本文转自11月9日IMI财经观察。

10月19日，通州·全球发展论坛（2024）分论坛三“践行多边主义，推动全球金融治理改革”在中国人民大学举办。论坛上，中国人民大学国际货币研究所国际委员会主任、联合国大会主席理事会主席、第56届联合国大会主席、韩国前总理韩升洙应邀出席，并就“多边主义与推动全球金融改革”议题发表了讲话。韩升洙在发言中强调了多边主义在全球经济治理中的核心作用，呼吁各国加强合作，共同应对当前的全球经济挑战。

韩升洙指出，多边主义在塑造全球经济格局中发挥着关键的作用，尤其通过像世界贸易组织（WTO）这样的国际机构，促进了全球贸易合作、提升了生产力，并显著改善了全球生活水平。他认为，多边主义为各国提供了合作的平台，使各国不论大小均能在这个联系紧密的世界中共同繁荣。

韩升洙特别提到中国经济转型是多边主义带来积极效应的典型案例。中国于2001年加入世贸组织后，拆除了贸易壁垒，进入了全球市场，并吸引了大量外资。这一开放促进了中国工业的快速发展，也让中国在全球供应链中取得了举足轻重的地位。过去20年的经济转型，不仅使中国的GDP大幅增长，还使超过8亿人口摆脱了贫困，特别是那些依赖出口的地区。

韩升洙也警示当前多边主义正面临严峻挑战。他回顾了2008年全球金融危机，指出该事件暴露了国际经济体系的脆弱性，并导致了保护主义和民族主义的抬头。他特别提到中美贸易战及新冠疫情引发的经济动荡，进一步加剧了多边体系的压力。他指出，这些地缘政治紧张局势扰乱了全球供应链，推动了经济碎片化和中美“脱钩”趋势的加剧。

此外，韩升洙提出，全球正在经历更广泛的地缘政治分裂。如今世界各国愈发重视本国利益，全球供应链也随政治和安全考量重组。他引入“友岸外包”（friend-shoring）的概念，即将供应链转移到政治立场一致的国家。他表示，尽管在短期内，这种做法可能降低风险，但因其削弱了多边主义所依赖的开放、基于规则的贸易原则，长期上该行为将面临经济低效和全球经济碎片化加剧的隐患。

韩升洙强调，现有的多边机构存在结构性局限。他指出，国际货币基金组织（IMF）和世界银行等机构是在欧美主导全球经济的背景下建立的。现有的治理结构没有随着中国、印度等新兴经济体的崛起而发展，显得有些过时，并让许多国家因未被充分代表而感到不满。因此需要对这些机构进行全面改革，以反映当今的地缘政治现实，重建国际信任。

同时他还提到，民族主义和民粹主义的兴起对多边主义产生重大挑战。他指出，“美国优先”政策削弱了美国在全球机构中传统的领导角色，使其转向保护主义和单边主义。这一趋势在英国脱欧等政治运动中也可以窥见，凸显了现代全球化背景下政治行动与经济利益之间日益加剧的分歧。

最后，尽管挑战重重，韩升洙对全球合作仍持乐观态度。他呼吁对全球金融架构进行改革，确保新兴经济体得到应有的代表权，并强调国际合作在应对气候变化、绿色科技发展和全球金融稳定等问题上至关重要。他坚信全球合作，尤其中美之间的合作，是解决当今世界最紧迫问题的关键。

Saturday, 19 October 2024

2024 Tongzhou Global Development Forum, Renmin University

Speech by Han Seung-soo

Chairman, International Committee of IMI, Renmin University

and 

Chairman, Council of Presidents of the UN General Assembly (UNCPGA)

英文原文如下：

President Lin Shangli

Distinguished Speakers,

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I am very pleased to be invited by the International Monetary Institute of Renmin University to speak on Multilateralism and Promoting Global Financial Reform at this important conference.

Three weeks ago, I was in New York to attend the Summit of the Future and the opening of the 79th High-level Session of the United Nations General Assembly. One of the important items of the UN Pact for the Future was that multilateral system is under unprecedented strain and in transforming global governance; the reform of the international financial architecture has to be accelerated.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Multilateralism is crucial not only for China’s future but also for the global economy. It is a system that has played a pivotal role in shaping the global economic landscape and remains of utmost importance for the entire world. Over the past few decades, multilateralism has provided a framework for nations to collaborate, trade, and thrive, driving the global economy to unprecedented heights.

Since the end of World War II, multilateral institutions like the World Trade Organization (WTO) have played an instrumental role in shaping global trade rules. They have made it possible for large and small countries to participate in and benefit from an interconnected world. Through multilateralism, trade barriers have been reduced, investment flows have increased, and nations have been able to specialize in industries with a comparative advantage, leading to overall gains in productivity and better living standards.

China’s economic transformation is indeed a remarkable example of this. Over the past few decades, China has shifted from a predominantly agrarian society to a global economic powerhouse. A pivotal turning point was its accession to the WTO in 2001, which allowed China to access new markets, attract significant foreign investment, and adopt new technologies, fueling its explosive economic growth. 

Before joining the WTO, China’s exports were constrained by trade barriers, including high tariffs and quotas that limited its access to major markets. Once these restrictions were removed, China experienced a surge in exports, which had a profound impact on global supply chains. For example, China’s share of global manufacturing exports rose from about 5% in 2001 to around 21% by 2022. This dramatic growth in exports positioned China as a critical player in global manufacturing, earning it the reputation of being the "world’s factory." In parallel, China’s GDP grew significantly from $1.3 trillion in 2001 to $18 trillion by 2023, transforming China into the world’s second-largest economy.

The true significance of this transformation, however, lies not just in the numbers but in the profound improvement in living standards for millions of people. Over the last 40 years, over 800 million people in China have been lifted out of poverty, helped by the rise of export-oriented industries, which provided millions of jobs, particularly in coastal regions such as Guangdong and Jiangsu, where small towns transformed into bustling cities.

China’s integration into the global economy has also had far-reaching impacts on other countries. For example, many developing nations have benefited from Chinese investments in infrastructure, such as roads, bridges, and power plants. These projects have facilitated regional trade and economic growth, demonstrating how interconnectedness can catalyze development far beyond the borders of individual countries.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Although multilateralism has successfully promoted economic growth and global cooperation, it has faced significant challenges in recent years. The 2008 global financial crisis marked a critical turning point, exposing vulnerabilities in the global economy and leading to a wave of protectionism and nationalism that has persisted since then and intensified. These trends have only been exacerbated by a series of geopolitical and economic events and the Covid-19 pandemic that have taken place since 2018. 

One of the most prominent challenges stems from the growing tensions between China and the US. What was once a cooperative economic relationship has now turned into a strategic rivalry, with competing visions for global governance and economic leadership? Since the US-China trade dispute began in 2018, the US has imposed tariffs on about 66% of Chinese imports and China has retaliated with tariffs on roughly 58% of US products, having disrupted global supply chains, increased costs for businesses, and led to a significant reduction in bilateral trade. Between 2017 and 2022, China’s share of US imports fell from 22% to 17%. The decline was even more pronounced for strategic goods, particularly those classified as Advanced Technology Products by the US, where China’s share dropped from 37% to 23%. Beyond the immediate economic consequences, the trade war has fueled a growing movement toward decoupling or fragmentation.

However, it is important to recognize that the full impact of weakened multilateralism is not yet fully realized. Many Chinese goods are now being rerouted through “connector” countries like Vietnam and Malaysia before reaching the US, which implies lengthening supply chains and shows just how resilient and adaptable global trade networks can be, even with rising protectionism. However, as the IMF has cautioned, history tells us that trade disruptions can have long-lasting effects. If tensions between the US and China continue escalating, we could be heading toward a more fragmented and polarized global order. While some connector countries might benefit in the short term, the gains from trade will eventually diminish for everyone in the long run. This implies that even the intermediary countries would end up competing for a larger slice of a smaller pie, with the overall size of global trade shrinking.

Beyond the US-China rivalry, multilateralism is also being tested by broader geopolitical fragmentation due to the Covid-19 pandemic. As countries turned inward to protect their citizens and economies, international cooperation faltered and the global fragmentation accelerated. The pandemic exposed the vulnerabilities of global supply chains, particularly in the manufacturing and healthcare sectors, highlighting the risks of relying too much on a few key trading partners. In response, many countries have started rethinking their trade policies and moving towards greater self-reliance, which further strains the multilateral system.

The Russia-Ukraine war has also posed significant risks to multilateralism. For example, it prompted a major reconfiguration of global energy markets. European nations, which had long relied on Russian energy, are now seeking alternative suppliers, fundamentally reshaping the global trade landscape. Similarly, many countries are reconsidering their supply chain dependencies, with a growing emphasis on national security, moving toward "friend-shoring," a practice where supply chains are relocated to politically aligned nations in order to mitigate risks tied to dependence on non-aligned countries. This has deepened the divisions among major global powers, making it increasingly difficult to reach consensus on critical global issues, such as climate change, trade, and security, further weakening the effectiveness of multilateral institutions. 

These developments reflect a broader trend of geo-economic fragmentation, where economic decisions are increasingly driven by political and security considerations. If this trend continues with unchecked, it could undermine the foundations of multilateralism, built on the principles of open, rules-based trade and international cooperation, leading to competing economic blocs, each with its own rules and standards. This would increase the cost of doing business and reduce the overall efficiency of the global economy, potentially slowing down economic growth for all nations involved. Additionally, tackling global challenges like climate change, public health, and financial stability could become even more difficult to address in a more fragmented world, as countries might be less willing to work together. 

Ladies and Gentlemen, 

More broadly, the challenges facing multilateralism today can be traced back to some fundamental factors.

First, the rise of new global powers, such as China and India, has significantly altered the balance of power in the international system. When institutions like the World Bank, IMF, and WTO were established, the global economy was dominated by the US and Western Europe. However, the economic landscape has changed dramatically over the past few decades, with emerging markets now playing a much larger role. Despite these changes, the governance structures of many international institutions have remained largely unchanged, leading to frustration among emerging economies that feel underrepresented. This lack of adaptation has contributed to a decline in trust in these institutions and has raised questions about their relevance in today’s world.

Second, the rise of nationalism and populism has also weakened multilateralism. The US, which had historically been a leader in creating international institutions like the IMF, has shifted its approach in recent years. Under the "America First" policy, the US took a more protectionist stance, pulling back from international commitments and prioritizing its own economic interests. Although the current administration has softened some of these positions, it continues to focus on limiting China’s influence. At the same time, political movements such as Brexit demonstrate that political logic does not always align with economic benefits.

Third, multilateralism itself has inherent limitations. Historically, weaker nations have often been marginalized within the multilateral framework, and inequality has increased as a result. As noted, the benefits of globalization have not been evenly distributed, leading to rising discontent among nations that feel left behind. Moreover, multilateralism has struggled to address some of the most pressing global challenges, such as inequality and climate change. These shortcomings have sparked calls for reform to create a more inclusive and equitable system.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

One of the key difficulties in addressing the decline of multilateralism lies in the differing perspectives between China and the US on multilateralism and global governance.

From China’s viewpoint, the weakening of multilateralism is largely seen as a consequence of US unilateralism and protectionism. China has pushed for a more inclusive and equitable global economic order that gives developing countries a greater voice in international institutions and ensures that the benefits of globalization are more widely shared. Through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) and the establishment of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB), China has sought to enhance connectivity and provide critical infrastructure to countries in Asia, Africa, and beyond in the Global South. 

On the other hand, the US views the decline of multilateralism as a necessary response to the challenges posed by China’s rise. From the American perspective, China’s economic practices, including state subsidies, intellectual property concerns, and market access restrictions, have distorted global markets and necessitated a rethinking of the existing framework. In addition, the US sees China’s initiatives like BRI and AIIB as a means of expanding its geopolitical influence, leading to increased competition between the two superpowers. The US has, therefore, taken a more assertive approach, seeking to reshape global trade rules to address these concerns and protect its own economic interests.

As such, the divergence in perspectives between the US and China has contributed to the current impasse in global trade negotiations and has made it increasingly difficult to find common ground and move forward on important global issues.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Despite the challenges for multilateralism, there is a strong case for global cooperation, as the benefits far outweigh the costs of fragmentation. And research has shown that undermining multilateralism would have severe consequences for the global economy.

First, pulling back from multilateralism would lead to significant disruptions in global trade and investment. For example, according to the IMF’s estimates, global output could drop by 0.3% to 2.3% in the long term, with low-income countries potentially losing over 4% of their GDP. Similarly, WTO estimates that even limited decoupling could cause some countries to lose 0.4% of their GDP, while the most affected could see losses of up to 12% under full technological decoupling. In today’s interconnected world, stepping back from the multilateral frameworks would not only hurt economies but also widen global inequality by restricting developing countries' access to wealthier markets and opportunities, highlighting the importance of preserving economic cooperation in light of growing geopolitical fragmentation.

Second, despite the ongoing tensions between the US and China, their economic relationship remains highly significant, implying that it would be extremely difficult to sever the close economic ties that have developed over decades of cooperation. To put it in perspective, during the Cold War, trade between the US and the Soviet Union made up only about 1% of each country’s total trade, whereas today trade with China represents 17% of US imports in 2022. 

As I mentioned earlier, the indirect trade between China and the US through connector countries like Mexico and Vietnam continues to link the two economies, underscoring the deep interdependence that exists within the global trading system. These findings suggest that efforts to decouple the US and Chinese economies would not only be costly but also disruptive to global supply chains.

Third, the major challenges we face today—such as climate change, artificial intelligence, and global health crises—can only be addressed through international cooperation. These issues cross national borders and require a coordinated global response. Moreover, the notion that countries must choose one side between the US and China in a competitive geopolitical environment is not only unrealistic but also counterproductive. History has shown that intensifying competition between great powers often leads to conflict, as demonstrated by the "Thucydides Trap," where rising tensions between established and emerging powers result in mutually destructive outcomes.

Ladies and Gentlemen,

In a similar context, the call for comprehensive global financial reform is also more urgent than ever in today’s multipolar world. The existing global financial architecture, established through the Bretton Woods agreements after World War II, has faced increasing challenges for addressing the complexities of the modern global economy. Institutions such as the IMF and World Bank, though foundational, are now viewed as outdated due to governance structures that under represent emerging economies. Reforming these institutions to reflect the shifting global landscape is crucial to restoring their legitimacy and ensuring they effectively serve all nations.

One of the most visible changes in the global financial order is the rise of de-dollarization, a phenomenon driven by geopolitical shifts and the desire of many economies to reduce reliance on the US dollar. Countries such as China and Russia, along with other emerging economies, are increasingly conducting trade in local currencies and building alternative payment systems. While de-dollarization highlights the growing fragmentation of the financial landscape, it underscores the need for a more inclusive and multipolar financial system driven by comprehensive reforms that accommodate the interests of both developed and emerging economies.

The emergence of new financial institutions such as the AIIB and the New Development Bank (NDB) also reflects a growing demand for alternatives to traditional global financial governance. These institutions have demonstrated their capacity to address infrastructure gaps, drive development, and support sustainable growth in regions that have historically been underserved. As these new institutions grow in influence, it is imperative that traditional institutions evolve to remain competitive and relevant. A key part of this evolution involves adjusting voting rights and quotas to better reflect the shifting global economic power dynamics. Without these changes, the existing system risks losing its ability to foster meaningful global cooperation.

Moreover, the growing burden of sovereign debt, particularly in developing economies, must be addressed. Many countries are grappling with unsustainable debt levels, often exacerbated to external factors such as rising interest rates and currency fluctuation. Common Framework for debt treatment needs to be expanded and restructured to offer more equitable solutions. This includes market-based approaches to private sector debt and climate-related debt relief mechanisms that incentivize creditors to participate in sustainable debt restricting. These mechanisms will be able to free up fiscal space in developing countries, allowing them to invest in pressing issues such as climate adaptation and poverty reduction.

Reinforcing the global financial safety net is also vital. Reforms to the IMF’s Special Drawing Rights (SDRs) and improved access to precautionary financial lines can provide necessary buffer to mitigate the impact of global financial volatility. Strengthening this safety net will be crucial for ensuring that nations, especially those in the developing world, can weather economic shocks and maintain stability, especially in times of increased fragmentation. 

Ladies and Gentlemen,

Looking ahead, it is clear that both China and the US must take on leadership roles in strengthening global cooperation. While it may be difficult to resolve all outstanding issues in the near term, both countries can start by identifying common ground for cooperation and gradually expanding their collaborative efforts.

One area where cooperation is not only possible but essential is in the field of green technology and climate change. Both China and the US have made significant investments in renewable energy, electric vehicles, and other clean technologies. By working together, they can lead the global transition to a low-carbon economy, addressing one of the most urgent challenges of our time. Scaling up climate financing is also critical for global financial reform. The world is falling behind in meeting the targets of the Paris Agreement, and without substantial investments in green technology and infrastructure, the goal of limiting global warming will remain out of reach. A potential solution is to consolidate the existing network of over 60 climate funds into a single Green Bank, which could streamline the financing of climate mitigation efforts and create a global carbon market to better align incentives across nations. Other areas of mutual interest, where cooperation is also essential, include food security and the regulation of AI technology.

Ultimately, pragmatic approaches are necessary to prevent the worst outcomes of geopolitical fragmentation. By maintaining open lines of communication, pursuing agreements on critical issues, and refraining from harmful unilateral actions, both nations can contribute to a more stable and prosperous global order. 

As such, expanding the scope of information sharing through ongoing dialogue is particularly important. This will help resolve current misunderstandings and foster better cooperation. For example, the IMF’s recent research suggests that trade imbalances between China and the US are largely driven by macroeconomic factors. According to the research, China's increased trade surplus after the pandemic was primarily due to weak domestic demand and reduced imports, not overcapacity from industrial policies. Similarly, the US trade deficit has been attributed to increased imports driven by the unwinding of excess savings accumulated during the pandemic. The lack of transparency regarding China’s subsidy policies further complicates accurate assessments. These insights underscore the need for continuous communication to achieve a more nuanced understanding of trade imbalances and avoid unnecessary conflicts. 

In this regard, recent meetings between US high-level officials—Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, Secretary of State Antony Blinken, and National Security Advisor Jake Sullivan—and Chinese leaders, including President Xi Jinping, are promising signs that dialogue remains crucial in addressing these complex issues. 

Ladies and Gentlemen,

I would like to conclude my speech by saying that  the future of multilateralism and global financial architecture depends on the willingness of major global powers like China and the US to work together. While multilateralism is not without its flaws, it remains an effective way to address the complex challenges of our interconnected world. Reforming multilateral institutions to reflect the realities of the 21st century will also be essential to preserving their relevance and effectiveness.

By working together, China and the US can help preserve and enhance the international order, ensuring that it continues to serve the needs of all nations—large and small, developed and developing. In sum, cooperation, rather than competition, will be the key to building a safer, fairer, and more prosperous world for everyone.

Thank you.

(欢迎关注人大重阳新浪微博：@人大重阳 ；微信公众号：rdcy2013)