with Africa” will be held in Berlin. The G20 also aims to accept responsibility in other fields. Migration and refugee movements, the fight against terrorism, money laundering and corruption will also be addressed during Germany’s G20 Presidency.

The beef over Syria, North Korea and climate

 The issues which we can expect the nations to touch upon in this meet are the US pulling out of the Paris Climate Accord, Britain’s drift from the European Union, Syria, North Korea nuclear tensions and although off the table, but possible mentions of the rising tension between India and China.

 The long standing issue of Syria and its future, threatened by, on one hand the Assad regime and its alleged atrocities on the people and the rebels on the other, and worsened by the presence of the Islamic State terrorists. While primarily it has been speculated and confirmed by US Secretary of State Rex Tillerson that US President Trump and Russian President Vladimir Putin will seek to find a common ground over Syria, the most important decision both countries may arrive could be regarding establishing no-fly zones and on the ground ceasefire norms.

The G20 and world at large looked at the decision of US President Donald Trump with an expression of predictable horror, when he declared that the USA will no longer be part of the Paris Climate agreement. While his decision was censured by citizens of the US and other nations alike, this G20 platform will be reportedly used by a couple of nations to show President Trump that in this issue, the USA is isolated from the rest and as Greenpeace Director Jennifer Morgan would say,’ The only game in town.’

Indian Hindutva agenda of anti-beef issue would not even be mentioned in the summit although such grave issues that are detrimental to normalcy and prosperity of a nation need to be debated and such nations promoting fanaticism as their key ploy as policy should be warned against the dangerous drama just for majority votes. . 

Will G20 achieve anything?

Like UN, the G20 and other such forums only promote multilateral trade and do not think about the future of poor nations and poor populations in real terms. World Bank and IMF impose economic measures to weaken the poor people. They and all governments promote ah and help  the rich and MNCs, corporate lords and their  wealthy trade outfits.

With the global political dynamics changing over the period of one year severely and more so in the last few months, perhaps the Summit is well-timed to resolve the differences which have visibly surfaced within several members and non-members of the G20 nations.

No one is sure about the outcomes as the US led Syria war is in the minds of every leader attending the summit.  While there’s little disagreement on fighting terrorism, prospects of finding common ground on climate change and trade look uncertain.

The illegal war in Syria led by USA and joined by Russia must be stopped and the remaining Syrians must be saved as the first action priority of G20 and UNSC.  Israel and India must be brought to negotiating tables to discuss the burning issue of reestablishment of Palestine and Kashmir as soverign nations as they had existed before.

Remaining Palestinians and Kashmiris must be saved. Only Big powers can make the genuine dreams of Palestinians and Kashmiris a reality as quickly as possible. 

However, since the veto powers control everything including the UN and G20, no one is yet sure if the communique that would be drafted at G20 would sternly warn the colonialist and imperialist powers destroying peace in the world, destroying climate, destroying poor people in every country, destroying nations and people; These should be warned against the crimes they perpetrate against humanity by attacking and killing the native people living in them.  Apart from helping the poor and weak nation in economy and development programs, the G20 should also make suitable recommendations to arrest the climatic change taking place globally that would make many island nations disappear from the face of our earth.

Looking forward to the best possible outcomes from the G20 summit in Germany!

Continue Reading
Comments

Economy

U.S. policy and the Turkish Economic Crisis: Lessons for Pakistan

M Waqas Jan

Published

on

Over the last week, the Turkish Lira has been dominating headlines the world over as the currency continues to plunge against the US dollar. Currently at the dead center of a series of verbal ripostes between Presidents Donald Trump and Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the rapidly depreciating Lira has taken center stage amidst deteriorating US-Turkey relations that are wreaking havoc across international financial markets. Considering Pakistan’s current economic predicament, the events unfolding in Turkey offer important lessons to the dangers of unsustainable and unrealistic economic policies, within a dramatically changing international scenario. This holds particular importance for Pak-US relations within the context of the impending IMF bailout.

In his most recent statements, Mr. Erdogan has attributed his economy’s dire state of affairs as an ‘Economic War’ being waged against it by the United States. President Trump too has made it evident that the latest rounds of US sanctions that have been placed on Turkey are directly linked to its dissatisfaction with Ankara for detaining American Pastor Andrew Brunson. Mr Bruson along with dozens of others has been charged with terrorism and espionage for his purported links to the 2016 attempted coup against President Erdogan and his government.  There is thus a modicum of truth to Mr. Erdogan’s claims that the US sanctions are in fact, being used as leverage against the weakening Lira and the Turkish economy as part of a broader US policy.

However, to say that the latest US sanctions alone are the sole cause of Turkey’s economic woes is a gross understatement. The Lira has for some time remained the worst performing currency in the world; losing half of its value in a year, and dropping by another 20% in just the last week. Just to put the scale of this loss in to perspective, the embattled currency was trading at about 2 Liras to the dollar in mid-2014. The day before yesterday, it was trading at about 7 Liras to the dollar.

While the Pakistani Rupee has also depreciated quite considerably over the last few months, its recent drop (-17% against the dollar over the past 12 months) pales in comparison to the sustained and exponential downfall of the Lira. Yet, both the Turkish and Pakistani economies are at a point where they are experiencing an alarming dearth of foreign exchange reserves that have in turn dramatically increased their international debt obligations.

The ongoing financial crises in both Turkey and Pakistan are similar to the extent that both countries have pursued unsustainable economic policies for the last few years. These have been centered on increased borrowing on the back of overvalued currencies. While this approach had allowed both governments to finance a series of government investments in various projects, the long term implications of this accumulating debt has now caught up with them dramatically. As a result, both countries may soon desperately require IMF assistance; assistance, that in recent times, has become even more overtly conditional on meeting certain US foreign policy requirements.

In the case of Pakistan, these objectives may coincide with recent US pressures to ‘do more’ regarding the Haqqani network; or a deeper examination of the scale and viability of the China- Pakistan Economic Corridor. With regards to the latter, US Secretary of State Mike Pompeo has clearly stated that American Dollars, in the form of IMF funds, to Pakistan should not be used to bailout Chinese investors. The rationale being that a cash-strapped Pakistan is more likely to adversely affect Chinese interests as opposed to US interests in the region at the present. The politics behind the ongoing US-China trade war add even further relevance to this argument.

In the case of Turkey however, which is a major NATO ally, an important emerging market, and a deeply integrated part of the European financial system, there is a lot more at stake in terms of US interests. Turkey’s main lenders comprise largely of Spanish, French and Italian banks whose exposure to the Lira has caused a drastic knock on effect on the Euro. The ensuing uncertainty and volatility that has arisen is likely to prove detrimental to the US’s allies in the EU as well as in key emerging markets across South America, Africa and Asia. This marks the latest example of the US’s departure from maintaining and ensuring the health of the global financial system, as a leading economic power.

Yet, what’s even more unsettling is the fact that while the US is wholly cognizant of these wide-ranging impacts, it remains unfazed in pursuing its unilateral objectives. This is perhaps most evident in the diminishing sanctity of the NATO alliance as a direct outcome of these actions.  After the US, Turkey is the second biggest contributor of troops within the NATO framework. As relations between both members continue to deteriorate, Turkey has been more inclined to gravitate towards expanding Russian influence. In effect, contributing to the very anti-thesis of the NATO alliance. The recent dialogues between Presidents Erdogan and Putin, in the wake of US sanctions point markedly towards this dramatic shift.

Based on the above, it has become increasingly evident that US actions have come to stand in direct contrast to the Post-Cold War status quo, which it had itself help set up and maintain over the last three decades. It is rather, the US’s unilateral interests that have now taken increasing precedence over its commitments and leadership of major multilateral frameworks such as the NATO, and the Bretton Woods institutions. This approach while allowing greater flexibility to the US has however come at the cost of ceding space to a fast rising China and an increasingly assertive Russia. The acceleration of both Pak-China and Russo-Turkish cooperation present poignant examples of these developments.

However, while it remains unclear as to how much international influence US policy-makers are willing to cede to the likes of China and Russia over the long-term, their actions have made it clear that US policy and the pursuit of its unilateral objectives would no longer be made hostage to the Geo-Politics of key regions. These include key states at the cross-roads of the world’s potential flash-points such as Turkey and Pakistan.

Therefore, both Turkey and Pakistan would be well advised to factor in these reasons behind the US’s disinterest in their economic and financial predicaments. Especially since both Russia and China are still quite a way from being able to completely supplant the US’s financial and military influence across the world; perhaps a greater modicum of self-sufficiency and sustainability is in order to weather through these shifting dynamics.

Continue Reading

Economy

Social Mobility and Stronger Private Sector Role are Keys to Growth in the Arab World

MD Staff

Published

on

In spite of unprecedented improvements in technological readiness, the Arab World continues to struggle to innovate and create broad-based opportunities for its youth. Government-led investment alone will not suffice to channel the energies of society toward more private sector initiative, better education and ultimately more productive jobs and increased social mobility. The Arab World Competitiveness Report 2018 published by the World Economic Forum and the World Bank Group outlines recommendations for the Arab countries to prepare for a new economic context.

The gap between the competitiveness of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) and of the other economies of the region, especially the ones affected by conflict and violence, has further increased over the last decade. However, similarities exist as the drop in oil prices of the past few years has forced even the most affluent countries in the region to question their existing social and economic models. Across the entire region, education is currently not rewarded with better opportunities to the point where the more educated the Arab youth is, the more likely they are to remain unemployed. Financial resources, while available through banks, are rarely distributed out of a small circle of large and established companies; and a complex legal system limits access to resources locked in place and distorts private initiative.

At the same time, a number of countries in the region are trying out new solutions to previously existing barriers to competitiveness.

  • In ten years, Morocco has nearly halved its average import tariff from 18.9 to 10.5 percent, facilitated trade and investment and benefited from sustained growth.
  • The United Arab Emirates has increased equity investment in technology firms from 100 million to 1.7 billion USD in just two years.
  • Bahrain is piloting a new flexi-permit for foreign workers to go beyond the usual sponsorship system that has segmented and created inefficiencies in the labour market of most GCC countries.
  • Saudi Arabia has committed to significant changes to its economy and society as part of its Vision 2030 reform plan, and Algeria has tripled internet access among its population in just five years.

“We hope that the 2018 Arab World Competitiveness Report will stimulate discussions resulting in government reforms that could unlock the entrepreneurial potential of the region and its youth,” said Philippe Le Houérou, IFC’s CEO. “We must accelerate progress toward an innovation-driven economic model that creates productive jobs and widespread opportunities.”

“The world is adapting to unprecedented technological changes, shifts in income distribution and the need for more sustainable pathways to economic growth, “added Mirek Dusek, Deputy Head of Geopolitical and Regional Affairs at the World Economic Forum. “Diversification and entrepreneurship are important in generating opportunities for the Arab youth and preparing their countries for the Fourth Industrial Revolution.”

With a few exceptions, such as Jordan, Tunisia and Lebanon, most Arab countries have much less diversified economies than countries in other regions with a similar level of income. For all of them, the way toward less oil-dependent economies is through robust macroeconomic policies that facilitate investment and trade, promotion of exports, improvements in education and initiatives to increase innovation and technological adoption among firms.

Entrepreneurship and broad-based private sector initiative must be a key ingredient to any diversification recipe.

The Arab Competitiveness Report 2018 also features country profiles, available here: Algeria, Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Lebanon, Morocco, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Tunisia, United Arab Emirates.

Continue Reading

Economy

The impact of labour market trainings on unemployment process in the global labour economy

Gunel Abdullayeva

Published

on

Since the 1990s, the persistence of high unemployment has been followed by two downturns, which affected an economic life over the world across the nation-states. The overt consequences cost unpleasantly social and economic outcomes for the states as well as societies. Henceforth, activation turn has observed once more shifting passive employment policies within the active policy actions of countries upon labour market at the beginning of a new millennium. It was supposed that the activation of jobless people through keeping employees occupied, job-search assistance, job creation and work experience programs, training and invest in up skilling, is an open way to fight against high unemployment and secure economic growth as well. Hereby, the idea of an active labour market policy (ALMP) became again pivotal tool in the domestic policy agendas of states in order to engage in new challenges of labour markets. Since the 1950s,it is an apparent fact that in Europe and the Nordic countries that the effectiveness of ALMPs engenders diminution in a structural and long-term unemployment and leads to increase net income together with the employment ratio of targeted groups in national economies.

With the XXI century’s new technological vicissitudes and industrialization, the active employment policies have been designed to support people with monetary (income) and non-monetary (education) incentives in order to reduce inequality, keep the balance of social inclusion, and stimulate market beyond to decrease unemployment. Consequently, labour market training grew into to become an important measure of ALMP strategies in the background of “welfare to workfare policy approach” to create better-skilled workforce as well as to surge adequate match between skilled manpower and needs of progressive demand in labour markets.

In fact, the scholarly studies state significant impacts of training and vocational programs in the activation of the workforce. For example, the 1950-1960s – Post War Era characterized with the rapid economic growth and labour supply shortage in the European industry. And as a solution, national employment policies started to focus on labour trainings. So that Sweden with its successful retraining system has been the pioneer of ALMP idea in the history. On the other hand, Germany with 1969`s Employment Promotion Act considered training as a principal component of active employment policies to upskill workforce in terms of new industrial needs by market demand.

The UN 2009 reports that education is considered one of the main indicators of poverty reduction: education and human resource investments contribute to an economic development of nation-states and societies. Higher educated people or up-skilled workforce boost up productivity and react the positively to technological changes. Some scholars and interlocutors claim that in long-term perspectives ALMPs should have to aim to develop an education and training system that enhances the productivity and employability of a labour force. Because of the fact that the skilled manpower is one of the cornerstones of the higher employment, developed economy, higher net income and well-being of the whole society.

Many types of research have been carried out to identify the prominence of labour market training, however, the Katz`s study (1993) shows the significant point of job market training as turning “unskilled labour” into “skilled labour”. Perceptibly, the unemployment problem is more common among less skilled individuals and new entrants to the market. Shifting in demand against unskilled labour force causes an unemployment among those people. In contrast to unskilled force reservation wage and labour demand is high for skilled manpower in the market. Here, the training policy helps turn out unskilled to a skilled workforce and to increase total employment in order to decrease unskilled unemployment. Research argues that training policy extends the skilled labour force and close the gap between the unskilled and skilled workers. Caruana and Theuma (2012) refer to Katz (1993) argue that in order to push jobless people towards work, some trainings improve the qualification of those workers who are already in the market. Hence, Katz (1993) emphasizes the importance of labour market training in reducing the unemployment rate of unskilled labour by transferring more workers to the skilled labour pool. They also underline the significant role of a training policy in improving the skills of employees and increasing, the supply of skilled manpower in the economy. The following figure “Development of Unskilled Labour Force” visualizes Katz`s statement andshows how training measure affects the job market in both ways. The points where demand curves intersect supply curves, which are given wages for skilled and unskilled labour respectively. As the author explains, the wages represent the remuneration of foregone opportunity costs that, logically, is higher for skilled labour than for unskilled one. Since labour demand for the skilled labour is stronger than that of unskilled labour, thus, the demand curve for the former one is more elastic. As the figure illustrates, after the implementation of training, part of unskilled labour is moving up to the skilled.

At the same time, scholar states that wage setting regulation, training, and education systems affect differently net income and employment perspectives. Consequently, education and labour training policies create an equal distribution of skills and able to reduce supply and demand shifting on wages and employment. Another study by Calmfors et al., (2001) argue that training programs increase the reservation wage of attendees. However, salary growth and employment perspectives are possible by time after long run participation in the program.

To sum up, the training policy is considered as a main supply-side policy tool of activation to tackle unemployment. Scholars argue that training programs are useful to prevent the long run unemployment and to keep unemployed active in the market via participation. However, ex-post evaluation of training programs is controversial. Country case studies show that training programs are more effective in the background of vocational education reforms and collaboration with demand-side active labour market policies.

Reference list:

  • , Forslund A., &Hemstrom M., (2001), Does Active Labour Market Policy Work? Lessons from Swedish experiences, Swedish Economy Policy Review, 85, 61-124
  • Caruana C. &Theuma M., (2012), The next leap – From Labour Market Programmes to Active Labour Market Policy.
  • Katz, F.L., (1993), Active Labor Market Policies to Expand Employment and Opportunity.
  • United Nations, (2009), Rethinking Poverty: Report on the World Social Situation 2010, Retrieved from http://www.un.org/esa/socdev/rwss/docs/2010/fullreport.pdf
Continue Reading

Latest

Trending

Copyright © 2018 Modern Diplomacy