BY BERIL DEDEOGLU
TODAY`S ZAMAN- The leaders who gathered at last week`s G-20 summit discussed several important subjects at the meeting, surrounded by massive street protests. The protesters pushed people worldwide to think about the damage caused by capitalism to human relations on the global level.
Their actions also revealed that diverse social groups are now working to raise their voices more than ever, since the current global economic and financial crisis is affecting many countries and social classes. The way reactions have grown more and more intense shows that we have to prepare ourselves for further social tension, as those who have nothing to lose are ready to transform this tension into mischievous social unrest.
Societies that have much to lose are already well represented by several nongovernmental organizations all over the world; however, their governments like instead to show themselves in forums like the G-20. It`s clear that more than other countries, the group of 20 leading and emerging nations is facing the social consequences of the global crisis and that the worst is probably yet to come.
It`s only natural that capitalist economies face crises from time to time. But in order to assure this economic system`s success, crises should remain controllable, allowing new initiatives. But for now the crisis of capitalism has become unmanageable and a new initiative seems difficult to achieve. That`s why old capitalist powers and other countries that benefit from the current system, like China, are working hard to find ways to extinguish this crisis and survive it.
G-20 countries have similar approaches to understand the crisis and also agree that something has to be done about it. But their proposed solutions aren`t identical. It`s unlikely that they will pick one of the models proposed by economists and apply it cooperatively. There are radical differences over the measures that should be implemented and, due to these differences, the economic crisis may grow even become chronic.
Three main trends can be seen in the economic model in place. The first is the so-called Chinese model, which is based on printing huge amounts of Yuans and using cheap labor. This model carries the risk of damaging US economic interests in Asia and especially in the Far East. But since the current American model is about stimulating production by encouraging consumption, there`s no big conflict with the Chinese model as of yet. On the other hand, the EU model is based on reducing public spending - becoming thriftier, in other words. So while the US and China defend expansion, the EU promotes contraction.
The EU`s economic model is meaningful from a household economics perspective; nevertheless, it is doubtful that it corresponds to global economic realities. Moreover, the US believes that the model the EU proposes, and which is mainly defended by Germany, may reduce the size of the markets and cause an even worse crisis. The EU suspects that the US` real intention is to seize as much of the EU market share as possible.
This difference in the economic approaches is naturally affecting political relations between the US and the EU. Many think the main target of rising xenophobia in EU countries is Europe`s Muslim population. However, let`s not forget that the xenophobia voiced by the higher social classes, including politicians in some European countries, focuses on the US, too. There`s no need to warn how risky an economic confrontation between the EU and the US may be under the current circumstances. Let us hope that common sense prevails and that everyone sees that this crisis is good for no one.