Here's the final communique of the G20 summit, sort of like the final research paper put together by a team of egos and rivals. (It begins: "We, the Leaders of the Group of Twenty, met in London on 2 April 2009.") President Obama was supposed to convince European leaders to spend more money on their home economies; he didn't do that. Instead, the White House -- and the world -- were preoccupied by Obama's side meetings. There he is, making amends with Medvedev; look -- he's bantering with Hu. He gave the Queen an iPod! Michelle touched the Queen's back!
All these distractions from the common purpose served the Obama White
House well. News blackout aside, they're sending home great pictures,
and they've got a report card full of good grades (incomplete as they
are) to show their mommies. I gather from the financial press that
there are a few "winners" of the summit. One is the IMF, which will get
an infusion of at least a trillion dollars from richer countries in
order to dampen the effects of the global downturn in less developed
countries. The comminique includes a long section on protectionism,
more money pledged to protect against protectionism (!) and a
reaffirmation of the principles of the Doha round of trade
negotiations. I take it that Germany and France wanted tighter
regulations on hedge funds and other financial instruments, and the
final document creates a standards board that will standardize...not
much, yet, but it's a step.
There may indeed have been "friction"
between the Americans and some European leaders on issues like
accounting standards, but this blog evaluates the political
consequences of President Obama's activities for his domestic audience.
You'd be forgiven for not seeing too much coverage of the economic
debate, and for thinking that Obama Style Eclipised Merkel Substance,
and not the other way round. The message is probably different in
Europe -- the U.S. didn't get what it wanted, but I think the national
security message shapers here are OK with that. While it's true that
the U.S. hoped for some flexibility on spending, it was important not
to appear to be seen as bullying Europe into submission.
As if anything meaningful has EVER come from these pow-wows? The difference between a resolution that everyone forgets about on the plane home and no resolution at all is very slight. Historically, who cares, really?
It is sort of like the meetings of professional sport leagues...it isn't what comes out during the meetings, but it is the side deals that are being worked that end up having impact.
Eclipised? Or eclipsied? eclipissed? ellipsieis? Did your spell checker not pick that one up? Because I did. Heh heh heh.
a very odd perspective to take considering that all 20 leaders had little more than 8 hrs to discuss these issues. as always in these cases, these heads of states aren't there to engage in the nitty gritty of policy. this normally occurs in the background. they're just to affirm the general direction they intend to take.
.
second point. historically, these summits don't accomplish much. correct me if im wrong, but the only memorable summit was the us-soviet showdown over the cuban missile crisis. you had two distinctly different camps. today, you have 20 different nations, each with it's own ideas and wanting to be acknowledged. while it was more dangerous back then, today it's more like 3 dimensional chess.
.
this was more about obama's introduction to the world stage than any concrete policy proposal. it was a chance to see how the us would lead the world. would we sound off ideas, then convince people to either accept and reject, would we be totally irrelevant in an evolving world, would we listen...ect deals got finalized, but nothing was surprising.
At the end of the day most of what happens on good will when it comes to implementation. If Obama didn't get his way neither did Sarkozy and Merkel get their's. They pumped a lot of money into the IMF so that's going to assist weak third world economies weather the storm and they got a general agreement on a lot of regulation tightening....I'm sure they were happy about what they heard from Geithner....and that they are going to do whatever is necessary to prevent their economies sliding into recession. Which brings us back to goodwill. Did Obama engender a lot of it. Undoubtedly so to that extent he must be adjudged a success. Domestically I don't remember one of these summits getting anything like this attention so his and Michelle's star status is going to assist his mojo at home.
So Bush goes to Europe for eight years and gets squat, but it's because they hate him. We Americans have “alienated” our allies. So much so that British press called Americans stupid for voting him in 2004. But now that we are SMARTER and the European approve of our choice what do we get ………? And here in the US the illusion continues "today it's more like 3 dimensional chess", and what was it yesterday?