Our blog is focused on delivering ideas to change the current model of globalization and make it work, simply as that. I strongly believe that there is no correlation among the theory and the real practice and, although we have achieved lots of benefits to make the world more connected and responsive, is it also less fluid in terms of structure. Global institutions are needed for this purpose but when it becomes rusty and excessively bureaucratic they prevent true changes. That is precisely what the United States is claiming and unfortunately used to deploy its agenda. However, is not by dismantled global institutions that we are going to succeed in a world of multiple crises that demand joint action, but by reforming, deeply and consciously, removing all obstacles and leaders that prevent moving forward. Is it here when we face the first deep constraint: the political system. A pillar that leads global institutions and slows down any change that represents a balance of power. When the United States found that we are moving faster to be equal in terms of Nations´ power is when they lose the political will to participate and that marks a very important difference from other countries that also hold the potential to be an axis of power: Russia, China, etc. Instead of claiming for their position they focus on deploy their authority among their spheres of action and internationally by creating structures as BRICS or continue to participate in global institutions –not as transparent as we wish, but trusting that a global model is the must-have of current turbulent times-.
The best way to fight back nationalisms is by more effective inclusive global policies. COVID9 response gives us the perfect opportunity to create a new global model in which nationalisms can coexist pacifically, complementary, and above all equal on transparency. Is not the same to withdraw from a global system than to withdraw from the accountability system. Nationalisms that expect to rule the world without accountability are dangerous but Nations that hold a less global perspective within international coordination and accepting the fact that the world is moving faster towards global standards of living, are not only welcome but fit in a new world.
From the European Union, there is an idea that a closer union will deliver better responses as well as more cohesion among countries. However, even if I am a strong supporter of globalization is it only on a reshaped model. Is it not the correct momentum to boost global models but to boost solid pillars of interconnection and collaboration. Is it time for action towards an effective response. We get used to living in a world hit by multiple crises but COVID19 turns to be a crisis that affects daily activities and paralyse consumption with immediate impact on the economy. Is for this reason that the responses cannot be purely global, but within international collaboration: is not about supranational measures but national measures that are coordinated internationally. The context have changed…. so do I.
When a country is forced –and ought to make decisions in that sense- to close borders is that we realise that we cannot apply global rules but national ones within an international commitment to share and exchange. Only certain policies, strategies, and actions can be done at a purely global level, the rest is adaptation and implementation of national political decisions that better suit the specific circumstances of each country at each specific historical momentum . Is for this reason that we cannot be global but within solid international coordination, cooperation, and above all knowledge and information sharing. Being updated and then adapted to each situation: political leadership styles have never been so needed to met national needs rather than abstract global goals. In crisis times, emergency political decisions.
It is extremely important to be connected, learn from global institutions – WHO is no doubt a leading institution during COVID19- but the implementation cannot be global but based on a national focus adapted to their particular challenges. Not all the countries faced the same reality, although all of them are impacted by the pandemic. Even if a country has a lower rate of deaths, the world is orchestrated to be of global dimension, making of trade, services, transport, etc. a must-have to run normally. Is it so that isolation from the rest may protect them but not allow them to thrive that it is about innovation and how to continue growing without sinking the economy.
On one hand, we must stop the spreading of the virus at the national level, and on the other and at international level coordinate. Businesses are global, but a pandemic is not and this dichotomy is what makes any global strategy useless. Knowledge sharing, humanitarian aid, or any form of cooperation among countries is the only aspect that counts now to overcome COVID19 and rescue the economy by not paralyzing consumption.
It’s a huge responsibility and a challenging work for political leaders to tackle the national crisis and raise awareness of the need for self-protection and at the same time to create a new life without paralyzing activities. Having in mind the differences among international and global context is it paramount to success, as well to apply actions on the right timing.
Beyond global, within the international vision and national resilience survival mode….just powerful political leadership.
* “COVID19 from global to international cooperation: reflecting on paradoxes”, Mar Introini
- The world is of global nature not a cage of global dimensions
One thought on “Political decisions during crises: global or international?”