Xi Jinping: Global South Emergence is 'Irreversible Trend'

Closing out the BRICS summit on Tuesday, the Chinese President reiterated his calls for cooperation between countries of the global south on the world scale.

The Chinese President Xi Jinping has called for “solidarity and cooperation” among countries of the global south, emphasizing that the collective rise of developing countries is an “irreversible trend of our times,” during a period of “adjustment of the world economic structure,” Xinhua reported.

RELATED: BRICS Condemns Worldwide Military Interventions, Sanctions

Xi's remarks came at the close of the ninth BRICS summit on September 5th, hosted this year in the Chinese city of Xiamen. Reiterating his previous calls to resist “protectionism,” he called for the gathering of emerging economies to continue to amplify their roll in bringing together a more fair and equitable economic order.

The President also called for the need to pressure for “greater representation and voice” of global south and emerging economies in forums of international governance.

“Emerging markets,” which Xi emphasized account for aroudn 80 percent of total global growth in 2016, are today the “main engine” of the world economy, the President and Communist Party of China leader said.

In this moment, Xi believes that it is necessary for countries of the global south to “enhance solidarity and cooperation to jointly seize the historical opportunity arising from the adjustment of the world economic structure.”

As the current holder of the BRICS presidency, China proposed “BRICS Plus,” which would invite leaders of other emerging economies not included in the original five to attend the economic summit.

“The emerging market and developing countries should dare to innovate and reform, and drastically push forward economic restructuring so as to unleash their internal growth power,” Xi said.

Xi said that the “top priority” of emerging economies remains the push toward sustainable development on the economic, social, and environmental fronts.

Dialogue between countries of the global south will “strengthen solidarity and cooperation among emerging market and developing countries, and also contribute to the building of BRICS mechanism. Emerging market and developing countries, who face similar development tasks, can multiply their impact by deepening practical cooperation and tapping into their complementary advantages.”

President Alpha Conde of Guinea, who is currently the Chair of the African Union, and President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi of Egypt, attended the summit and called for increased cooperation between BRICS and African countries.

RELATED: As NAFTA Negotiations Continue, Mexican President Peña Nieto Attends BRICS Summit

“The advent of BRICS is already scaring people in some quarters by its determination to build a more just and equitable world economic order,” Conde, the African Union leader said.

Following China, South Africa is scheduled to be the next BRICS summit host in 2018. South African President Jacob Zuma also spoke at this years summit and called on greater BRICS cooperation in Africa.

China's leadership has taken a leading role in promoting the expansion of BRICS and “South-South cooperation.”

Promoting a broad vision of a more equitable globalization that reflects an emerging multi-polar political-economic order, Xi has attacked those countries that have turned toward economic nationalism and protectionism.

“Some countries have become more inward-looking, and their desire to participate in global development cooperation has decreased,” Xi was quoted as saying by Reuters.

  • Published in World

WTO Without US? Trump Trade Agenda Clashes With New Global Rules

Lower imports tariffs, as proposed by the WTO, do not fall in line with Donald Trump’s idea of the US role in foreign trade, which might eventually result in America leaving the WTO and reshaping the entire landscape of international exchange in goods and services.

Kristian Rouz – A protectionist approach to international trade, repeatedly reiterated by Donald Trump’s administration, is becoming increasingly contradictory to the new global trade rules enforced by the World Trade Organisation (WTO).

The international organisation, aiming for the increased laissez faire in global trade in goods and services, has lowered the tariffs on Wednesday, having stated that lower imports tariffs would boost the volume of trade by roughly $1 trln per year.

The Trump administration, however, is hardly enthusiastic over the WTO agenda. The White House is drafting a proposed US trade reform, which would raise imports tariffs and lower exports tariffs, and this protectionist approach to foreign trade goes the opposite direction to that of the WTO.

This conflict of interest might result in the US eventually leaving the WTO amidst the concerns of the increasingly unfair trade competition as practiced within the organisation.

“I heard the US team complaining about unfair trade,” Roberto Azevedo, the WTO’s Director-General said. “Every single country in the WTO complains about unfair trade. What you do about that is the big question.”

Donald Trump has said on several occasions that the US is being taken advantage of in their foreign trade by other countries, which have lower manufacturing throughput costs, stemming from easier access to raw materials and very cheap labour. Imported goods have subsequently pushed the more expensive US-made goods out of the American domestic market, which imposes significant limitations on US economic growth, wages and salaries, and the labour market.

“President Trump, during his election run, made it very clear that if we cannot get the WTO to enforce the rules that everybody agreed to when they joined up, then the WTO will have lost its effectiveness and we will re-evaluate whether we even belong to the WTO or not,” Dan DiMicco of Nucor Steel Corp. said.

On his campaign trail last year, Trump had said the US might leave the WTO due to his commitment to restore the US manufacturing and overall output in US-made goods. Moreover, the Trump-proposed lower US export tariffs are designed to enhance the presence of US enterprises in the global market, and low imports tariffs imposed by the WTO on other nations would come in handy.

Other WTO members would not be happy with Trump’s trade reform, and might enforce their own protectionist tariffs accordingly. This would effectively mark an end of the WTO.

On Wednesday, the WTO streamlined customs proceeding for all of its member states as part of the Trade Facilitation Agreement (FTA), described as "the biggest reform of global trade in a generation" by the WTO’s Azevedo. According to the WTO economists, emerging markets will be the greatest beneficiaries of the reform, the final goal of which is eliminating imports tariffs.

Advanced economies will therefore face an even greater influx of cheaper foreign-made goods, which will further decimate their manufacturing capacity. This is hardly a possibility under the Trump administration in the US, and Brexit and the rise of populist right movements in continental Europe are all likely an indication of a conservative revolution in global trade.

Trump is intending to slap Mexico with a 35-percent import tariff, and mainland China with a 45-percent import tariff. Both would violate the WTO rules, therefore, both Mexico and China, for example, would win in the settlement proceedings against the US within the WTO.

Trump, who referred to the WTO as a ‘disaster,’ along with his team, must have a clear understanding that greater trade protectionism is hardly compatible with a membership in an international organisation based on the principles of laissez faire.

The new White House administration has stated that mutually beneficial bilateral trade deals with other nations will likely be a cornerstone of the new US foreign trade policy. Meanwhile, Trump withdrew from the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) last month, and is aiming to renegotiate or eliminate NAFTA, the 23-year-old trade agreement with Mexico and Canada.

Against the backdrop of these developments, pulling the US from the WTO might only be a matter of time. The bigger question is, would other advanced nations follow the US exiting the WTO in order to support their domestic industries, and how would that subsequently affect the WTO rules.

  • Published in World

Culture in Cuba will never be merchandise

In times of overwhelming globalization, culture remains synonymous with identity and resistance of peoples.

Art and literature aren’t mere commodities, although some assume it as such. Nobody doubts there’s a market for art, but that does not mean art can be reduced to a purely commercial expression.

I say art and can tell culture, which is a broader and more embracing concept. No one living in society can be on the fringes of its culture.

After repeating it so much, it seems a set phrase now, but it is a truth as a temple: culture is the very essence of identity. There’s no nation without culture.

That’s why it’s vital to defend that heritage in these times, which seem marked by the globalizing desire of the big market.

Right now, the world is hit by numerous wars, many of them particularly bloody. Most of are explained, at first glance, in the contradictions among dissimilar ways of assuming and understanding politics, though at the bottom, economic conditions almost always prevail.

But there’s a much more widespread (and effective) war: that of symbols.

The big hegemonic power centers bombard citizens with productions from the so-called junk culture, designed to stimulate boring consumerism.

Those who believe there’s no solid thought column behind this strategy are too naive. Theoreticians of that globalization have a clear understanding of the power of culture.

The real logic is that of money, which in the end is the logic of most wars, even though nationalisms and the fight against terrorism and oppressive regimes are made explicit.

Without firing a shot, they dig a favourable channel through by-products of the cultural industry.

And it is not just about the naive and necessary aim to entertain, since paradigms are established in the end.

Hence the huge importance of the entertainment industry, which is supported by a gigantic advertising system.

It is not that easy, walls won’t be worth building, since they will also be reductionist and in fact, impracticable.

The most effective barrier of peoples is promotion and defence of authentic cultural values that become guarantee of resistance and reaffirmation.

Art and literature can and should participate in the public debate without assuming dim propaganda and doctrinal stances, which are by force oblivious to creative exercise.

The entire artistic heritage cannot be confined to a purely ornamental purpose.

It’s true that Cuba has now the same challenge to solidify a productive base.

Economy must be a priority, because it becomes support of the national project.

But not just economy: culture cannot be held hostage of commercial conceptions that, in the long run, will relegate it to mere entertainment.

Some Cubans, even with leadership responsibilities, understand it that way today. They believe, for example, that art is a secondary issue, mere complement.

Certain views consider that some cultural proposals should not be subsidized, because they might become a burden on the nation.

Some request that culture self-finances, thus ignoring that this framework is precisely one of the pillars of national sovereignty.

The enjoyment of art in all its expressions must remain a right.

Our liberation struggle always leaned on the traditions of a creative people.

Prohibitions, impositions, or schematic, utilitarian and chauvinistic views make no sense. Culture is guarantee of emancipation and freedom, as José Martí so wisely said.

This country enjoys a great privilege: its main hero is also one of its greatest poets and thinkers.

Translated by Jorge Mesa Benjamin / Cubasi Translation Staff

  • Published in Specials
Subscribe to this RSS feed