Last weekend Beijing hosted the APEC conference, welcoming leaders from 21 different economies to discuss important policies on growth and trade in the Asia-Pacific region. Finishing on Tuesday, world leaders then flocked to Myanmar for the ASEAN meeting, before finally arriving today in Brisbane for the formal launch of the annual G20 summit. International meetings and summits are vitally important for global trade and relations, but how do all of these meetings differ from one another? With great cost and effort to each host nation in welcoming the world’s most important people to their countries, it begs the question are these meetings really worth it?
APEC
The APEC Conference held only a couple of days previously in Beijing has been considered a success, with billions of dollars’ worth of trade deals agreed, talks on infrastructure plans approved and exciting projects and new openings confirmed – such as new ten year visas between the USA and China, and the formation of a new “maritime silk road” of trade circulating around the Asia-Pacific region. APEC welcomed 21 economies at various stages of growth – China, the US and Japan economic giants compared to emerging economies such as Vietnam, Papau New Guinea and Thailand. APEC covers 40% of the global population and 44% of world trade, and the importance of focusing on regional international trade is surely an advantage not offered by the G20 Summit. APEC may include economies of various sizes and types, but there is always the risk that all attention will be paid to deals involving the economic powerhouses while simultaneously ignoring the emerging economies. In terms of trade and business, APEC is of vital importance to the Asia-Pacific region. However it is too early to know exactly the overall cost of hosting the conference for China – Beijing factories were closed, schools, offices and government staff were all ordered to take a 6 day vacation during the meeting. This along with the lavish fireworks, arrangements and stunning Sunrise Kempinski Hotel built for the conference must surely add up to a hefty sum, with some quoting a figure between 6 and 7 billion US dollars. But can a price really be put on the agreement between China and the US on harmful emissions, or on that handshake between Xi Jinping and Shinzo Abe? These are priceless moments with huge potential value for the region’s – and indeed for the whole world’s – long-term stability and economy.
ASEAN Summit and East Asia Summit
The Association of South East Nations convenes annually to discuss the economic and cultural development of Southeast Asia. The 10 member states comprise of Thailand, Vietnam, Indonesia, Malaysia, the Philippines, Singapore, Brunei, Laos, Cambodia and Myanmar, representing 500 million people in a region of rapid economic growth and development. Meeting twice a year, the summit also coincides with the East Asia Summit, which sees the ASEAN countries joined by China, Russia, the US, India, Australia, New Zealand, South Korea and Japan. ASEAN does not feature one outstanding economic giant among its members, but it uses this to its advantage by grouping together and establishing deals with China, the US and other top 10 economies. The focus of the conference is not just on the economy – in recent years ASEAN has claimed the opening up of Myanmar as a great success story, as well as establishing free trade deals with China for all ASEAN members. Myanmar hosted this year’s summits – the first major event held by the nation since reforms. ASEAN may not have as big a global impact as G20 or APEC, but in terms of macroeconomic policy and regionalized growth and development, its annual summits are vital meeting points to steer development in a positive direction for the region.
G20
Beginning today in Brisbane, Australia, G20 joins together 20 of the world’s largest and most important economies, including the European Union. Leaders, finance ministers and bank leaders represent their economic regions in what is the biggest global annual meeting. The summit replaced the G8 Summit in 2008 as the principal economic council of wealthy nations, and grew in stature in response to the global economic crisis of 2008. Leaders meet annually to discuss growth in response to that crisis, and to concur on measures to be put in place in order to avoid such a severe financial depression from recurring.
This year’s conference in Brisbane has economic growth in the private sector as its main focus, but with the eyes of the world’s media on such a vast amount of global leaders all convened in the same location, questions will diverge from economics to political questions. Vladimir Putin is predicted to find himself under intense scrutiny this year, with calls prior to the Summit for Russia to be excluded from this year’s G20. Pressure will also be on leaders to discuss climate change and emissions – a topic that comes around every year but on which very little action is ever taken. Ebola is another elephant in the room at the summit this year, as is the threat of Jihadism to Europe and the Middle East. However Australian Prime Minister and G20 Host Tony Abbott has refused to make room for anything other than economic discussion on the agenda of the two day conference.
The G20 Summit along with most other global discussions between leaders is often accused of being platforms for men and women who are all talk but no action. With Brisbane’s G20 costing upwards of AUS$400 million, positive results need to be seen in action for further support of such meetings. Last year’s G20 Summit in Russia appeared to see none of the leaders reach great consensus on any matters of true global importance – indeed that Summit was dominated by a US-Russia split over international efforts to resolve the Syria crisis.
With more and more protesters seemingly turning on meetings such as G20 with anger and exasperation at the huge financial and environmental costs of hosting the leaders, is there another solution? There is no doubt that annual meetings such as G20 are important to the stability and growth of the world economy and must take place, but efforts should surely be taken to reduce the costs of hosting these leaders. The future could even be virtual conferences held live over the internet between leaders.