Is it time yet to speak of a new world order? Who knows? I know that I don't intend to answer that question with this brief post, although I have speculated about it elsewhere. Nevertheless, I think it advisable that we eschew provincialism in favor of following events in other parts to the world. In particular I am drawing attention to the ongoing summit of the 18th Shanghai Cooperation Organization in Qingdao.
For those unfamiliar with the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, or SCO:
SCO is now based in Beijing and counts eight members: China, Russia, India, Pakistan and four Central Asian countries – Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan.
There are also four observer states: Iran, Afghanistan, Belarus and Mongolia, and six so-called “dialogue partners”: Cambodia, Sri Lanka, Nepal, Turkey, Azerbaijan and Armenia.
While there are many issues one could speak of in this context, I won't even scratch the surface although I will highlight some perhaps crucial links before concluding. The latest news is that China, Russia and Mongolia vow to strengthen cooperation with each other.
However the most important article is that penned (keyed) by Pepe Escobar for Asia Times. He seems to discern a new emerging world order through SCO and highlights three preceding meetings that according to him may signal such an outcome. These are 1) the Astana Economic Forum, which included the participation of "...the president of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) Jin Liqun; Andrew Belyaninov from the Eurasian Development Bank; former Italian Prime Minister and president of the EU Commission Romano Prodi; deputy director-general of the WTO Alan Wolff; and Glenn Diesen from the University of Western Sydney”; 2) the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum (SPIEF), which is the annual Russian equivalent of Davos, and 3) the Shangri-La Dialogue in Singapore, which “has been the top venue for defense diplomacy debate in the Asia-Pacific since 2001”, according to Escobar.
For me, the crucial part of the article is the following quote by Diesen (as highlighted by Escobar):
Diesen argues that: “The emergence of economic mega-blocks actually improves economic relations by creating more symmetry. For example, China’s CIPS (Cross-Border Interbank Payment System) undermined the ability of SWIFT (Society for Worldwide Interbank Financial Telecommunication) to be used for economic coercion, while CIPS and SWIFT still cooperate. Similarly, the EAEU [Eurasia Economic Union] gets its strength from the ability to integrate with other regions as opposed to isolating itself.”
And here’s the clincher: “China’s cooperation with the EAEU mitigates Russian concerns about asymmetries, and enables greater EAEU-BRI [Belt and Road Initiative] integration under the stewardship of the SCO. Also, unlike the EU, the EAEU provides great benefit to non-members (non-zero sum) by creating an effective transportation corridor with harmonized tariffs, standards, etc.”
Well, I have given you a lot to chew on and much of the substance can be derived from the links. Unfortunately, time constraints prevent me from elaborating much on these topics. I am currently participating in an academic conference at the UIBE (pictured). For those unfamiliar with China's earth-moving Belt and Road Initiative, I will suggest THIS as a first source (I believe the book can be downloaded for free online).
