Remember Doha (the Doha Round of WTO talks)? What happened to it?
Or even "Doha Lite"?
Some 6 years ago (December 2006), before the subprime led crisis, the Euro crisis, a few years after the dotcom crisis (bubble), and before the real estate bubbles in the US, Ireland and Spain (et al), before the global oil and staple foods prices crisis, I was proposing that: The "kingdom" of economic liberalism is not "grounded" that well on this earth! The ongoing troubles of the Doha Round of world trade talks are evidence to that. What do people prefer, to work as blacksmiths in a fair trade based job market or as knights in a free market based job market? (from my post "The Pirates of the Globalean and the curse of liberalism?", 4/12/2006).
The "rest of the wordl" compared to the US and the EU (and its (so they think) developed grand economies of the G7 (UK, Germany, France and Italy)) plus Japan and Canada, has been claiming its fair share on world GDP and wealth in general. That means (see rough calculations in my recent post, 3/2/2012: "If GDP per capita in USA, EU, China, India was to converge then ...") a decline in the US and EU's share of the world GDP and their GDPs per capita. Which is already happening and one can expect acceleration in the near future, unless:
As I have argued in many posts and tweets, the WTO "global trade league" does not seem to work for the US and the EU anymore since China entered (December 2001) and showed its communist-capitalist muscle. The troubles of the WTO talks in 2003 in Cancun prompted the EU, the US and others to sign bilateral trade (and sometimes wider "economic" or even wider) agreements. Also, it prompted the establishment of new or the evolution of existing "regional" entities (see eg ASEAN, ASEAN-China, Mercsur and UNASUR, even the African Union project) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) aka Trans-Pacific Strategic Economic Partnership Agreement. Not to forget NAFTA and CAFTA. And the pan-American free trade area that Bush tried to promote but fell flat on its (his) face in Mar Del Plata at the 4th Summit of the Americas in November 2005. Which was by the way followed a month later, by another major fail of the WTO Doha Round of talks in the 6th WTO Ministerial Conference in Hong Kong, 13–18 December 2005.
Political science and politics have developed in recent centuries different models for the re-distribution of wealth inside national confines. Now they have to deal wit it at global level-framework, not national. No wonder many are fighting against a world government (with a world parliament) tooth and nail! Even at the European level, the Euro crisis is partly a crisis of redistribution of wealth at European level or even the mere development of "EU interest" or "Eurozone interest" instead of national interest!
No wonder that an oxymoronic anti-globalist (and even anti-EU) libertarian anti-tax, anti-state, austerity-hawkish political philosophy has evolved. How does one blend libertarianism with nationalism, well that is a political "bartender's" secret that still eludes me.
So, are the social democrats or the left of center more generally ready to govern in Europe? Yes, as long as it finds a political model for EU or Eurozone "interest". The same applies to the centrists in Europe (who are they? that is another post). The conservatives are torn between the German ordoliberal and the classic or neo liberal thinking dogmas (eg the UK Tories). Against a backdrop of the Belgian issue between Vlaanderen and Wallonie or the after-math of the German re-unification pains of the 1990s that still linger to some extent.
Are the German Pirates a view of things to come in European politics? Too early to tell.
What will happen in the Eurzone and the EU if Hollande breaks up the Merkozy affair on May 6? Well, on verra, but can it be worse than the existing situation (of Merkozian politics and economics)? Nein, non. ochi.
Showing posts with label Merkozy. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Merkozy. Show all posts
Friday, April 13, 2012
Monday, March 12, 2012
The potential for an alternative to the Merkozy way (Part 2: Competitiveness)
This is a follow up to my post "The potential for an alternative to the Merkozy way (Part1)" of March 10, 2012.
The so called "Fiscal Pact" or "Fiscal Compact", that Merkozy conceived and 25 of 27 states signed in early March is too rigid in scope, in philosophy and in targets to be of benefit to the participating states (we shall see how many will actually get the OK from their national parliaments or their citizens, eg Ireland).
It introduces fiscal only interventions to the sovereignty of the members that not only justify a national referendum in Ireland but a 2/3 majority in the two houses of the German parliament (the Bundestag and the Bundesrat) too, etc.
Theoretically, the Europe 2020 strategy that was decided in 2010. But that IMO is not nearly enough.
According to the Europe 2020 webpages of the European Commission, "the 5 targets for the EU in 2020 are:
1. Employment
75% of the 20-64 year-olds to be employed
2. R&D/ innovation
3% of the EU's GDP (public and private combined) to be invested in R&D/innovation
3. Climate change / energy
greenhouse gas emissions 20% (or even 30%, if the conditions are right) lower than 1990
20% of energy from renewables
20% increase in energy efficiency
4. Education
Reducing school drop-out rates below 10%
at least 40% of 30-34–year-olds completing third level education
5. Poverty / social exclusion
at least 20 million fewer people in or at risk of poverty and social exclusion"
It seems to me that this "strategy" is more of a plan that a strategy. Plus IMO it relies too much on R&D as a source of EU competitiveness. Plus it does not allow for specialised strategies and competitiveness models for each state or regions thereof.
What is needed is the establishment of a Competitiveness Agency for the Europlus ie the participating members.
This agency must be the sum of 25 think tanks of the member states and daily monitor and analyse the competitiveness strategy of each member states and regions within the states and seek to coordinate those into an overall "conglomerate" strategy. It should operate mainly in an inter-governmental way but with cooperation and support from the Services of the European Commission, committees of the European Parliament and councils of the EU. With a very lean infrastructure and secretariat. Also consult with the national parliaments of the participating states.
It should include technocrats who will be personal appointees of the member governments as well as the key national social partners.
The Competitiveness Agency should have the right to express opinions on any action or policy of EU institutions and bodies that affect the competitiveness of not only the Europlus as a whole but the EU and most importantly the participating states!
Eg it should be able to criticise the ECB if its interest rates lead to Euro exchange rates that hurt the competitiveness of the Eurozone/Europlus or some of its members or regions!
Issue opinions on the impact on the competitiveness of eg Greece or Portugal from TENs, evaluate the so called structural funds with respect to their impact on the competitiveness of the recipient economies or regions, even have the right to suggest EU policy vis-a-vis its WTO membership, FTAs, or even argue for EU exit from the WTO if that is seen as the only way of improving the competitiveness of enough members of the Eurozone/Europlus! Propose EU laws the removal of which would improve competitiveness!
A Eurozone/Europlus "MITI" (as in Japan)? Not quite, simply a body that cares for the competitiveness of the Eurozone/Europlus AND its constituent member states and regions thereof.
The key concept is that the competitiveness of the Eurozone/Europlus is not a one-fits-all policy, but a spectrum of policies that as a whole have to accommodate the competitiveness needs of each state and even region.
To be continued.
The so called "Fiscal Pact" or "Fiscal Compact", that Merkozy conceived and 25 of 27 states signed in early March is too rigid in scope, in philosophy and in targets to be of benefit to the participating states (we shall see how many will actually get the OK from their national parliaments or their citizens, eg Ireland).
It introduces fiscal only interventions to the sovereignty of the members that not only justify a national referendum in Ireland but a 2/3 majority in the two houses of the German parliament (the Bundestag and the Bundesrat) too, etc.
Theoretically, the Europe 2020 strategy that was decided in 2010. But that IMO is not nearly enough.
According to the Europe 2020 webpages of the European Commission, "the 5 targets for the EU in 2020 are:
1. Employment
75% of the 20-64 year-olds to be employed
2. R&D/ innovation
3% of the EU's GDP (public and private combined) to be invested in R&D/innovation
3. Climate change / energy
greenhouse gas emissions 20% (or even 30%, if the conditions are right) lower than 1990
20% of energy from renewables
20% increase in energy efficiency
4. Education
Reducing school drop-out rates below 10%
at least 40% of 30-34–year-olds completing third level education
5. Poverty / social exclusion
at least 20 million fewer people in or at risk of poverty and social exclusion"
It seems to me that this "strategy" is more of a plan that a strategy. Plus IMO it relies too much on R&D as a source of EU competitiveness. Plus it does not allow for specialised strategies and competitiveness models for each state or regions thereof.
What is needed is the establishment of a Competitiveness Agency for the Europlus ie the participating members.
This agency must be the sum of 25 think tanks of the member states and daily monitor and analyse the competitiveness strategy of each member states and regions within the states and seek to coordinate those into an overall "conglomerate" strategy. It should operate mainly in an inter-governmental way but with cooperation and support from the Services of the European Commission, committees of the European Parliament and councils of the EU. With a very lean infrastructure and secretariat. Also consult with the national parliaments of the participating states.
It should include technocrats who will be personal appointees of the member governments as well as the key national social partners.
The Competitiveness Agency should have the right to express opinions on any action or policy of EU institutions and bodies that affect the competitiveness of not only the Europlus as a whole but the EU and most importantly the participating states!
Eg it should be able to criticise the ECB if its interest rates lead to Euro exchange rates that hurt the competitiveness of the Eurozone/Europlus or some of its members or regions!
Issue opinions on the impact on the competitiveness of eg Greece or Portugal from TENs, evaluate the so called structural funds with respect to their impact on the competitiveness of the recipient economies or regions, even have the right to suggest EU policy vis-a-vis its WTO membership, FTAs, or even argue for EU exit from the WTO if that is seen as the only way of improving the competitiveness of enough members of the Eurozone/Europlus! Propose EU laws the removal of which would improve competitiveness!
A Eurozone/Europlus "MITI" (as in Japan)? Not quite, simply a body that cares for the competitiveness of the Eurozone/Europlus AND its constituent member states and regions thereof.
The key concept is that the competitiveness of the Eurozone/Europlus is not a one-fits-all policy, but a spectrum of policies that as a whole have to accommodate the competitiveness needs of each state and even region.
To be continued.
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Whatever happens on May 6, they will always have Greece
According to Wikipedia, a "work spouse" is a co-worker, usually of the opposite sex,[1] with whom one shares a special relationship, having bonds similar to those of a marriage (but platonic).
By analogy, the relationship between Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy could be called "political spouses" or "Euro-spouses".
And if Sarkozy emerges non-victorious on May 6 at the sec9nd round of the French Presidency elections, the two will always have Greece (not sure what Greece thinks of that though).
Yet for those who monitor European, EU and world affairs (what a choice of terminology!!) this Euro political love affair and "marriage" seemed as plausible as Greek growing by 20% next year, only a few years ago. I can still recall the press reports on how Angela Merkel, always wanted to be prepared at meetings etc, could not tolerate Nicolas' brainstorming style, and neither did her "court".
So many press reports on how much they could not stand each other. And then, political Eros (aka Cupid) striked! Maybe it was Greece that brought them together. Frankly, I cannot recall when the thin line into love was crossed.
They do not call it EU Affairs for nothing. But one of the morals of the story, IMO, is that EU affairs, like romantic affairs, can be unstable.
Nick and Angie will always have Greece. Hope that Greece will not always have austerity though.
By analogy, the relationship between Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy could be called "political spouses" or "Euro-spouses".
And if Sarkozy emerges non-victorious on May 6 at the sec9nd round of the French Presidency elections, the two will always have Greece (not sure what Greece thinks of that though).
Yet for those who monitor European, EU and world affairs (what a choice of terminology!!) this Euro political love affair and "marriage" seemed as plausible as Greek growing by 20% next year, only a few years ago. I can still recall the press reports on how Angela Merkel, always wanted to be prepared at meetings etc, could not tolerate Nicolas' brainstorming style, and neither did her "court".
So many press reports on how much they could not stand each other. And then, political Eros (aka Cupid) striked! Maybe it was Greece that brought them together. Frankly, I cannot recall when the thin line into love was crossed.
They do not call it EU Affairs for nothing. But one of the morals of the story, IMO, is that EU affairs, like romantic affairs, can be unstable.
Nick and Angie will always have Greece. Hope that Greece will not always have austerity though.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)