G-20 stands up to world crisis as the key decision-making body
(From The Japan Times April 5 issue)

危機脱出の意思決定機関となったG20

Only history will judge whether the April 2 meeting of Group of 20 nations did in fact provide a floor to the worst economic crisis since the Great Depression. Equally uncertain is whether the conclave marked the emergence of a new economic order as British Prime Minister Gordon Brown declared upon its conclusion. Mr. Brown deserves credit for forging a remarkable consensus that could steer the world. Success, however, depends on national governments making good on their pledges: Empty words will guarantee that this meeting fails and the economy continues its plunge.

The meeting yielded agreement on three sets of concerns. The first is the need for a significant increase in assistance for developing economies. Previously, industrialized nations had agreed to provide the International Monetary Fund (IMF) with $250 billion in funds that can be used by developing nations hard hit by the crisis; on April 2, G-20 governments tripled that amount to $750 billion. They also agreed to increase the amount of special drawing rights (SDRs), the IMF currency available to member governments, by another $250 billion. Finally, the leaders agreed to provide $250 billion in credits that will be used to finance international trade, which is projected to decrease for the first time in 30 years.

In total, the G-20 agreed to provide $1.1 trillion. This is a remarkable sum — nearly 20 percent of the total global stimulus that has been pledged by all nations — and a further reminder of the need for the IMF, an institution that was only recently criticized as outdated and irrelevant. Equally important, the funds were made available with considerably looser conditions. Traditionally, such funds can only be used for debt payment, recapitalization of banks or balance-of-payments support. They can be used for goals such as stimulus spending, infrastructure investment, trade finance and social support.

The second set of concerns focuses on global financial regulation. The G-20 agreed to create a Financial Stability Board that will monitor the financial system for signs of risks. While this new board does not have the cross-border authority some governments sought, attendees agreed to closely coordinate regulation of "systemically important" financial institutions. This will bring hedge funds under scrutiny for the first time and will also include credit rating agencies.

An important step concerns agreement to crack down on tax havens. Asserting that "the era of banking secrecy is over," the declaration pledges the group will "take action against non-cooperative jurisdictions, including tax havens." This was a particularly contentious issue: China was reportedly opposed to this provision — because of Macau's status — and U.S. President Barack Obama's intervention is said to have produced agreement.

The final component of the declaration is agreement to avoid protectionism and to publicly identify nations that transgress. This is one expression of a larger and more important idea that is found throughout the document: Solving this crisis requires a concerted and coordinated effort. Just as no country can be ignored, neither can any government think that its actions can be considered in isolation from others'. Protectionism is a slippery slope that invariably invites like-minded gestures or retaliation.

The G-20 consensus also acknowledges that there are no "one-size-fits-all" solutions. Every nation must tailor its response to its particular circumstances. Given the diversity of problems that nations face, flexibility makes sense. But there is no mistaking the need for all governments to respond to this crisis: There is no standing aside and letting others bear the burden. Thus while some European nations have been reluctant to add fiscal stimulus, they are not obliged to do so. But if current measures do not get the economy to turn the corner, the leaders "commit today to taking whatever action is necessary to secure that outcome."

Mr. Brown's declaration that the G-20 meeting signals the end of "the Washington Consensus," which has guided international economic decision-making since the end of World War II, may be premature. A new architecture has not yet emerged, but trends are changing the way the global economy is run. It is significant that it is the G-20 — not the G-7 or the IMF — that is seen as the key decision-making body. Economic power has dispersed and new governments must have seats at the table. Ultimately, the viability of any institutional order depends on its capacity to solve problems. The G-20 has made a start.

G20金融サミットは大恐慌以来最悪の経済危機を食い止めたのか、ブラウン英首相が宣言した新経済秩序を生んだのかは、歴史が証明するだろう。同首相の手腕で世界を導く合意にこぎつけたが、各国が誓約を守ることが成功の鍵だ。

会合は3つの課題で合意に達した。まず、開発途上国への支援について、G20参加国はIMF資金を7500億ドルに3倍増、2500億ドルのSDR（特別引き出し権）新規配分を支持、2500億ドルの貿易金融支援を確保することで合意した。

計1兆1000億ドルのプログラムは、各国が合意した財政刺激策の20％にあたる規模で、時代遅れと言われたIMFの必要性も示した。融資条件が緩和されたことも重要なポイントだ。

次に、世界の金融規制については、リスクを監視する金融安定理事会を設置、ヘッジファンドや信用格付け会社を含む「システム上重要な」金融機関や商品に対し緊密に連携して監督することで一致した。

タックス・ヘイブンを含む非協力的な国に対する措置の実施でも合意、「銀行の秘密主義は幕を閉じた」。さらに、保護貿易主義阻止とそれに非協力的な地域の公表でも一致したことは、危機克服に向けた協調の必要性の表れだ。

危機を傍観し他国に負担を押し付けることは許されない。追加景気刺激策を望まない欧州の国は、実施中の政策で危機を脱出できなければあらゆる手段を講じると宣言した。

新秩序の構築は道半ばだ。しかしG20は主要な意思決定機関とみなされた。どんな機関もその存続は問題解決能力にかかっている。G20はそのスタートを切ったのだ。