The G20 and the debate on world order

The G20 and the debate on world order

By Julio Gambina Blogspot

It is that Our America occupied from the beginning of the XXI century the place of political change with respect to the neoliberal hegemony built from the exit to the crisis of the late 1960s and early 1970s. What began as State terrorism in the southern cone of America, is now extended as a militarization of the world system. The experiences deployed from the caracazo, even with nuances, generated hopes and expectations in the global sphere, encouraging new processes of social transformation beyond the region.

The response to the threat of our region to world power was undemocratic, with "parliamentary coups" in Honduras, Paraguay or Brazil. The legitimation for the dispute of a return to the liberalization agenda was granted by the electoral triumph of Macri in Argentina in 2015. This legality of origin tries to be legitimized with political and ideological signals from world power, since the visit of Obama or Merkel to Argentina, Trump's friendship towards the Head of Government in Argentina; the visits of international organizations and the landing of the WTO in December. The strawberry is the G20 presidency for next year 2018.

The G20 and the hegemonic dispute

The G20 deals with the world crisis and generates an agenda to resume the course of liberalization (economic opening) affected by the multiple events that emerged around 2008 with a strong impact on the large US investment banks (Lehman Brothers among others) and that it was extended to the whole world order in economic, financial, food, energy, and environmental matters, putting into discussion the contemporary civilizing order.

The meetings as such do not solve much in economic and social terms, but they serve to update the correlations of force on the world order.

The US was the group's mentor, summoned by George Bush at the end of his term, expanding from the G7 (USA, Germany, France, England, Italy, Japan and Canada) with emerging countries such as China and Russia; Mexico and Brazil; South Africa, the arena of consensus for global policy directions. Argentina was part of the "technical" G20 that emerged in 1999 and remained as a founding partner along with other guests who were not part of the original nucleus, in the case of the European Union or Spain. They demanded to be part of the select self-erected group above the UN to discuss the vicissitudes of the emerging criticism towards 2008.

The recent meeting in Hamburg found Trump alone, who did not validate the consensus on the Paris agreement as an area related to the treatment of global warming. Is it weakness or strength of the US? What is disputed is the hegemony of the capitalist system in the conditions of weak growth that are replicated year after year by the statistics and forecasts of international organizations such as the IMF or the World Bank.

The United States is the only one that imposes global conditions from its economic power, especially its currency (despite the weaknesses of the dollar), its military deployment and its cultural symbolic ideological influence. Monetary sovereignty allows the government in Washington to sustain the fiscal and trade deficit that it wants (relatively speaking) along with greater indebtedness in absolute terms in the currency itself. Although they are a set of federal states, their integrated historical logic allows them to compensate with fiscal policy for the limitations of sub-national states with difficulties.

The same is not the case in Europe, where German hegemony does not favor the support of national states in a critical situation, clearly demonstrated in Greece, but also expressed with Spain, Italy, Portugal or other smaller partners in the European military. Europe is far from being the Federation that the US is, even though its integration strategy implies it.

Japan drags its critical situation of poor growth since the 90s of the last century and sees its possibilities limited in the hegemonic dispute, especially with the emergence of China as a world economic and political actor in recent decades. China has strengthened in the partnership with Russia and its projection since in 2013 it stopped the US military initiative against Syria. Canada only acts as a junior partner in US decisions.

Let us insist that the United States is the only country in a position to function with relative autonomy from the world system. This is based on the monetary sovereignty deployed since 1971 with the inconvertibility of the dollar. Not even the Chinese holdings of trillions of dollars invested in Treasury Bonds are a problem, since if necessary they are canceled with issuance, the same as the twin deficits (fiscal or commercial), everything that sustains private savings and capitalist investment U.S.

No one in the world has that quality, beyond any attempt at austerity economic policy or the counterpart of monetary expansion. China is perhaps the only one that advances in the sense of achieving a national currency with global acceptance, the effort of recent years since its predominance in material production and technological innovation based on robots, nanotechnology and artificial intelligence, promoted in the extension of relationships commercial and economic with all the countries of the world.

In the G20 these tensions are expressed and while the US discusses the reorganization in its favor of global relations and liberalization, China organizes its ties upholding traditional aspirations of free trade of those who dispute a place in the hegemony of capitalism. The course of the world is discussed and the US continues to have the handle and global power from the dollar, its military capacity and cultural influence. It is not about the West against the East, but about hegemony in the orientation of the capitalist order.

Argentina and its role in the world

This is where Argentina moves, recognized by world power for the potential to modify the strategic course of Our America, from the political change of these first years of the 21st century to the subordinate reintegration in the liberalizing logic imposed by the large transnational capitals that organize the contemporary production and development model.

Macri had imagined it with the Democratic leadership of Hillary Clinton, but with no problem fitting in with Donald Trump even when only business and investment from China appear.

Let us insist, neither the West nor the East, only period capitalism, transnationalized and liberalizing, despite the environment and the quality of life of the workforce and the peoples.

Argentina is preparing to fulfill its role in the logic of sustaining the capitalist order. It does not have monetary sovereignty nor does it define the orientation of production to meet the needs of its population. It depends on the income of foreign currency: dollars, euros, yen or yuan, Brazilian or Chilean pesos, strictly speaking, on whoever is willing to transform money into capital for a logic of production and reproduction of a daily life inserted in a subordinate way in the world. For now, it only obtains funds for financial speculation that are paid with the product of social work in the country, channeled via the budget.

The Macri government supports a discourse that is functional to the requirements of global power and that it intends to be assumed as the only possible thing. It is a story accompanied en masse by the press and the climate of a “common sense” that cannot imagine thinking beyond capitalism. The oppositions have difficulty moving away from the hard core of the macrista diagnosis and proposal, since Argentina did not move from the productive and organized development model since the genocidal dictatorship.

The insertion subordinated to transnationalization was not born in 2015 and the ruling class populated by external creditors, transnational food and biotechnology companies; the automotive and oil companies; together with banking services and large commercial chains among others, they are part of a strategy associated with global liberalization emanating from the imagination and initiative of the Martínez de Hoz Plan onwards. It is true that in the medium not everything is the same and there are moments in recent history that attempted policies that mitigate those reactionary effects, but without affecting the structural core of redefinition of the hegemonic social relations of production in the country.

The Macri government tries to "normalize" the situation in Argentina, difficult due to the tradition of struggle of its workers, with a long history of confrontation in the dispute over social rights. The country is the springboard that the world ruling classes look to to recover the North American region to the capitalist “normality” of free trade and liberalization.

It is not a simple or easy task, not only because of the widespread local struggles in Argentina, but also because of the persistence and consolidation of the Bolivian proposal for the process of change and the defense of the Venezuelan Bolivarian process with its constituent and the intention of making its experience visible. of little known communal power; but also with the Cuban stubbornness to sustain a socialist project in times of governmental transition from the historic breed of the revolution to new generations.

Anti-imperialism in our territory

The intention of world power is based on the possibility of making local political reality visible with the conclave of the WTO ministerial in Argentina in December and the G20 in July 2018. In both meetings the transnationalization agenda is discussed, the encouragement to the free (liar) game of the market, as an expectation of imperialism.

If that agenda advances, whether in terms of electronic commerce, liberalization of fishing or educational change (reactionary and privatizing), it will cause significant regressive effects in terms of unemployment and super-exploitation, not only in the country, but throughout the world, so It is necessary to continue the example of the widespread protest in the German streets by the social and political movements critical of the maxim program of domination and of anti-imperialism.

The gigantic security operation did not impede the visibility that the protest acquired, showing that there is not only politics and ideology of power, but also an initiative of counter-power and a search for the construction of civilizing alternatives, as an ancient search for the emancipation of the peoples.

That is why there is the challenge of building a great response against the WTO and G20 summits in Argentina, something that is in process, simultaneously with the repression that is planned, to try to shield the visitors from the world power who will negotiate liberalization in Buenos Aires territory on behalf of the WTO or the G20.

The G20 will celebrate a decade in 2018 from its new role assumed in 2008 and its results are scarce for the world power itself. Not to mention for the unemployed and impoverished of the world. Growing inequality is the reality of efforts to normalize the "free market." The same occurs with the WTO negotiations, traversed by disputes between hegemonic capitals and their countries of origin for leading the contemporary world situation.

The voice of the peoples is the other side, beyond liberalization and in the search for another order, more established in the production of use values ​​than exchange goods, due to de-commodification and the expansion of rights, due to the food, energy and popular sovereignties; for social emancipation.

Beyond the debate over the neoliberal or neo-developmentalist options to sustain the order of capital, there is the possibility of thinking about another possible world and developing the historical experience of the peoples' struggle. Of course, what I write is crossed by a date of historical tradition in Argentina such as the day of national independence.

Buenos Aires, July 9, 2017

Julio Gambina

Video: Virtual Roundtable: World Order After COVID-19: Perspectives From the European Union and Russia (July 2021).