G-Global

Global economy is about to undergo serious changes. A new form of international communication that is due to replace the G-8 and G-20 has been discussed at the highest level: it is the so-called G-Global project.

This is a whole new international forum which would take into account not only the interests of the main centers of power, but the interests of the developing countries as well, which are for now isolated from setting global monetary and financing principles despite their growing importance in the raw material sector of global economy. Azerbaijan, Kazakhstan and a number of Pacific states are in the ranks of these developing powers.

The main problem is that the lessons of the 2008-2009 global crisis were basically ignored by the world’s elite. None of the necessary measures was implemented, especially where the domain of the money-markets is concerned: no one took the idea of creating new reserve currencies seriously. No actual steps have been undertaken.

Against the background of the deep crisis of the eurozone and the possibility of Greece leaving the European monetary system, the contradictions between the so-called old and new Europe became even more noticeable. If Merkel loses the upcoming elections, the socialists might come to power in the wake of the popular slogan of cutting financial help to Southern Europe.

In this case the breaking of the ‘Paris-Berlin’ political axis, so integral to the very core of the EU, will be put at risk, not to mention that it would stop helping those EU members who failed to observe the Union’s financial discipline.

In this regard, the idea of the G-Global is a project of a more uniform distribution of responsibility. But it would happen only if all the new states have equal rights along with Washington, London and Paris in the framework of this new forum. However, not all Western states see post-Soviet countries as equal players in global economics and politics, and prefer to regard them as mere objects for their political games.

But this game is losing its resources by the day. So the WMF bureaucrats’ optimism is quite puzzling: they still believe that the crisis can be put out by an influx of money. But the only realistic solution, as the Greek catastrophe has shown, is to share rights and responsibilities.