{"id":93398,"date":"2018-12-20T09:13:36","date_gmt":"2018-12-20T08:13:36","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/?p=93398"},"modified":"2025-12-19T11:23:11","modified_gmt":"2025-12-19T10:23:11","slug":"why-international-collaboration-seems-bumpier-than-ever","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.erasmusmagazine.nl\/en\/2018\/12\/20\/why-international-collaboration-seems-bumpier-than-ever\/","title":{"rendered":"Why international collaboration seems bumpier than ever"},"content":{"rendered":"

International collaboration went through a particularly rough patch in 2018. Trade agreements that had always appeared rock-solid suddenly came under fire; the Brits lobbed one spanner after the other into the EU works. And then there\u2019s Trump, of course. This year, it seemed as if everything we were certain about was thrown overboard. But what\u2019s academics\u2019 take on these unsettling developments? Is there really cause for concern?<\/p>\n

\"\"

\n\t\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/span>\n\tImage by:<\/span>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tBas van der Schot<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>

It\u2019s clear for anyone who has watched, read or listened to the end-of-year roundups these past few weeks. Apart from some stray references to the \u2018Zwarte Piet\u2019 debate, November and December alone offered a year\u2019s worth of news updates about the heavy weather that international collaboration finds itself in. Theresa May\u2019s twists and turns in the Brexit saga. The verbal flak spraying across the Pacific between China and the US. Or the spats at the G20 summit in Buenos Aires.<\/p>\n

Protectionist rhetoric<\/h2>

To outsiders, it may feel as if the entire edifice could cave in at any moment. Still, Professor of European Union Law Fabian Amtenbrink wouldn\u2019t go as far as that. \u201cI\u2019d say that international collaboration has mainly become more complex \u2013 it definitely hasn\u2019t become impossible. We see more and more new faces on the scene \u2013 China for instance. And they all aim to play a leading role on the world stage. Populism and nationalism are also on the rise.\u201d<\/p>\n

It\u2019s not so much a bomb that is about to explode as a system that\u2019s crackling with high voltage. According to Amtenbrink, this development started a number of years ago. \u201cYou can see a swell of populism around the world. It\u2019s fed by people\u2019s resentment of economic liberalism, multiculturalism and, above all, internationalism.\u201d The latter concept in particular is like a red rag to a bull in many countries. And politicians aren\u2019t afraid to tap into this mood. \u201cInternationalism is seen as a movement of the political elite. Populists are putting increasing emphasis on national sovereignty. This goes in tandem with protectionist rhetoric.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button><\/figure>

Populism translated into policy<\/h2>

And in 2018, these sentiments entered international politics \u2013 with a vengeance. \u201cPopulist emotions are translated into concrete policies. Trump is a case in point. Withdrawing from negotiations about a Trans-Atlantic trade agreement, for example. Or putting the NAFTA trade bloc between Canada, Mexico and the US up for renegotiation. Or the way he has undermined the World Trade Organization by unilaterally imposing tariffs, in contravention of WTO rules \u2013 and even talking of a US withdrawal.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t
\n\t\t\u2018Ultimately, these leaders also understand that returning to a world of nation states would never work in the long term.\u2019\n\t<\/blockquote>\n\n\t\t\t
\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t–<\/span>\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tFederica Violi, Assistant Professor of International and European Union Law\n\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t\t\t\t\t<\/figcaption>\n\t<\/figure>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

Federica Violi, Assistant Professor of International and European Union Law, sees this undermining of the WTO as one of the key developments of the past year. \u201cIn the 1990s, there was a targeted effort to strengthen international economic integration. This was seen as the best way to increase prosperity. The General Agreement on Tariffs and Trade of 1994 and the founding of the WTO in 1995, for example, stepped up economic integration far beyond a mere lowering of tariffs. This had far-reaching consequences for the entire system. It has severely limited individual states\u2019 options to safeguard their scope for domestic regulation and decision-making. In return, they were promised increased prosperity across the board, which would also trickle down to national economies.\u201d<\/p>\n

For a long time, this gambit seemed to pay off. But after a few years of grumbling behind the stage, it seems that in 2018, the organisation is actually on its last legs. Trump already attacked the WTO head-on back in August. And other countries have also voiced their dissatisfaction with existing arrangements. \u201cTake India and Brazil, for example: both countries have also called for new trade agreements within the WTO,\u201d says Violi. \u201cIn the view of government leaders, systems like the WTO no longer effectively serve their national interests. Although the big question is: what could actually be a viable alternative? Ultimately, these leaders also understand that returning to a world of nation states would never work in the long term.\u201d<\/p>\n

Fresh thought<\/h2>

This dilemma is also brought up by Professor of Inclusive Global Law and Governance Alessandra Arcuri. \u201cThere are a number of major challenges that can only be solved through international collaboration.\u201d She lists a few: \u201cEconomic inequalities and environmental pollutions, as well as climate change. These are huge issues that countries could never resolve on their own. That\u2019s why we need to give fresh thought to how we could use international collaboration to resolve major global problems. By adapting existing trade and investment agreements, for instance. These agreements would need to include stricter rules that protect the environment, and new regulations that can prevent tax evasion.\u201d<\/p>\n

The picture painted by the news surveys may not be full of pensive government leaders, but Amtenbrink would like to put things in perspective: \u201cThe remarkable thing is that even the biggest populists, including Trump, realise that occasionally it\u2019s in their interest to play along. International collaboration is too important; mutual ties have become far too strong over the past few years. My feeling is that with people like Trump, it\u2019s about holding a big speech rather than relying on strategic diplomacy. Intimidation is increasingly becoming a negotiation strategy in its own right.\u201d Or, as Arcuri puts it: \u201cTrump\u2019s talk of protecting the American public sounds great, but it\u2019s rather simplistic. While it may work to get people riled up, there are better ways to tackle domestic inequality, of course. In this context, it\u2019s important to note that according to experts, economic inequality in the US first took off in the 1980s under Ronald Reagan, who set up a more regressive tax regime.\u201d<\/p>\n

\"\"\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\n\t\t\t<\/svg>\n\t\t<\/button>

\n\t\n\n<\/svg>\n<\/span>\n\tImage by:<\/span>\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t\t\t\t\tBas van der Schot<\/a>\t\t\t\t\t<\/span>\n\t<\/p>\n<\/figcaption><\/figure>

When push comes to shove<\/h2>

One thing the three academics all agree on is that despite all the complaining, tampering and threats like Brexit, international collaboration is here to stay. \u201cEveryone has become far too dependent on each other,\u201d says Violi. \u201cThe potential advantages of working together are simply too great. For everyone. We couldn\u2019t go back to the situation before the Second World War if we wanted to.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\t

\n\t\t
\n\t\t\t
\n\t
\n\t\t\u2018International collaboration will remain of vital importance to countries in the 21st century \u2013 although how they go about it is clearly changing.\u2019\n\t<\/blockquote>\n\n\t<\/figure>\n\t\t<\/div>\n\t<\/div>\n

\u201cOf course, Brexit is a prime example of international collaboration becoming harder than it used to be \u2013 particularly when you\u2019re dealing with political integration,\u201d says Amtenbrink. \u201cBut we would be grossly over-simplifying things to simply attribute the wish of a share of the British people to leave the EU to populist influences and a rejection of anything that reeks of internationalism. Despite Brexit, the UK was, is and will most likely remain a major champion of international trade. Of course, the big irony is that once Brexit is fact, the British will need to pay more attention than ever to international collaboration, to safeguard their country\u2019s economic future. International collaboration will remain of vital importance to countries in the 21st<\/sup> century \u2013 although how they go about it is clearly changing.\u201d<\/p>\n

As far as our academics are concerned, this is the conclusion that people at home should reach as they put a fresh batch of oliebollen<\/em> in the fryer. Sure, various international systems seem to be past their sell-by date. But we should take all the braggadocio reported in the media this past year with a grain of salt. \u201cA lot of people were talking big, including in the run-up to the G20,\u201d says Amtenbrink. \u201cBut when push comes to shove, America has no decent alternatives either. That\u2019s another trend that has continued over the past year. It started in 2017, but the mechanism has only become stronger. Sometimes relations are very cool, other times very close. But at the end of the day, you still have international collaboration in some form or other. That\u2019s the real trend of 2018.\u201d<\/p>\n\n\t\n\t

\n\t\t\t\t\t

De redactie<\/h2>\n\t\t\n\t\t
\n\n\t\t\t\n\t\t\t