Only Multilateralism Can Save Us
Between a coronavirus pandemic and collapsing
stock markets, the global economy may be in a worse situation than it was
during the 2008 financial crisis, because America has all but slammed the door
shut on international cooperation. And yet, without a multilateral response,
the US will suffer as much as anyone.
WASHINGTON, DC – The global economy was ripe
for a recession even before the coronavirus pandemic struck. Many commentators
have been warning that stock markets were overheated, that advanced economies were
heading for a slowdown, and that US President Donald Trump’s
protectionist policies had disrupted supply chains and ushered in an era
of heightened uncertainty. Now, the stock market has finally
crashed, and a recession has become almost inevitable.
In the past, the international community has
successfully mustered a coordinated response to similar crises. The threats posed by SARS in 2003,
H1N1 (swine flu) in 2009, MERS in 2012, Ebola in 2014-2016, and the 2008 global
financial crisis were all contained through rapid multilateral action. But
Trump has shown nothing but contempt for multilateralism, which helps to
explain why a global response to the COVID-19 crisis has yet to materialize.
Trump’s flailing response to the outbreak is a
sharp departure from that of his predecessor. According to former Vice
President Joe Biden, now the leading contender for the Democratic presidential
nomination, Barack Obama’s administration helped to contain multiple previous
outbreaks by convening health officials from around the world in the White
House Situation Room, where they mapped out a coordinated response. Earlier
economic downturns were likewise addressed through multilateral channels. At
the height of the global financial crisis, the G20 repudiated trade
protectionism and committed to pursuing simultaneous fiscal and monetary
expansion. We now know that this coordinated response played a major role in
preventing the downturn from getting significantly worse.
The current crisis is even more deserving of a
multilateral response, because it presents challenges above and beyond those
previous threats. In what amounts to an economic perfect storm, the pandemic
has combined with preexisting recessionary pressures, the broader disruption to
global trade, and a new and somewhat unexpected complication: a sharp drop in
oil prices.
Major oil-exporting countries’ failure to agree
on either price or production limits has driven the price of oil to $20 per barrel.
That may be good for US consumers and oil-importing countries, but it also
means that many US fracking companies will struggle to service their debts.
Falling investment and an increase in nonperforming loans will become another
major source of downward pressure on economic activity.
The current disarray in global trade also
hurts. From the beginning, the Trump administration has rejected America’s long
tradition of global leadership and support for the open multilateral trading
system. Opting instead for bilateral deals with trading partners, the US has
bullied its allies along with everyone else. Almost all of America’s trading
partners, including the European Union and Japan, have been subjected to
increased US import tariffs on steel and aluminum. And Mexico, Canada, South
Korea, Turkey, India, Brazil, and Argentina have all been pummeled with
non-negotiable demands for US-friendly revisions to previously negotiated trade
agreements, on the threat that previously granted favors will be revoked.
The trade war with China, moreover, is still
ongoing. In the current climate of uncertainty, exporters do not know whether
they will suddenly face new tariffs, and importers are reluctant to expand
domestic productive capacity because they do not know if or when existing
tariffs will be rescinded. Protectionist policies thus continue to disrupt
supply chains and discourage investment around the world.
These factors will not only make the next
recession more severe; they also are making it much harder to organize a global
response. There is already near-unanimous support for fiscal and monetary
stimulus to soften the blow from the pandemic. But in the absence of
multilateral coordination, these policy responses will issue haphazardly from
individual countries. A 2008-style concerted push would provide far more
stimulus and improve business and consumer sentiment; but the window for that
option is quickly closing.
Still, there is a chance for a coordinated push
under the auspices of the G20 or the International Monetary Fund. Jointly
orchestrated monetary and fiscal policies would provide not just immediate
stimulus but also a boost in confidence, as would an agreement to reverse the
protectionist policies of the past few years. A mutual ceasefire in the trade war
and a return to multilateral trade negotiations would directly boost economic
activity by restoring confidence and spurring investment. It would show that
the international community is still capable of coming together in meaningful
ways to fight a global crisis.
Taken together, joint action to tackle the
pandemic, manage multiple economic shocks, and end the trade war would both
limit the severity of the downturn and accelerate the pace of the subsequent
recovery. The US can and should assume a leading role in the fight against
COVID-19, given the risks to the US and global economy. Until recently,
restoring multilateral cooperation and rebuilding confidence in the
institutions that Trump has torn down was a noble objective. Now, it is an
urgent and near-existential one.
Correction: March 19, 2020
The price of oil in the fifth paragraph has been changed to $20, from "below $30."
The price of oil in the fifth paragraph has been changed to $20, from "below $30."
Writing for PS since 2014
27 Commentaries
27 Commentaries
Follow
Anne O. Krueger, a former World Bank chief
economist and former first deputy managing director of the International
Monetary Fund, is Senior Research Professor of International Economics at the
School of Advanced International Studies, Johns Hopkins University, and Senior
Fellow at the Center for International Development, Stanford University.
No hay comentarios.:
Publicar un comentario