The New Class War

The good globalization is over. The good times of diminishing trade barriers, products of great multilateral agreements, are behind us. The biggest pessimists paint a frightening picture of a return to protectionism and trade blocs. The failure of the Doha Round negotiations to free world trade is a terrible sign during this time of economic uncertainty. And when a bad wind blows, even the most doctrinaire liberals turn into supporters of government intervention to protect their interests. Only a presidential surprise in Washington next year could introduce a change in atmosphere capable of getting the Doha Rounds off the ground. And the surprise is not Obama becoming president. The real surprise would be if he does not become a protectionist as has been the solid democratic tradition. Bill Clinton has already gone against this tradition. He was taken in by the supporters of free trade and in exchange was crowned as the president who gave the greatest impulse to globalization.

It is becoming increasingly clear that Bush’s terms as president have been the lost years of the 21st century. The United Nations have not undergone reform. The UN Security Council ended up mortally wounded after the debate over the Iraq war. The European Union is in exactly the same position, under the Treaty of Nice, that it was when Bush installed himself into the White House. The failure to reduce polluting emissions, as proposed by the Kyoto Protocol, is evident, mostly because of its boycott by the country which has been the greatest polluter in the history of the world. And now the Doha Rounds, which were instituted by Bush in his inaugural year, have failed. If Clinton acted as fertilizer and oxygen to global growth and the appearance of the middle classes in Asia and Latin America, Bush is the president that has broken his rules in the name of American unilateralism and the rights of America as a superpower. Now, the emerging powers that are stepping on America’s heels, especially China and India, also want to follow in America’s footsteps in terms of unilateralism, especially when it comes to trade and the environment.

It was almost impossible for the latest round of negotiations in Geneva last week to change the direction that the world is going. All the optimism and will to succeed streaming from Pascal Lamy, the Secretary General of the World Trade Organization, was not able to stand up to the spirit of the times, which is protectionist, hostile to multilateralism and loyal to the bad example preached and practiced by the White House. The iceberg that sank the ship were the clauses to safeguard the agriculture of these developing countries, which are suspicious of free trade due to previous waves of liberalization, when the destruction of barriers left poorer farmers defenseless when faced with the invasion of agricultural products from wealthier countries. Even though China and India have persevered in defense of agriculture, in reality they have been trying to challenge the United States, and, to a lesser extent, the European Union, in a gesture that corresponds to the new geopolitical structure of the world. The fight that manifested itself in Doha is a sign of the times: it is the same fight that will be expressed in negotiations over climate change, between developing countries that aspire to pollute more in the next few years, to account for growth margins and their ever increasing middle classes, and rich countries that have already eaten up their share of atmosphere, and are now reaping the benefits of their privileged situation.

We are faced with a new class war, but it is not like the one between proletarians and bourgeoisie described by Marx and Engels. Now it is between the middle classes of developing countries, and the middle classes of already developed countries, who have a bigger share of the global pie. And the ones who stand to lose something are the poorer classes, who don’t count on strong states to defend them and find themselves stuck between the impetus of those on the rise (Chinese and Indians) and the fear of those who are falling (Europeans and Americans). It is a crucial time when resources are being transferred from those who have always been rich to the new wealthy producers of energy. There is also a transferring of purchasing power from the old middle classes to the new. The ones from the developing countries will consume more and the European and American middle classes will have to adjust their consumption habits to the new market conditions. This class war does not lead to any kind of revolution, but it can produce tensions, including indirectly sparking some conflicts. From there comes the importance of lessening the tension in the Middle East, especially between Iran and the West. But where these tensions will show their results will be at the WTO and on the United Nations committee about climate change. If its resolutions are not multilateral, we cannot have any doubts that we will be sowing the seeds of great conflicts that will grow well into the 21st Century.