This post was originally published on this site
Among the unlikely heroes of the 2008 global financial crisis were the world leaders who scrambled to assemble in Washington to respond to the plummeting investing markets.
They discussed fiscal and monetary measures to bolster the economy. They promised financial-markets reform and resources to support emerging markets. They even foreswore protectionism and committed to accelerate free-trade talks.
A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far away …
Wouldn’t it be nice for finance ministers and central bank governors to launch intense consultations to coordinate their response?
What may spook markets most this week is the dawning realization that there is no plan — and no one is in charge. There has been precious little coordination on how best to contain COVID-19 with President Trump still downplaying the risks. Trump’s address to the nation Wednesday night only made the situation worse. And on the same day, the Dow Jones Industrial Average DJIA, -5.86% in the U.S. fell into a bear market. The other major indexes, the S&P 500 Index SPX, -4.89% and Nasdaq COMP, -4.70%, aren’t far behind.
There has been no significant conversation about a financial or economic response outside a limp statement last week from G-7 finance ministers and central bank governors. Still worse, Russia and Saudi Arabia, two of the world’s more recalcitrant governments, seem to be taking advantage of the global shock to advance their narrow oil agendas.
Read: To save the economy from COVID-19, the only effective policy is medical
Markets didn’t react immediately to the G-20 meeting that President George W. Bush had hastily convened 12 years ago, but there was a clear sense that policy makers were pulling in the same direction. At later summits in Pittsburgh and London, more concrete measures included fresh government spending, coordinated efforts to stabilize financial markets, better bank regulation and new money for the International Monetary Fund and the World Bank.
It was an important part of restoring confidence to markets that had lost their bearings, and within months prices began a slow and steady climb back.
A world apart
Today’s G-20 operates amid a very different set of constraints. Its two largest economies have embarked on an escalating trade war, notwithstanding the recent truce. The European Union just lost its second largest economy and the future relationship with Britain looks as cloudy as ever. Japan’s feeble growth and inflation rates send chills through everyone else at the table.
Read: A commander-in-chief who cannot do the job ‘must resign — immediately,’ writes presidential scholar
And don’t forget the games between Moscow and Riyadh. In a different time, Washington might be expected to mediate, but those days are long past given how far the Russian relationship has deteriorated. Indeed, it seems like President Vladimir Putin may be using the coronavirus shock at least in part to damage the U.S. shale oil sector that underpins America’s energy independence.
In many respects, today’s world brings echoes of the financial turmoil before the Great Depression, when short-sightedness and sharp elbows among the world’s largest economies triggered a collapse of the gold-backed monetary system that no one actually intended. Clearly the threat of military conflict seems very different a hundred years later, but the sense of disorder is rising.
It seems quaint and slightly pointless to call for more “leadership” that might inspire selfless acts of cooperation. Indeed, a charismatic leader might help in these depressing times, but Bush was hardly known for his soaring rhetoric during the financial crisis. Nor, for that matter, was British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, who was nevertheless instrumental in advancing the global response.
Low-hanging fruit
At this stage. a little common sense would go a long way.
What if the G-20 governments were to convene their health ministers to share containment strategies? China’s ability to isolate key mega-cities can’t be reproduced in Europe or the United States, but Japan and Korea have been doing something right as infection rates there stabilize.
Economically, governments have announced a patchwork of fiscal measures to respond to the economic shock from the virus, and the Federal Reserve has been the most prominent central bank to cut rates. Still, wouldn’t it be nice for finance ministers and central bank governors to launch intense consultations to coordinate their response? The seven-page communique from their long-scheduled ministerial Feb. 24 mentions “risk monitoring, including of the recent outbreak of COVID-19.”
Commitments to free trade may be a stretch in the U.S. administration’s new negotiating paradigm. Tariffs have now become an acceptable weapon in polite trade talks, but what if the U.S. and China eliminated remaining tariffs at least temporarily to cushion the shock from the virus?
The larger problem may be that the world of 2008 was still basking in the later stages of a post-Cold War glow. Washington still talked about resetting the relationship with Moscow. The West welcomed Chinese efforts to reflate the global economy, even if its exchange-rate policy still rankled. That goodwill is now in short supply.
Perhaps the most awkward obstacle to jump-starting G-20 action quickly may be that its host this year is the same Saudi Arabia that has helped tilt world energy markets into turmoil. Tradition holds that the host shapes the agenda and convenes the meetings, but Washington or Tokyo — or anyone, for that matter — could get the ball rolling.
It wouldn’t take much to suggest that someone was in charge.
Christopher Smart is managing director, chief global strategist and head of the Barings Investment Institute. Follow him on Twitter.
