Follow us on:   

Re-globalization Heralds an Emerging New World Order
January 9, 2017, 6:19 am

The world-wide debate about globalization has been upended by “the Trump Phenomenon” and its wild-fire spread to Europe and elsewhere. The two separate camps of “Deglobalization” versus “Reglobalization” are pitted against each other in a tug-of-war with no clear winner.

From a historical perspective, globalization and, for that matter, the world history has not been linear in its progress. There have been ups and downs as well as twists and turns. With several decades of fast growth of globalization, the world has reaped unprecedented benefits, but we have also seen the widening gap between the rich and the poor and deeper division between the capital and the labor as predicted by Karl Marx. So, the conclusion should be that globalization will continue but with a different paradigm or narrative, thus ushering in a new era of “reglobalization” wherein China is called upon to play a key role of leadership. China’s President Xi Jinping is going to Davos World Economic Forum in January 2017 which again indicates that China attaches great importance to “make globalization and global governance work again” even though now globalization is somewhat in shatters and in urgent need of changes.

The emerging world order is being shaped by the ongoing twists and turns of globalization. Although what anti-globalization measures President-elect Trump will take and what will happen in European politics in the next few years are mostly in the domain of unknowns, there are a few trends that will no doubt continue.

One trend is that after 2008 financial crisis neo-liberalism has been retreating or receding at a rapid pace globally. The other is the fact that despite global economic slowdown, China’s economic growth path and model have been proven of great salience in global economic governance with its resilient political system and strong institutional arrangements.

File photo of a woman holding a placard during a protest against the Trans-Pacific Partnership [Xinhua]

File photo of a woman holding a placard during a protest against the Trans-Pacific Partnership [Xinhua]

The contrast between a collapsing neo-liberalism of the west and the much-welcomed new development model espoused and practiced by China is not to be missed. I am certain that it will be featured prominently at the upcoming annual Davos gathering too. In the last decade or so, China has taken a proactive approach to the provision of global commons ranging from Shanghai Cooperation Organization to the Asia Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), from RCEP the new free trade agreement that is almost at the finishing line to “One Belt & One Road” Initiative that promotes new thinking of common development in global governance.

Amid growing uncertainty caused by political and economic sand shift in major advanced nations like the US, UK, Italy and France, China stands out as an anchor of stability and continuity in global governance and international efforts to tackle global challenges such as climate change. The greatest uncertainty is doubtlessly what economic and monetary policies Mr. Trump will come up with. Trade protectionism, reduction of taxes, increasing investment in infrastructure to the amount of one trillion dollar and continuance of Fed’s rate hikes are already on the table. That mix of policies will impact the global trade and economy. The question is how much and how long as economies of the world are virtually interdependent for global production and financial flows. Any disruption to the current system could be costly to many countries especially small economies or single commodity economies.

Of course, it is not just about China and the US. It is about the changing political and economic landscape of the world we live in, about the “rebalance” or “convergence” between the developed and developing nations on a scale that has not been seen since the industrial revolution a few hundred years ago. In other words, global governance is undergoing a historical process of “western governance” to “co-governance by East and West”.

Will we succeed in shaping the emerging new world order that will be more fair, more just and provides better global governance architecture to the community of nations that are a de facto entity of common interest with mutually beneficial relationships. That is a big challenge to all of us. It will be tragic if a country or countries hijacked by domestic politics and economics or geo-politics will become roadblocks rather than movers in “reglobalization”. There is no time to waste when the new era is already on the horizon and a fast-changing world certainly requires a meeting of minds and concerted actions in global governance by all members of the international community to make “reglobalization” work.

Last but not the least reglobalization does not mean throwing away the current global governance system. China has repeatedly expressed its firm position that it wants to safeguard and reinforce the existing governance system. What needs to be done after careful and wide consultation among nations is what reform measures should we contemplate and be taken to improve the system with apparent imperfections.

The rising populism in the US and Europe is not something happening out of the blue that can be ignored. It is resulted from and enhanced by the persistently widening income and wealth gap from the disparate gains between the capital and the labor, to speak in general terms. Populism is only a label. The root cause that keeps feeding the populist anger against the elites in the US and some European countries is now crystal clear. If that angst cannot be diffused, any talk of a new world order would be futile. China’s success in continuous growth and her tremendous efforts to reduce and eradicate poverty can be a good example for other nations.

 

This article first appeared in China US Focus.

The views expressed in this article are the author's own and do not necessarily reflect the publisher's editorial policy.

3 Responses to Re-globalization Heralds an Emerging New World Order

  1. Patrick Michael Molen Reply

    January 15, 2017 at 7:44 pm

    Is China’s model of Authoritarian Capitalism more attractive to elites like “Davos Man” and to international shareholders and their corporate executives than the model of Democratic Capitalism that has produced the Brexit and Trump populist backlashes against unfettered globalization? Post Brexit and Post Trump, do elites like those gathering at the World Economic Forum in Davos Switzerland prefer to work with Authoritarian Capitalist nations such as China over Democratic Capitalist nations like the USA and UK?

  2. kushal kumar Reply

    January 18, 2017 at 6:23 am

    Analysing planetary influences in relation to economy round the globe , it looks to this Vedic astrology writer that the global economy has potential to stagnate if not slow down during coming five months from February to June 2017. Nations whose economic picture as in the beginning of the year 2017 is doing well , the planetary influences could be read to mean a potential stagnation trends during said period February to June 2017. But in nations where economy is found to be slowing down in the beginning of year 2017 owing to serious economic or political problems , there is no potential of even stagnation and a slow down potential seems to be almost certain during February to June. Best of efforts or economic strategy could yield results but with not as much quantum as expected. Areas which may require more focus or close strategy are aviation industry , cyber or mobile or telecommunication industry depending upon air as medium of passage. Energy sector like oil and gas may also require close focus as these may cause major concerns in vulnerable countries.
    Note :- This Vedic astrology writer’s predictions in monumental article – “ Stressful times ahead for world economy in 2015 and 2016” – published on 2 June 2014 in online magazine (blog) astrologyweekly.com, have stood the test of times in substance.
    2. The alerts in this write-up could be fit one for information of members of World Economic Forum Meeting just begun these days at Davos, Switzerland or else these could be of immense interest to investors, policy makers and economists alike.

  3. sixpack Reply

    February 6, 2017 at 10:10 pm

    We need to stop with the “global governance” paradigm. No matter how “humanitarian” the idea starts out, the problem is and always will be greed. “Global governance” ALWAYS turns into GLOBAL TYRANNY. I think the people of the world have made it clear that we do not want a global master. I have a feeling that China will be surprised when they find out that Russia will not go along with global governance, regardless of who the elites choose to lead their effort.

    A more subtle approach to global control still end with global tyranny. No thank you.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Anti-Spam * Time limit is exhausted. Please reload the CAPTCHA.