Scoring the G-20 summit

The big winners and losers in the global economic summit’s plan of action

What happened

The leaders of the Group of 20 nations agreed to a series of measures to address the global economic crisis. These included a pledge of $1.1 trillion for the International Monetary Fund, World Bank, and regional development banks; a Financial Stability Board to monitor the world’s “systemically important” financial firms; and plans to clamp down on tax havens, tighten financial regulations, and combat protectionism. (The New York Times)

Subscribe to The Week

Escape your echo chamber. Get the facts behind the news, plus analysis from multiple perspectives.

SUBSCRIBE & SAVE
https://cdn.mos.cms.futurecdn.net/flexiimages/jacafc5zvs1692883516.jpg

Sign up for The Week's Free Newsletters

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

From our morning news briefing to a weekly Good News Newsletter, get the best of The Week delivered directly to your inbox.

Sign up

This new system gives much greater influence to emerging economies like China, Brazil, and India, said Doug Saunders in Canada’s The Globe and Mail, which means a big loss of power for the U.S. Since the “similarly momentous” Bretton Woods summit in 1944, the U.S. has controlled the global economic agenda. Not any more.

China, India, and Brazil will get the “authority they now deserve,” said Steven Pearlstein in The Washington Post, but “if any countries are likely to lose out in the restructuring, they are those of ‘old Europe,’” which wield far more power than they merit. So despite declaring “victory over unfettered Anglo-American capitalism,” France and Germany may be among the biggest losers.

For most of these big changes to become reality, they have to be implemented by 20 or more sovereign nations, said The Wall Street Journal in an editorial, “not by a single unit called the G-20.” In other words, “don’t hold your breath.”