Search

Begin New Search Topic Multilateralism Political Geography North America

1. Toward a Robust Architecture for the Regulation of Data and Digital Trade

Author:
Dan Ciuriak and Maria Piashkina
Publication Date:
04-2020
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
The rapid digital transformation occurring worldwide poses significant challenges for policy makers working within a governance framework that evolved over centuries. Domestic policy space needs to be redefined for the digital age, and the interface with international trade governance recalibrated. In this paper, Dan Ciuriak and Maria Ptashkina organize the issues facing policy makers under the broad pillars of “economic value capture,” “sovereignty” in public choice and “national security,” and outline a conceptual framework with which policy makers can start to think about a coherent integration of the many reform efforts now under way, considering how policies adopted in these areas can be reconciled with commitments under a multilateral framework adapted for the digital age.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Reform, Digital Economy, Multilateralism, and Digitization
Political Geography:
United States, China, Europe, Asia, and North America

2. Rebuilding the Transatlantic Relationship – Transatlantic Policy Forum in Review

Author:
Danielle Piatkiewicz and Miroslava Pisklová
Publication Date:
11-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
It was noted that the pandemic has not brought about systemic change but has instead accelerated and exacerbated existing trends. Both the US and the EU see the pandemic furthering disagreements and on both sides of the Atlantic by causing rise to internal political divisions on how to tackle the pandemic. One of the big lessons of this global crisis is that collaboration is crucial. Not even powerful countries, such as the US, can tackle it on their own. Now more than ever, it is time to move beyond competition and focus on strengthening international cooperation, otherwise we risk a success of non-democratic actors seeking to undermine democracy and rule of law.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Multilateralism, Crisis Management, Transatlantic Relations, Pandemic, and COVID-19
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

3. The post pandemic future of the transatlantic relations – time to rebuild or repair?

Author:
Danielle Piatkiewicz and Miroslava Pisklová
Publication Date:
10-2020
Content Type:
Policy Brief
Institution:
Europeum Institute for European Policy
Abstract:
After already enduring a 4-year term under United States’ President Trump, the future of the transatlantic relationship is at a critical junction. The US faces an upcoming election where the next administration can either further deteriorate relations or seek to rebuild and strengthen them. No matter the outcome, the future path will be intrinsically tied to how the transatlantic partners cope with the political, economic and security fallout of the global pandemic. Will the US return to the fold of multilateralism and restore an equitable world order in cooperation with the EU, or does the EU stand alone and will have to rapidly grow into a more influential geopolitical player? Or will relations continue their downward trajectories current and spur an accelerated retreat towards isolationist policies, creating space for external challengers like China and Russia to reassert their global positions and challenge the established order? This analysis will examine the current and upcoming challenges on the transatlantic horizon in regard to post-COVID economic recovery. Each region has proposed policies to tackle the current and upcoming economic aftermath of the pandemic, but as Europe outlines strong policies, the Trump administration’s approach has had dire consequences. The Biden campaign’s approach, on the other hand, shows similarities to that of Europe, evoking hope for a more harmonized approach that has proven successful in the past. This analysis will examine the US and EU’s diverging approaches to global issues, challenges and external challengers, such as Russia and China. As demonstrated by the Trump administration, the US is retreating on many of its multilateral and international commitments – how will the Transatlantic relationship look like if there is a second Trump term as opposed to if Biden takes over? Is the relationship irreparably damaged or can it be repaired? Finally, this paper will examine the future of transatlantic security under the framework of NATO’s 2030 reflection process and appraise how the new security landscape will look like post-COVID, especially as external threats mount and impact the Central and Eastern European front.
Topic:
Foreign Policy, Diplomacy, Bilateral Relations, European Union, Multilateralism, and Transatlantic Relations
Political Geography:
Europe, North America, and United States of America

4. A Canadian Primer to the G20 Summit in Osaka, Japan, June 28-29, 2019

Author:
Colin Robertson
Publication Date:
06-2019
Content Type:
Special Report
Institution:
Canadian Global Affairs Institute (CGAI)
Abstract:
On Friday, June 28, Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe hosts the leaders of the 19 major economic nations and the European Union in Osaka, Japan. As G20 finance ministers noted after their meeting earlier this month “growth remains low and risks remain tilted to the downside. Most importantly, trade and geopolitical tensions have intensified.” Created in the wake of the 2007-2008 “Great Recession”, the G20 is economic multilateralism at work, an insurance policy to prevent globalization going off the rails. This 14th G20 summit is the culmination of a year-long series of ministerial meetings, hosted throughout Japan. G20 leaders are a diverse group – liberal democrats, authoritarians and autocrats. While the plenary sessions are the point of the meeting, attention will be on the interactions between U.S. President Donald Trump and Chinese President Xi Jinping. Can they start to undo their trade war or will tariffs continue to escalate? While the focus is geo-economics, the geopolitics are always present. After abandoning the nuclear deal with Iran, the Trump administration has re-imposed sanctions and tensions have risen with recent actions, attributed to Iran, against container ships and a U.S. drone. China continues to muscle into the South China Sea. HMCS Regina and MV Asterix recently transited the Straits of Taiwan and sailed into these international waters. Russia still occupies parts of Ukraine. Ukraine now has a new president and parliamentary elections are underway. Canada hosts the third Ukraine Reform Conference this July in Toronto. There is little discernible progress in the U.S.’s negotiations with North Korea over its nuclear and missile capacity. Canadian ships and aircraft are part of the international sanction efforts on North Korea. Conflict continues in Yemen, Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and Central Africa and famine ravages parts of Africa. The United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees reports there are over 70 million displaced persons. Among them are 25.9 million refugees, over half of whom are under the age of 18. With millions of stateless people not just in the Middle East and Africa, but in Asia and Latin America, it is estimated that one person is forcibly displaced every two seconds. Canada resettled more refugees than the United States in 2018, the first time the U.S. did not lead the world on this measure in decades. Human rights are also part of the backdrop. China has said it will not permit any discussion of the Hong Kong situation because it is China’s “internal affair”. According to the UN Special Rapporteur, there is “credible evidence” that Prince Mohammad bin Salman, a participant at the G20, is liable for the killing of Washington Post columnist Jamal Khashoggi. Saudi Arabia is to host next year’s G20, but does this not give de facto impunity to MBS?
Topic:
G20, Geopolitics, Multilateralism, Trade, and Primer
Political Geography:
Japan, Canada, and North America

5. The Global Interplay between Trade, Geopolitical and Commodity Shocks

Author:
Idris Ademuyiwa and Pierre Siklos
Publication Date:
10-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
Recent events have the potential to reverse the positive macroeconomic performance of the global economy and trigger a slowdown in both global growth and international trade. In particular, the implications of ongoing trade disputes that have undermined trust in the existing multilateral cooperation system and the incentive for countries to align with ongoing global policy coordination efforts. A compelling case for a mutually beneficial resolution of these tensions can be made by emphasizing the interdependence of the Group of Twenty (G20) economies — the G20 being the premier repository of international cooperation in economic and political matters. This study also considers the state of trade globalization, with an emphasis on the performance of the G20. The emergence of geopolitical risks (GPRs), that is, events that heighten tensions between countries and therefore threaten global economic performance, is an attempt to quantify the potential economic impact of the nexus between politics and economics. In the presence of heightened political risks, negative economic effects become more likely. Nevertheless, there is no empirical evidence investigating the links between the real economy, trade, the state of the financial sector, commodity prices and GPRs. Moreover, there is no evidence on these links that has a sample of countries that make up the G20. This paper begins to fill this gap. Relying on descriptive and statistical evidence, the conclusion is drawn that GPRs represent a significant factor that threatens global economic growth and economic performance, in the G20 countries in particular. Ultimately, however, GPRs reflect other factors, including threats stemming from trade tensions and large swings in commodity prices.
Topic:
International Cooperation, International Trade and Finance, Economic growth, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
Europe, Asia, South America, North America, and Global Focus

6. U.S.-China Constructive Interaction in Latin America and the Caribbean

Author:
Gianadrea Nelli Feroci
Publication Date:
11-2019
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
The Carter Center
Abstract:
In October 2019, The Carter Center was invited to participate in “China, US and Latin America Relations in a Transforming International Order,” organized by the Shanghai Institute of International Studies. There the Center presented a paper arguing that today instead of trilateral mechanisms, several existing regional multilateral frameworks could be used to promote constructive U.S.-China interaction in LAC. The paper provides a macro analysis and recommendations based on a comparative analysis of U.S. and Chinese strategy documents for LAC and existing regional multilateral development policy frameworks.
Topic:
International Relations, Regional Cooperation, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
United States, China, Asia, Latin America, and North America

7. The Rise of Mega-Regionalism: Revealing Canada’s Blind Spots

Author:
Jeremy de Beer
Publication Date:
10-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
The era of global multilateralism in international trade is coming to an end. The World Trade Organization’s (WTO’s) Doha Round, which sought to reduce multilateral trade barriers, has been declared “dead and buried” according to certain scholars. New WTO reform efforts may be rekindled; however, the world has shifted toward international economic regionalism. The WTO defines regional trade agreements as reciprocal preferential trade agreements between two or more partners (whether or not from the same region), of which almost 300 are in force. While these agreements can be called bilateral, free, regional or preferential trade agreements, there is a more important issue than naming.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Regional Cooperation, World Trade Organization, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
United States, Canada, and North America

8. Crisis in the WTO: Restoring the Dispute Settlement Function

Author:
Robert McDougall
Publication Date:
11-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
Centre for International Governance Innovation
Abstract:
The impasse in the World Trade Organization (WTO) over the appointment of new members of the Appellate Body is just one symptom of crisis in cooperation on trade. Driven by skepticism about multilateralism and binding dispute settlement, and by a growing strategic and economic rivalry with China, the current US administration has elevated longstanding US concerns about WTO dispute settlement to new heights. The inability of WTO members to exercise their collective authority to interpret the meaning of their WTO commitments has meant that the Appellate Body is effectively not subject to any checks and balances. As other WTO members blocked US efforts to negotiate more member control, the United States increasingly turned to unpopular unilateral mechanisms, culminating in the current block on new appointments as part of its more disruptive trade policy. Assuming the United States will eventually return to rules-based trade, restoring the WTO dispute settlement system to full capacity and enhancing its legitimacy will likely require some changes. This might include improving mechanisms for political oversight, diverting sensitive issues from adjudication, narrowing the scope of adjudication, improving institutional support and providing members more say over certain procedures. Preserving compulsory, impartial and enforceable dispute settlement in the WTO will require an accommodation of different perspectives on how the system should function. Achieving this, in whatever form, will contribute to maintaining and even strengthening multilateral cooperation on trade.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, World Trade Organization, Global Political Economy, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
United States, China, Asia, and North America

9. The EU and China: Modest Signs of Convergence?

Author:
Gustaaf Geeraets
Publication Date:
12-2018
Content Type:
Working Paper
Institution:
EGMONT - The Royal Institute for International Relations
Abstract:
Against a background in which the United States is increasingly drawing into question its commitments to free trade and the global commons, the challenge for the EU and China is to deal with a global governance system that is evolving from a multilateral system centred around the US into a more diffuse system resting on the three strong trading poles: China, the EU and the US.
Topic:
International Trade and Finance, Governance, European Union, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
United States, China, Europe, Asia, and North America

10. We’ve Been Here Before: The Durability of Multilateralism

Author:
David Bosco
Publication Date:
07-2017
Content Type:
Journal Article
Journal:
Journal of International Affairs
Institution:
School of International and Public Affairs, Columbia University
Abstract:
Several of the Trump administration’s opening foreign policy salvoes have been aimed directly at the world’s multilateral structures. The president and his nominees lambasted the UN Security Council for its December resolution declaring Israeli settlements illegal. A draft executive order reportedly called for funding cuts of up to 40 percent to the United Nations and an end to new multilateral treaties. The administration withdrew funding from the UN Population Fund and hinted that it might spurn its Human Rights Council as well. “A wave of populism … is challenging institutions like the United Nations and shaking them to their foundations,” said UN Ambassador Nikki Haley. The United Nations is far from the only multilateral target. The president quickly pulled the United States out of the Trans-Pacific Partnership negotiations and demanded changes to the longstanding North American Free Trade Agreement. His team floated the idea of tariffs on Mexico that could violate World Trade Organization rules. He pledged to review U.S. participation in the Paris Agreement on climate change. Just days before taking office, Trump called NATO “obsolete” and predicted that more members would abandon the European Union. In a sign of displeasure at what he perceives as freeloading NATO members, Trump reportedly presented German Chancellor Angela Merkel with a “bill” for underinvestment in her country’s military. The president’s apparent aversion to key alliance structures and multilateralism has fed growing alarm that the administration plans to abandon the post-World War II international order. In this publication, scholar and former Obama administration official Anne-Marie Slaughter warned that “the next four to eight years may well see the end of the United Nations as a serious forum for global decisionmaking about peace and security.” Jack Goldsmith, a Harvard Law professor who worked in the Bush Justice Department, called Trump’s early moves “the beginnings of the greatest presidential onslaught on international law and international institutions in American history.” Others have argued that China may now be more committed to key global institutions than Washington. Major multilateral organizations like the UN, WTO, and EU and multilateral treaties are not, of course, the whole of the international order. Informal norms, habits of cooperation, and embedded power realities arguably play an even greater role in maintaining a modicum of order in the international system. But formal organizations and treaty regimes undoubtedly play an important role, which has become more prominent since the end of the Cold War. The prospect of an American administration actively undermining these instruments is unnerving. As with much else in the administration’s troubled first months, however, there’s confusion about what exactly lies beneath the smoke and steam. The draft order on UN funding has been delayed for further review. Senior U.S. officials have repeatedly toned down (or openly contradicted) several of the president’s most outlandish comments. Both Secretary of Defense James Mattis and Vice President Mike Pence sought to reassure European allies that Washington does in fact value NATO and the EU. So how serious and unprecedented is the Trump administration’s challenge to multilateralism?
Topic:
International Cooperation, United Nations, Military Strategy, and Multilateralism
Political Geography:
United States and North America