We use cookies to help improve and maintain our site. More information.

June 28, 2019

In Osaka

We never cease to be amazed about the hopes for G20 meetings expressed by some commentators - as though this was a democratically legitimised world government. The G20 and the G7 came into their own when governments co-ordinated global macro policies during the 1980s and right after the global financial crisis. 

The rise and fall of the multilateral G groups coincides much with the rise and fall of global liberal capitalism and the phenomenon known as globalisation. What the EU’s founding fathers understood better than modern policy architects is that multilateral action needs to be underpinned by democratic structures and legal enforceability. This is why a Victor Orbán or a Matteo Salvini cannot on their own derail the EU. Where the EU went wrong is when it departed from the script of its elders - when it created half-baked multilateral structures like the eurozone or Schengen. 

The G20 succeeds and fails with the chemistry of its leaders. A fitting example last night was the scheduled meeting between Donald Trump and Angela Merkel. Trump kept a visibly irritated Merkel waiting for a long time because he had to fire off tweets to comment on the debate among Democratic presidential contenders. The multilateral stage has degenerated into the unilateralists’ showcase. We may be shocked, but should not really be surprised.

At the Osaka G20, the main issue is not what will or will not be in the communique. FAZ journalists managed to write a whole article about German hopes on whether the fight against protectionism could somehow find itself into the declaration or not. We don’t think that even German readers care about this. It appears to us that the world of economic and financial diplomacy increasingly operates in a parallel universe. This is also happening in the EU where diplomatic paper tigers like Jean-Claude Juncker’s investment programme or the Iran SPV lead existences separate from the real world.

If there is one issue of interest during the Osaka jamboree is the possibility of a bilateral goodwill gesture by Trump in the trade conflict with China. We will leave that issue where it belongs: outside our reservation, except perhaps concerning what it might suggest about the looming US/EU trade conflicts. The script is no longer that of a of a classic 1930s-style trade war, but a new more dramatic one, made up of threats, action, counteraction, standstill agreements, renewed threats. The main channel through which it works is uncertainty.

Show Comments Write a Comment

This is the public section of the Eurointelligence Professional Briefing, which focuses on the geopolitical aspects of our news coverage. It appears daily at 2pm CET. The full briefing, which appears at 9am CET, is only available to subscribers. Please click here for a free trial, and here for the Eurointelligence home page.


Recent News

  • May 13, 2019
  • Brexit Party has already changed UK politics
  • Orbán visits Trump, after a very long wait
  • Le Pen's appeal to the PiS likely to fall on deaf ears
  • January 04, 2019
  • Will the AfD become the Dexit party?
  • Romania's corruption problem in the spotlight of its EU presidency
  • August 28, 2018
  • Urban politics and national crisis - the Irish case
  • How anti-semitism became one of the main issues in British politics
  • April 25, 2018
  • Macron's pitch to Trump
  • Montoro in Schleswig-Holstein
  • The old world and the new
  • December 22, 2017
  • Will Macron be the new de Gaulle?
  • 2018 through the looking glass
  • August 21, 2017
  • Soft, getting softer
  • Tsipras' chances of a boost
  • On the fallacy of a middle-ground option for the eurozone
  • April 20, 2017
  • Don’t bet on Trump turning globalist
  • A note on UK election polls
  • December 20, 2016
  • The politics of terror
  • On Lagarde
  • Is a disruptive Brexit possible?
  • August 22, 2016
  • Gold for Brexit
  • EU and Turkey talking past each other
  • Switzerland is the next migrant transit country
  • On the death of neoliberal economics
  • April 25, 2016
  • The death of the Grand Coalition
  • Insurrection against TTIP
  • Juppé to benefit from Macron hype
  • On optimal currency areas
  • Why the Artic region could be the next geopolitical troublespot
  • From a currency to a people
  • November 11, 2019
  • Grand coalition agrees to continue grand coalition
  • Can Greens and conservatives agree on priorities?
  • Germany - self-content and without energy
  • October 27, 2019
  • German political centre is melting
  • Train drivers in all-out confrontation with Macron
  • Erdogan makes threats again
  • October 14, 2019
  • What is Turkey's medium-term game?
  • Germany sabotages EIB climate change policies
  • September 30, 2019
  • A pyrrhic victory for Kurz
  • Will there really be UK elections?
  • September 17, 2019
  • Beware of the diplomacy of humiliation
  • Germany’s climate hypocrisy
  • September 05, 2019
  • Would Keynes be in favour of Brexit?
  • August 27, 2019
  • Remain’s narrowing pathway
  • Macron's diplomatic masterstroke
  • August 01, 2019
  • Polls look good for Johnson, but raise difficult dilemmas
  • A German death that has become political
  • A French death that has become political
  • July 24, 2019
  • Johnson has more options than you think
  • A Franco-German initiative to redistribute migrants
  • July 17, 2019
  • The dreaded scenario
  • Meet the Labour no-dealers
  • July 12, 2019
  • EU veers into crisis over von der Leyen's confirmation
  • A short note on long ambitions
  • July 08, 2019
  • Instex, forever around the corner?
  • Why Rory Stewart is not really what Remainers should be looking for
  • July 04, 2019
  • What will the European Parliament do?
  • July 02, 2019
  • How not to choose
  • Why no-deal Brexit has emerged as a strong probability
  • July 01, 2019
  • The questions we will be asking tomorrow
  • What category of diplomatic accidents is Sea Watch 3?