The left diagnosed ills of globalisation but the right is eating our lunch

Free trade and the freedom of capital to move across borders have been the cutting edge of globalisation. They’ve also led to the succession of crises that have led to the widespread questioning of capitalism as a way of organising economic life — and of its paramount ideological expression, neoliberalism.

The protests against capitalism at the recent G20 meeting in Hamburg may seem superficially the same as those which marked similar meetings in the early 2000s. But there’s one big difference now: Global capitalism is in a period of long-term stagnation following the global financial crisis. The newer protests represent a far broader disenchantment with capitalism than the protests of the 2000s.

Yet capitalism’s resilience amidst crisis must not be underestimated. For trade activists, in particular, who’ve been on the forefront of the struggle against neoliberalism and globalisation over the last two decades, there are a number of key challenges posed by the conjuncture.

Neoliberalism’s surprising strength

First is the surprising strength of neoliberalism.

The credibility of neoliberalism, to which free trade ideology is central, has been deeply damaged by a succession of events over the last two decades, among which were the collapse of the third ministerial of the World Trade Organization in Seattle in 1999, the Asian financial crisis in 1997-98, and the Global financial crisis of 2008-2009, the effects of which continue to drag down the global economy.
READ MORE

Trump's friendly meeting with Putin further blurs US-Russia relations

It emerged early this morning: a few seconds of grainy footage showing U.S. President Donald Trump shaking hands with Russian President Vladimir Putin at the G-20 summit in Hamburg, Germany.

Trump, the taller man, stoops to meet Putin on equal terms. He pats him repeatedly on the elbow, and then on the back.

Later, as they sat side-by-side in matching cream-colored chairs, Trump called it “an honor” to meet Putin. The Russian president noted that they had talked on the telephone several times, but that talking on the telephone is never enough. An interesting choice of words, given Putin’s disconcerting habit of leaking the private conversations of foreign leaders.

So what can we learn about their relationship and the future of U.S.-Russia relations from this single meeting?

Hidden planning

They talked for more than two hours, far longer than the scheduled half hour. According to a briefing given later in the afternoon by Secretary of State Rex Tillerson, they discussed Syria, Ukraine, terrorism and cybersecurity, including “interference in the democratic processes” of the U.S. and other countries. And Tillerson announced that the U.S., Russia and Jordan have agreed to a ceasefire in Southwest Syria between the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad and opposition forces.

This was a substantial agenda, made to seem more impressive by clever expectations setting and misdirection undertaken by administration officials in advance of the meeting.

The official announcement of the ceasefire was held back so that the meeting would have a “deliverable.” However, the Associated Press gave the game away by reporting the deal while Trump and Putin were still talking.
READ MORE

The G20 summit shows a world divided in its attitudes toward globalisation

In particular, they are divided over their attitudes toward globalisation. It is globalisation that has significantly increased the degree of interconnection between the world’s economies. And it is this interconnection that drives the need for international discussion and cooperation – via events such as the G20.

But this last year has seen as a loud backlash against globalisation. There was the Brexit vote in the UK and the election of Donald Trump in the US on a protectionist ticket. This is ironic given that they are two of the world’s biggest economies (at least for the time being). Both have been major drivers of globalisation and have benefited enormously from it.

But now both countries are calling the future of globalisation into question. Two sides have emerged in the debate over whether or not globalisation is a good thing and whether or not nation states should be more protective and inward-looking.

On the one hand, some G20 countries emphasise the benefits of ongoing and increased levels of cooperation between countries and regional trading blocs. These countries, such as Germany and Canada, seek to tackle the issues caused by globalisation at the global scale. This is not a homogeneous group, but there is a broad consensus that the high degree of interconnection between the world’s economies is not easily unpicked, nor is it desirable to try to do so.
READ MORE

G20: Protestors, police clash in Hamburg for third day; cars set ablaze

Fresh clashes erupted early on Sunday in the streets of Hamburg following the end of the G20 summit, with protesters setting fire to a number of vehicles, the police said.

The protesters gathered after the close of the summit in the Schanzen district, a stronghold for extreme left radicals which has been the site of multiple confrontations since Thursday.

Armed with glass bottles and targeting vehicles, many of which they set on fire, the protesters were pushed back by the police, using water cannon and tear gas, the police said on Twitter.

The police said more officers had been injured, and more people arrested.

According to the most recent figures given by the police yesterday, some 213 police officers have been injured since Thursday, and 143 people have been detained. No accurate number for protestors injured is available.

On Thursday, a planned peaceful march by around 12,000 people protesting against globalisation turned violent.

Friday's clashes occurred as leaders from the world's 20 biggest developed and emerging economies began the two-day meeting focusing on trade, terrorism, climate change and other key global issues.

READ MORE