Thursday, July 9, 2009 - 6:07 PM
A few months ago I was at a panel on the April G-20 summit, when someone asked why there was a pledge to complete the Doha round when no one expected that to happen?
The answer given by the trade experts in the room was that, as toothless as such a statement might sound, it was worse not to say anything. The signal of not mentioning Doha was ostensibly worse than the cynicism of claiming that two plus two equals five.
Bear this in mind when reading the following:
The world’s biggest economies agreed on Thursday to conclude a comprehensive trade deal in 2010, in the latest attempt to revive the stalled Doha round and give a shot in the arm to the world economy.
Rich countries gathered for the G8 summit agreed with ten other large economies – including India, China and Brazil – that trade talks must resume urgently, with a deadline set for completion next year.
The agreement in the Italian town of L’Aquila will be hailed by world leaders as a decisive moment in reviving the global economy and a statement of intent to conclude a trade round which began in Doha in 2001.
But there will be widespread cynicism over whether such commitments are credible. Every G8 summit – not to mention other international summits – ends with leaders paying lip service to finalising a trade round.
If Obama actually tries a "Nixon goes to China" moment on trade, I might be more optimistic. But with global warming and health care on the horizon, I have zero confidence that Doha will be completed within the next eighteen months.
EXPLORE:TRADE AND DEVELOPMENT, CYNICISM, DOHA ROUND, GLOBAL GOVERNANCE, GLOBAL POLITICAL ECONOMY, TRADE, TRADE POLITICS
the failure of Doha will be blamed for this depression. Ha!
I'm not so sure about the trade experts' response. Simply doing nothing might bring accusations of anger and feet-dragging, but saying you will do something and then not doing that brings the above plus accusations and beliefs of hypocrisy, which lowers the overall trust level and makes it harder to actually muster support for legitimate action when it comes.
However, a more interesting question would be: are we gonna see a back-to-30s-economic-warfare once people realize the US dollar is not worst even the paper it is printed on?
Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.
Read More
(3)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE