Food for thought (geddit?)

Why are well-meaning Westerners so concerned that the opening of a Colonel Sanders in Beijing means the end of Chinese culture? A fatal Americanization. But we have had Chinese resteraunts in America for over a century, and it hasn’t made us Chinese. On the contrary, we obliged the Chinese to invent chop suey. What could be more American than that? French fries?

– Marshall Sahlins

Hollywood celebrates WTO victory

The US has won its two year old case against China at the WTO’s dispute settlement panel. The dispute centred on the Chinese state monopoly on the import of foreign books and films, with the US arguing that this constituted a barrier to trade.

This is one case where the political power of open trade is clear. The free exchange of cultural products like this one of the best things about globalisation and, as the Chinese government surely knows, the seductive power of American culture and its aspirational themes and ideas can be a democratising force. In short, American books and films will seem pretty subversive to an authoritarian government. Unfortunately, however, according to the FT:

foreign industry executives, who did not wish to be named, said they saw little chance of Beijing overturning the decision from the WTO in Geneva.

“They will definitely appeal but they understand that it’s just for gaining practice in dealing with trade disputes, not because they expect victory,” said one executive.

It’s here that the rise of China is a concern for the international trade regime. A rising hegemon upsets the balance of powers that currently keeps the system ticking over. Whilst many will welcome the decline of US hegemony at the WTO, the rise of a self-interested and rapidly growing China isn’t a particularly appealing prospect either. We can definitely expect a lot more trade conflict between the US and China in future. Luckily, the pacific effect of free trade is widely acknowledged.

Though, on that note, I’d like to suggest that it’s not free trade that stops wars, but rather the existence of a set of rules and norms to manage trade. It’s the institutionalisation of trade politics more than the nature of those politics that reduces conflict. It’s not an unimportant distinction.

http://www.wto.org/english/news_e/news09_e/363r_e.htm

The new transatlantic dialogue, trade wars, China and the IMF

I’m currently snowed under with work (Czechoslovakian democratisation, the prognosis for US hegemony, miscellaneous presentations and dissertation planning, since you ask), so apologies for the lack of posts. Things should even out from the beginning of June. In the meantime, there’s a few things I’d like to flag up.

• The Friedrich Naumann Stiftung für die Freiheit is running another online conference, this time on ‘The New Transatlantic Dialogue’. It is ongoing until 16 May and looks sure to be informative and useful.
• The epic beef-hormone conflict looks like it is coming to an end, while the nascent cheese war seems to have been nipped in the bud too.
• The Financial Times has an interesting profile of President Obama’s trade brinkmanship.
• The Guardian’s business section on Monday contained the headline ‘Europe accused of protectionism‘.
• The Catholic Times reports that ‘Pope accused of Catholic leanings’.
• Ngaire Woods discusses the influence of China on Bretton Woods reform.

The return of the bancor? Chinese ascendancy and the global monetary system

I have an editorial at e-International Relations entitled The return of the bancor? Chinese ascendancy and the global monetary system.

Established in Nov 2007 by students from Oxford, Leicester and LSE, e-International Relations (e-IR) is an independent, student-run website for people who are interested in international politics.

China after the G7’s Rome meeting

Both the FT and IHT are carrying stories about how the Group of Seven has been acting in a more pacific fashion towards China over the weekend. According to the Financial Times:

Aides at the G7 finance ministers meeting in Rome said the US and the UK in particular pushed for the group to take a more conciliatory approach towards Beijing ahead of a broader G20 summit in London on April 2.

“The G7 has realised that China needs to be brought into the fold of the global financial system rather than be treated as a pariah just because of currency inflexibility,” UBS said in a note on Sunday on the meeting. “This is also a realisation that as the world’s largest foreign exchange reserve holder and the US’s largest creditor nation, China not only holds the purse strings but its continued growth is crucial to helping the world recover from the economic crisis.”

The London Summit is shaping up to be utterly fascinating, to say nothing of potentially of great historic significance. But in other G7 news, the Japanese seem to have been driven to drink. Figures.