A China-dominated global order

It seems that US-dominated system of international finance created 70 years ago does not fully meet China’s needs

Shahid Javed Burki March 29, 2015
The writer is a former caretaker finance minister and served as vice-president at the World Bank

The last time the economic baton was passed from one country, the Second World War was concluding. It was done in an orderly manner. In 1944, Great Britain, being one of the victors of the Second World War, was economically exhausted. The United States, having aided London in the war effort, had emerged as the leading world economy. Instead of letting the global economy evolve on its own, the victors decided to create a set of institutions to manage the evolution of the global economy. A conference was convened at a small town in the American state of New Hampshire.

The Bretton Woods Conference was held in 1944 with 45 countries and 730 representatives participating. It designed a new global and financial order. The Bretton Woods was a conference of the victors as the European part of the Second World War was reaching conclusion.

The global economy has now entered another phase of transition that to be managed in an orderly way requires both imagination and political will. This time around, the transition of the global economy is from a system dominated by one player, the United States, to a system which has two dominant economic powers with China having overtaken America as the world’s largest economy.

According to Mathew Bishop, a reviewer of the recent book on the Bretton Woods, The Summit, by Ed Conway, an opportunity for making the transition is being missed. “For many people, Bretton Woods stands for the rarest of moments: when governments and experts come together to restore order to a chaotic global economy,” wrote Bishop for The New York Times. “After the financial meltdown of 2008, the president of the World Bank and the financier George Soros joined Bill Clinton and Tony Blair’s earlier call for a ‘new Bretton Woods’. It didn’t happen. The world and America may yet come to regret it.”

For difficult-to-understand reasons, Washington has tried hard to stop China from setting up a new international development bank for which it will provide most of the initial capital. To date Beijing has pledged $50 billion to start up the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) to finance the enormous needs of the fast developing continent to create the physical infrastructure it requires. It is fully recognised that the United States-dominated system of international finance created 70 years ago does not fully meet China’s needs. Beijing now sits on a mountain of cash reserves — about $4 trillion — which it would like to use for purposes other than buying United States treasuries.

It is interesting to note the nature of the politics behind Washington’s willingness to block the Chinese moves to carve out space for themselves in the international economic system after it has become clear that there are powerful elements in the United States which don’t want to share economic leadership with China. In November 2009 when President Barack Obama made his first visit to Asia, he started with a powerful speech at Tokyo’s Suntory Hall. There, he declared that Washington and Beijing should work together to guide international finance. It was a kind of G2 arrangement that would provide guidance for the global economy, the details of which would be worked out by the larger and more representative group of nations, the G20. But the American political right fought hard against any attempt to create a system in which their country did not have the dominant voice. Opposed on several other fronts by the same group — in particular its effort to kill the president’s attempt to create a national health system that would provide relief to the poorer segments of American society — Obama pulled back. On his next Asian visit, he made India his first stop and attempted to recruit New Delhi as its partner to block China. Dr Manmohan Singh, then the Indian prime minister, was reluctant to have his country cast in that role. However, his successor, Narendra Modi, a more assertive and ambitious politician, seems eager to be seen on the world stage with the American president.

That the large European nations led by Britain have decided to join Beijing in becoming the founding members of the AIIB means that the new institution will begin its life with wide international backing. Had Washington adopted a different approach, this effort by China could have become another ‘Bretton Woods moment’.

Published in The Express Tribune, March  30th,  2015.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.


varuag | 6 years ago | Reply Bretten woods led to gold backed world reserve currency on the back of US controlling almost half of world GDP. Later US removed the gold standard and Kissinger mid-wifed the birth of the petro-dollar. With QE's and currency wars and China's massive imports of gold (it is already the top gold producer) along-with Russia's new found love of the yellow metal, I am sure the Chinese have plans for a gold-backed-yuan. They have the 1985 Plaza Accords as a harbinger of what US did to the earlier economic challenger to their hegemony viz. Japan.
harkol | 6 years ago | Reply The biggest significance of Brenton Woods conference was that US$ was adopted as global reserve & trade currency. This gave US immense power - much more than its military power. The premise at that time was that US would keep an equivalent amount of Gold in reserve to preserve the sanctity of US Dollar as global currency. USA Moved away from that plan and delinked US$ from gold. And yet, world did not move away from US$... Why did this happen? I suspect, there is more at play here than the economic might of USA. I believe it is the faith in a well functioning US democratic system that drives other nations to trust its currency. China may become No.1 economically, but it's system is non-transparent and most nations won't trust it. And as lone as US$ is world currency, USA will have massive say in the affairs of the world.
Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ


Most Read