Experts attending a three-day Council of Councils seventh regional conference here have said they do not see a new world order emerging any time soon during the post-Bretton Woods system period.
The Bretton Woods system of monetary management established rules for commercial and financial relations among the world's major industrial states in the mid-20th century.
The system was the first example of a fully negotiated monetary order intended to govern monetary relations among independent nation-states.
Its chief features were an obligation for each country to adopt a monetary policy that maintained the exchange rate by tying its currency to gold and the ability of the IMF to bridge temporary imbalances of payments.
The system was also in existence to address the lack of cooperation between countries and to prevent competitive devaluation of the currencies.
In the wake of the global financial crisis of 2008, policymakers and others have called for a new international monetary system that some have dubbed as Bretton Woods II.
Richard Haass, president of the Washington-based Council of Foreign Relations (CFR), said that while the idea of a new world order was optimistic, aspirational and there was a remarkable consensual thought on this in 2000-2001, 15 years later however, there is a sense of disappointment that the agenda set then has not been realized.
He opined that the United States continues to suffer from what he termed "intervention fatigue and delusion" and most definitely needed to engage itself in critical rethinking in determining what could be realistically achievable politically and economically at the global level.
He, however, maintained that Washington would not be backtracking completely from its global role any time soon, and anybody thinking of Washington pursuing isolationist policies should be disregarded. It was his view that the United States is in the process of making geo-political adjustments.
"The world is playing catch-up. The concept of multilateralism has to be deconstructed to make global governance more relevant to the times," said Haass, adding that he was also in favour of the emergence of an alternative security system for Asia.
He said he was not supportive of forums airing their views frequently, as this was unrealistic. He said that he visualized a situation when regulatory policies will be the order of the day increasingly, as also the principle of pragmatism.
Rohinton Medhora, the president of the Canada-based Centre for International Governance, was also quite pessimistic about the emergence of a new world order, saying there was a need to not to equate global governance with war and peace.
Rather, he said, there was a need for focusing on what he called "global public growth", which in turn could lead to an acceptable form of global governance. He said that it takes a global crisis to consider course corrections in policies both at the individual state level, and at the multilateral level.
"We must look at positives rather than negatives; avoid a full-scale trade war. I don't think the global crisis has gone away. There is a need to reform existing institutions, think of ways to arrest climate change and ensure cyber security," he said.
Mendhora said he was not in favour of a proliferation of global institutions, and added that rules of the game should be written in stone.
Both saw the emergence of a coalition of interests, wherein nations like India may exercise their right to join or not to join depending on their stand on a particular issue.
"There are going to be pulls and pressures between established and new emerging economies. Politically, many statements could emerge from various nations, who may see what they are saying as correct in their context, though it may not seem correct in the context of other nations. Emerging economies like China and India are looking for headways, and are ready to come to the negotiating table to discuss the ways forward," felt Mendhora.
He said the WTO was not dead, but could go sectoral over the next couple of years.
Haass, Mendhora and Sunjoy Joshi, Director of the Observer Research Foundation, which organized Tuesday's event, also dwelt on the issue of cyber security and climate change. They all felt internet governance has bottomed up and cannot continue in its present form as it will harm internet unity. They said the challenges were huge intellectually, and any way forward, would have to factor in the interests of both consumers and producers.
On the issue of climate change, Joshi said there is both good and bad news. The good news is that the United States and China have reached an agreement on how to reduce global warming and ensure reduced CO2 emissions. The bad news is that China is yet to make a commitment to follow through.
Haass said India has to engage in energy modernization, and has to be more pro-active on climate change initiatives.
The Council of Councils is a CFR initiative that connects leading foreign policy institutes from around the world to have a common conversation on issues of global governance and multilateral cooperation. It has as its members, key institutions from 23 countries.
The Council of Councils initiative is funded by a Robina Foundation grant. By Ashok Dixit
.
