Europe's leaders are wrong to push for 'global governance at the G20 meeting says

Irwin Stelzer


[Daily Telegraph-Wednesday,  November 12,2008].


REPRESENTATIVES of some 20 nations are preparing to fly to m

Washington to erect a new architecture to house the


-"a new global order"[?]

was the description Gordon Brown used in Monday's speech at the Lord Mayor's banquet.

[Well! this is Euro -speak for the EU ambition for a WORLD GOVERNMENT which is behind all their moves to appear reasonable and co-operative which they label under COMMON PURPOSE.]

To prepare for this meeting of the G20 industrialised and emerging nations, Europe's leaders [In reality the GERMAN/FRENCH connection] gathered last week in BRUSSELS and set down the PRINCIPLES they intend to have PRESIDENT BUSH sign on to.  And GET THIS -THEY GAVE AMERICA a 100-DAY DEADLINE to AGREE WITH THEIR PLANS.

"We will be defending a COMMON POSITION, a vision...for reforming our financial system."

[Whatever many may think of BUSH this idea that America which join with such a closed undemocratic  non-enterprise shop is fanciful at the least and damned dangerous in the extreme.  There is only one word to explain the EU ultimatum  and that is CONTROL.]

My guess is that the American hosts are as intimidated by this show of UNITY as the WEST'S ENEMIES were by the announcement of the EUROPEAN ARMY.

France and Germany [How did you guess?] want the International Monetary Fund (IMF) to become a GLOBAL SUPERVISOR of REGULATORS;

"the pivot of a renewed international system"

is the blurry phrases used so as to minimise OFFENCE to the AMERICANS...

The new global order, those who have studied history contend, is to be modelled on Bretton Woods agreement of 1944. Never mind that the arrangements agreed depended heavily on some control of the international flow of capital, not feasible in today's globalised economy. Or that, as John Maynard Keyes, the architect of Bretton Woods, told the House of Lords,

" we intend to retain control of our domestic rate of interest"-

something that members of the euro -zone have already forfeited and would like other nations, including Britain, to surrender in the interests of INTERNATIONAL CO-ORDINATION.

This is not to say that the meeting this weekend will be a complete waste of time. there is the intangible benefit of the creation of PERSONAL RELATIONSHIPS that might contribute to FUTURE CO-OPERATION....

But in the end, this talking shop will reach no meaningful and binding decisions.  The Bush Administration wants nothing to do with


Nor does the incoming Obama team have any intention of signing on to such a programme, either before it takes office or during the 100-day deadline THAT THE EU HAS SET...But neither he nor in any likelihood, his successor will want to replace the current quite flexible but more effective system of informal international co-ordination with a MORE RIGID ARCHITECTURE.

 And my guess is that John Maynard Keynes, surprised at the fact that there is a place from which he can look down on the proceedings, would


He least of all would want to see the WORLD'S LEADERS bound by some academic scribbler of a few years back, even if he would be THE SCRIBBLER.


[Font Altered-Bolding & Underlining Used-Comments in Brackets]