 We have one more panel today Now that everybody's settled back Welcome back It's my distinct pleasure and honor to introduce to you today our keynote speaker centers center Charles Cobb Rob Senator Robb was a United States Marine Corps veteran and honor graduate of Quantico He went on to serve two tours of duty in Vietnam where he commanded a rifle company in combat and was awarded the bronze star Senator Robb later served as Democratic member of the US Senate From 1989 until 2001 during his tenure He became the only member of Congress ever to serve on all three national security committee committees Intelligence armed services and foreign relations at the same time In February 2004 senator Robb was appointed co-chair of the Iraq Intelligence Commission an independent panel tasked with Investigating US intelligence surrounding the US 2003 invasion of Iraq and Iraq's weapons of mass destruction In 2006 he was appointed to serve on the president's foreign intelligence advisory board and There's so much more. I can talk to you about Senator Robb, but I would like to Turn turn the podium back to him knowing that he will give you a very nice introduction of our second panel today and thank you when I Maybe I should begin by saying Monday noon, I was not planning to be here today. I had another engagement at this particular moment To and I got an email late in the Afternoons saying would you come and substitute for John hammering now? No one can substitute for John hammering In fact, let me put in a quick Boost for his two-pager if there's anybody here that is not on his mailing list It came out yesterday and I mean it comes out every week the one yesterday He handled all of the the possibilities permutations and ramifications of of war in cyberspace in two pages and he does that Constantly on some thoughtful topic. So if you're not signed up for it, I don't know who to Apply it to here, but I know that he likes to get wide distribution on that But I was asked if I would come and introduce the panel and I said well, sure I'd be happy to I've got to change a couple of things And then I checked and I said well, it's not really introduced the panel Specifically he said we've got somebody else for that and I said well, do you want to be introduced? I said I shouldn't be introduced and I do appreciate the kind introduction but and you're I Can assure you that I'm not giving a keynote speech As I say until last night. I didn't know precisely what my role might be in today's program So it will be mercifully brief. I will start by thanking Anna and the diplomatic courier and the Our Italian counterparts for arranging for this meeting which will be informative I caught just the end of the non-proliferation panel If I were going to participate Subsidively in a discussion that would have been the one because I'm I do spend some time in national security including non-proliferation non-proliferation matters. I do not spend time Thinking substantively about some of the economic challenges that are going to be discussed by some real experts In just a couple minutes Let me begin by simply observing that the Nuclear Preparation itself has enormous economic impact or could have depending upon what happens. We won't go into detail In fact, they didn't get the little piece of what I saw At the end of the last panel didn't get into significant detail in some of those areas, but the ramifications of what could happen depending upon particularly what happens with In North Korea and Iran right now and the the counteractions that might be taken Could indeed have very significant Consequences that would flow from it with it would If we went in that particular direction or if the evolution was in that particular direction, obviously You're going to have the prospect of an arms race that has enormous Implications if you even look at the Cold War and see how much the former Soviet Union spent in anticipation of some of the things that we might have and basically Bankrupted the country in the process You'd cost the Amount of money that we spend on providing for the nuclear umbrella that is a part of that and or the extension of it and Or request to put it in writing as the Japanese Prime Minister has asked us to do all of those have economic Consequences that are our words considering the refugee status that Occurs when some of these actions are taking place Not often mentioned In terms of the thing a number of times that it should be but the the cost With respect to refugees from Iraq over a period of time we're now experiencing in Pakistan as well as Afghanistan we have them before North Korea yesterday Paul Wolfowitz did a piece in the Wall Street Journal that some of you may have seen On this particular topic, but there are significant Consequences we are fortunate to have a panel To help us explore how the economic crisis that we're Experiencing on a global basis and if anybody is still of the belief that we don't have true globalization If you get up every morning and don't figure out what the markets in those who are just ahead of you have done that Day and anticipate what it's going to do to your own markets. I would submit that would be Sufficient proof for that particular question You don't have to agree with Tom Friedman that the world is flat to recognize that There is a Significant impact that we have enjoyed from it. There are obviously some Initial signs that we might be at the start of an economic recovery, but most top Economists and the IMF experts are remind us that we still face incredible challenges in that area Unemployment in the United States there were some figures that were released earlier today and around the world continues to rise even if the recovery starts the economic Effects of unemployment are going to continue for some period of time and May take a very different path and we may have a very different situation to look at it The world that emerges from this crisis Is likely to look very different from the world that preceded the crisis And it's going to have huge ramifications for the United States for all of the g8 countries including our host country Italy and it's going to have ramifications for China the other g5 invitees all of the other invitees that have been invited to the the summit come out in a couple of weeks It raises challenging questions about how international efforts in institutions such as the g8 and the IMF Will function in this new world in the next global economy? President Obama's proposal which he's formally rolling out this morning I think it is been written about in the last couple of days For revamping the federal regulation of the nation's financial markets and efforts to develop new rules to stop the phenomenon of excessive securitization of financial system and the use of derivatives that led to the current financial crisis Could result in the broadest rewrite of Financial regulation since the aftermath of the Great Depression That clearly would reshuffle responsibilities with consumers regulators creating new protections for Giant financial players that haven't really been involved before they've been off the radar like hedge funds Private equity companies under direct federal supervision So those are just some of the challenges forgive me for not giving you a quote keynote address In terms of this topic. This is not an area of this is not my forte as I explained the panel a few minutes ago But I'm here to learn as you are and to have an opportunity to interact with those who do Know something about it. I'm going to turn it over for the specific introduction to Where okay Steve Steven Schrodinger is the CSIS Scholl chair on international business. He is a former White House and USTR official. He's got expertise on the Hill and his co-chair of the gh Anticrim and terrorism group for individual Introductions of the panel and to conduct the remainder of this particular session So I'm delighted to be able to be with you to join in learning more about the preparations for the g8 summit That the formalization which will take place in a couple of weeks, but Steven at this point. I'll turn it over to you Thank you, Senator Roberts an honor to have you here today And I think you're far too modest with your wide range of experience that I think crosses so many different areas And I know Dr. Henry very much wanted to be here today Unfortunately, he was called into a meeting with the South Korean president for lunch at Blair House Which is a hard thing to refuse But we were so honored to be have someone of Senator Robb's stature that could come in and and talk about such a wide array of issues And as he noted we do face the worst global economic crisis since the Great Depression And it's having wide-ranging impacts across the world causing many to question core concepts of our economic systems and international institutions and whether we're seeing primarily green shoots as Fed chairman Brent Bernacke said or yellow weeds as neuro as neuro Robini the prominent economist said this week I think it's undeniable that the crisis has shaken some leaders key assumptions Launched efforts to rethink global structures and raises a series of critical questions for the g8 and policymakers around the world Some of these are obviously what will the next global economy look like what will replace growth driven by unsustainable u.s. Consumption and export driven economies that have thrived off of it What strategic impacts are happening as economic problems influence or fuel security and foreign policy challenges around the world? What are the impacts as the crisis ramifications flow through both existing powers such as the g8 and emerging power such as China and the developing world? How will it reshape institutions such as the g8 and the imf that are at the core of global economic efforts and Finally and most importantly to this conference as we look towards the summit in Italy What priority actions must the g8 and other nations take to tackle these problems? And as we think through these problems who really couldn't ask for a better panel or more esteemed panel in terms of addressing these issues First Tim Adams who's currently the managing director of the Lindsey Group and whom I've had the pleasure of working with in several capacities His most recent government service was as the undersecretary of the Treasury for international affairs Where he was the u.s. Governments point person on all international financial issues Ranging from exchange rate policy g7 meetings imf and World Bank issues and based on this is an interaction with colleagues around the world He's widely regarded and recognized by his key partners and counterparts in emerging markets such as China India and Brazil And has traveled extensively through Asia the Middle East in Europe Dr. Adams has served as the chief of staff the two Treasury secretaries and an international economic official the two presidents And just when you thought his range in depth across different issues couldn't get any deeper He also served as the top policy advisor on both domestic and international policy for a successful presidential campaign And beyond that has direct private sector experiences and entrepreneur fine of the g7 group So it's him as always we look forward to your thoughts and proposals across this range of efforts and Next we have we're joined by dr. Nancy bird saw who's also broken new ground in many different capacities Including launching the renowned Center for Global Development of which he's president She brings to these roles in this discussions a deep and impressive background Including serving as executive vice president of the Inter-American Development Bank the largest of the regional development banks 14 years of experience and research policy and management positions with the World Bank including director of the policy research department and Author co-author and editor of a dozen books and monographs and over 75 scholarly articles Serving on a number of prestigious boards including the overseas Development Council and a number of communities with the National Academy of Sciences Overall her insight and vice are widely sought out both nationally and internationally Including frequently by senior us and foreign officials and by many members of Congress that's seen by our recent testimony Ranging from foreign relations committee to all over so we look forward to her greatly valued and respected analysis today And finally last but not least we're honored to have IMF executive director or ego said doing with us today Since the financial crisis few if any organizations had been more at the center of efforts to confront the crisis and find new Ways for than the IMF Executive director said you will be able to give us a firsthand account of not only how the IMF use the current evolving situation But how the IMF itself is evolving and how other international institutions have to evolve rapidly to dress these new challenges But he doesn't only have experience in these international institutions But also in national governments particularly the very national government It's going to be leading the G8 in this upcoming summit from his role at the Italian Treasury Whereas director of economic and financial analysis department, and he also has deep private sector experience another entrepreneur We've got two three entrepreneurs in different ways here today as the founder of the business information group in Milan And again as a widely published expert on international economics We look forward to his thoughts, and he's also not a stranger to Washington having come here earlier to do his phd and Master's work so we welcome you back both in your current capacity as the IMF and here to CSIS we look forward to all your comments and we could go on much more at length But we really look forward to hearing their exact thoughts on the ways moving forward and and to opening up to your questions And the many experts in the audience today, so thank you very much So if that I'd like to turn to Tim to kick off the discussion Thank you Stephen for your for your introduction and a little bit of hyperbole involved in and the introduction But I'll take it Whole year round other places. I go it's a pleasure to be back here at CSIS and also to share the stage with two noted academics and policy experts Who I also happen to call dear friends So we rarely get to see each other in these kinds of circumstances, but it's a it's a pleasure and honor to be here with with two dear friends extraordinary times without question And you've been you've asked me to kind of kick the discussion off They talk a little bit about the strategic implications Or at least those that are seen Joseph Schumpeter said that history is a collection of events most of which were unintended and I would argue most of which probably Unpredicted and unforeseen so as we look at the collection of things in our box that we're worried about and we can extrapolate certain trend lines Probably the issues will be confronting five years from now We'll look very different than what we were able to describe today and the key is to have a policy apparatus Which is flexible enough malleable enough and and open enough to think about how this crisis Will morph itself into ways in which we haven't yet really began to fully appreciate That said let's let's take a crack at at some of the issues which are quite obvious and the most obvious And I know Nancy will talk about this is the world's lot poor today that was 18 months ago We've lost 50 trillion at least 50 trillion dollars worth of wealth equivalent to global GDP some of that's housing some of its equity some of it is Changes in values of quantities But as with most crisis those at the very bottom are always hurt the worst the World Bank and other Institutes as Nancy's have done a remarkable job of trying to quantify That that set back to the world's poorest the world's most vulnerable and try to put a human face to it without question Much the progress that we had seen a good portion of progress We had seen during this recent expansion the best five-year expansion in my lifetime Has taken a bit of a step back Because of this crisis and that means that those who are vulnerable most vulnerable are more vulnerable than they were before on a human level but also At a state level the fragile states that we all know too well, which which can pose the front page of the major Daily publications Pakistan Ukraine Iran other places Their fragility is only exacerbated by the depth and breadth of this crisis a crisis Which we may be out of the crisis stage, but the recovery stage could be long and painful with enormous Uncertainties so it is a world. It is poorer and more fragile and more vulnerable than it was before and it it's also Affected by the fact that the private capital flows that were so prevalent during this recent expansion Some 1.3 trillion dollars worth of private bank lending at least the corporates in emerging markets that we saw the 2005-2006-2007 That's that's that's gone Ross Perot back in the 90s talked about the great sucking sound he was talking about jobs in Mexico But in fact we have our own great sucking sound and that is capital being sucked out of so many locations that are starved of Capital in which capital can be put to work in such a highly productive manner And then I suspect that development budgets will come under stress and strain as over the coming quarters and years as We begin to dial back the stimulus the physical stimulus that is flooded the global economy and we'll be looking for savings and Unfortunately the international budgets the foreign assistance budgets are always an easy target I just look at the look at the debate that's occurred on capital just within the last three four hours on funding for the IMF It's an easy populist target to go out foreign assistance budgets And I'm truly concerned about what our foreign assistance budget will look like going forward I know the president has committed to not only maintaining but increasing and I hope that I hope that we can that we can continue doing that the second issue is This crisis probably accelerates this broad shift, which is written about so frequently over the last few years of moving from a uni Polar world to a multipolar world And I note some of the headlines that from some of the papers over the last couple of months The Sydney Sunday paper quotes that big broad headlines says end of the US era now China calls the tune President Lula Brazil President Lula said this crisis was caused by the irrational behavior of white people with blue eyes Who before the crisis appeared to know everything and now demonstrate they know nothing? And then even our own friends of the Western Club Mr. Sarkozy says the all-powerful market is finished and the good Prime Minister of the UK Gordon Brown says the Washington Consensus is dead I Disagree with that. I think it was incomplete, but I don't think it's necessarily dead But you get you get the drift the fact is there has been a rush to declare the end of Western Centered US dominated European dominated era of economic theory and thinking and Policy I think that's premature I think we still have lessons to learn but nonetheless there is calling into question and there is the rise of the so-called Beijing consensus and I would be just in Beijing last week and I heard it for the first time about the Himalayan consensus So there's lots of new consensus and I'm not I'm not dismissing any of them They all have certain unique factors and we should certainly be more sensitive to Something other than just top-line nominal economic growth by looking at environmental issues and the state of Human development But the fact is there is this view that the West has somehow stumbled stumbled badly maybe stumbled permanently and this natural shift away from the West towards The East if you will or toward developing markets. We certainly heard it from the bricks Brazil India Russia and China meeting in Russia just over the last few days There is a sense they play a glow a greater role on a global stage and certainly they will and they certainly will want Greater voice and influence and that will be an issue. I'm sure that Dr. Sadoom will discuss when he talks about the IMF The other issue is that cash is king because we're in a cash-tharved world And if you have reserves like the Chinese do of two trillion dollars or other other Asian Economies of the Japanese for example or if you're happen to be sitting on Trillions of dollars worth of wealth as they do in the Gulf that buys you enormous Influence and power especially as the West and especially the US is Increasingly dependent on imported capital and if you look at their physical physical trajectory Which is sobering and unsustainable it gives you an indication of how increasingly dependent We're going to be on the rest of the world to fund not only government but But in increasing aspects of an expanding government. I think that certainly it makes us more vulnerable to outside forces And we will have to find a way to grapple with that vulnerability The fourth issue is one in which I'm concerned about and I know the G20 has tried to address it and that is the issue of Isolationism protectionism regionalism this sense of globalization Fatigue and actually goes back to something with the kind of the Washington consensus that that open markets and greater integration was a good thing I think it I think it was I think it certainly led to the the increase in and global prosperity and the and dressing The reduction of poverty, but there is a sense certainly in this country and other places of fatigue of globalization It didn't work for everyone And it's certainly the polls over the past ten years in the US shows that there has been Reducing support lessening support for free trade and open markets And we have to address what drives those concerns and if you've been a wage earner and you've seen your wages stagnant And you've lost your health care and you've been in an industry which is which is a lost jobs the other place around the world It's certainly it's certainly not unreasonable to be fatigued with a set of trends and phenomena Which you see working against you and working against everyone, you know, I was in Detroit two weeks ago And it everyone should spend some time in Detroit these days It is a sobering place to visit and in some ways it's a microcosm of this sense that globalization has failed The US and I and there are other Detroit's around the world that certainly feel the same and let me just close by by seeing that In summation the world was more dangerous how much more dangerous because of this crisis We don't really know it was a dangerous world before the crisis It's more dangerous now teasing out the the threads of this financial crisis and impact on headlines We have yet to see a year or two or five down the road is quite difficult to do But there nonetheless the world is more dangerous place and that has implications for military budgets It has implications for the way and we way in which we conduct foreign affairs the way in which we Treat our allies the way in which we find new allies and it's the way in which we think about Institutional frameworks whether it's NATO or the IMF So again, it is a it is a more is a poorer world It is a more vulnerable world. It is a more fragile world It is a more dangerous world and those are trends in which we can have outcomes That can have profound effects on the way in which we function and again as I go back to my first point Probably in ways we in which we have not yet even begun to contemplate. Thank you Well, thank you very much Stephen. It was nice to have that introduction also a bit of hyperbole and Thank you to Tim for his nice remarks. We were talking beforehand about how We we are actually members of different parties, but I think we're both radical centrist so Why Why have a discussion of the role of the g8 or what the g8 should be thinking or saying or strategizing about on global economic issues? I think it's very obvious that there's ought to be a discussion of strategic and military problems of non proliferation at the g8 upcoming g8 summit I don't think it's as obvious anymore because we have a g20 That There should be a discussion of global economic issues. I think there should be But I think that it is time for the g8 as a group and in particular for the US as still the single largest Economic as well as military power to bring some sense of direction and vision not just for this g8 meeting But to help the Canadians in thinking about the next g8 meeting a year from now And I think two messages that seem Permanent in this global economy Our first we need much more focus and much more Education and information for citizens of the g8 about how important a multilateral approach is We need to strengthen the political support That particularly for the IMF and the multilateral development banks, but also for the United Nations in certain roles like peacekeeping Which is related to economic security in so many countries around the world and second We need to retain the role that the g8 began to assume now maybe 10 years ago in focusing on the problems of people who aren't represented either at the g8 or the g20 meetings and Those include the people in the poorest countries But I also would say that the poor and that very fragile and vulnerable Incipient middle class in Many countries that we don't think of anymore as low income. I'm talking about outside sub-saharan Africa Peru Mexico, Morocco, Egypt. I could go on and on Thailand even So those are my two issues and they're of course interrelated Multilateralism and what about the world's poor particularly in the poorest countries, but also in middle-income countries So I'd like to say a little bit about background and then resources and then reform of the IFIs So on background This is repeating a little bit of the points that Tim made, but I think it's very important to keep in mind that Up and up through 2007 for about 15 years There was tremendous progress across the developing world and I am going to be focusing on the developing world I think that's what the organizers probably wanted me to do both in terms of economic growth and in terms of good policy and good government the Fundamentals on macroeconomic policy and also the fundamentals on having accountable more representative more democratic government In Latin America we saw for the first time ever at least in that I can remember or no steady Not exciting economic growth, but steady economic growth for five six seven years That really was making a difference combined with much better policy in most countries much better policy setting in Sub-Saharan Africa Average economic growth was six percent a year Since about 2002 and it was faster than that in the 23 democracies There were three democracies in Sub-Saharan Africa 15 or 20 years ago now there are 23 so we saw this great progress and it was making a difference everyone knows that Poverty wasn't falling fast enough But I've been looking at the sort of question of is there a new middle class emerging and in many of these Countries a new middle class has been emerging Not the terribly poor but people at five to ten dollars a day for income and they are they are the potential bulwark of medium-term sustainable good politics and sensible economics So the crisis is not just a crisis in arithmetic terms about people losing their Jobs and their income. It's also a crisis in sense of confidence about what works and that's the risks of the idea of Capitalism being deep-sixed let's say or of market a market orientation and good government being deep six and we see that in the trade collapse around the world, which is dramatic And dramatic in terms of lost jobs We see it in the risks in remittances falling in many vulnerable countries Central America in particular And you know remittances are clearly the most efficient form of transfer From rich world to poor world in terms of efficiency and helping people Live better lives, but I think the biggest issue that is only now beginning to unfold At both the macro and micro level is the risk of huge fiscal shortfalls in Many developing countries that cannot be made up quickly enough without a big multilateral push in Africa already Has lost over 1% of GDP equivalent just in trade taxes so you know That means that countries can't run anything close to The stimulus packages or counter-cyclical policy. They don't have safety nets many of them And even if they did they don't wouldn't have the fiscal resources to implement them And we're talking about very basic the equivalent of food stamps just doesn't exist in most developing countries There's nothing like the automatic stabilizers We have here and nothing like the ability because of deep financial markets to borrow in order to Use public resources to to generate Stimulus so the risks are very high so what should be done? Let me say a word about resources and then in the spirit of multilateralism reform of the IFIs on the resources I think the the Obama administration really did a great thing in going to the G20 summit in London and Putting on the table. We have to have a major increase in the ability of the IMF to Transfer resources to help developing countries and emerging markets cope with the crisis I Put out a number one trillion in the fall at a time when it seemed you know people said it's way too much but in fact it isn't too much and in part because of the Endorsement and the push from the G20 summit. We're getting close to one trillion especially through the IMF there ought to be a little bit more push on What the US Treasury staff calls sweating the capital at the multilateral banks? That is more effective use of the capital there There ought to be much more thinking now about replenishments Particularly at the Asian Development Bank and possibly at the Inter-American Development Bank because these banks in trying to respond now to the some of the needs of their big borrowers are robbing the future Particularly to 2011 and maybe even latter part of 2010 in the in the expectation that they'll have more headroom through Capital replenishments that's the sort of issue that I hope at the G8 summit will be addressed more clearly and then of course there's the issue at the IMF of the gold and Moving on and getting this gold sold and maximizing the amount of the subsequent resources that can be used for highly concessional even grant transfers to the poorest countries and That requires, you know a push Especially in the US because we need congressional Okay, to do that Now let me go to the say a little one more word on bilateral aid It's very difficult because Italy is in an embarrassing position Can't really take leadership as the host of the summit because it has taken a big it has Cut its own bilateral aid budget substantially I think the US is not in a great position either because we haven't seen any appointments in terms of who will take leadership in the State Department on Having a strategy for this third leg of our foreign policy stool the three legs being defense diplomacy and development But we really don't see yet. What is the strategic direction? Because we don't have the leadership yet at the State Department or outside the State Department on These issues leadership at the highest level with political heft is what I'd like to see so the US the biggest country and Italy the host country are not in a great position I am a little concerned that there will be a Restatement of the announcement. We will try to honor our aid commitments. I think that only breeds innocent cynicism I would urge, you know Restate the commitments for 2010 where there's a lot of vulnerability in developing countries particularly amongst the poor Even if they're lower numbers Be clear and transparent so that the world and civil society and development advocates can monitor that commitment and I I would search for Some second second leg on the aid side and emphasis probably on transparency on clarity about what these numbers are and an emphasis on Coordination and reform of the system, which is extraordinarily wasteful So, you know, I would applaud anything that comes particularly from the US on urging all of the Bilateral aid donors to push much harder on reducing the waste an example because the US the White House is apparently talking about food Security is the fact that the US is in the embarrassing position still of transferring doing food aid primarily in kind That would be a great thing to bring to the G8 summit if the Obama administration could It would be very tough because the Bush administration tried and got really kicked back on the hill But at least to start on some of those reform issues If I have another minute, have I taken too long? So that was resources then in the spirit of multilateralism. I think the G8 Leaders could be more clear even than they were at the G20 summit on next steps It reform of the governance of the IMF in the World Bank And I would look for a deal particularly between the US and the Europeans that says the US gives up its lock hold on Appointing the next president of the World Bank and ensures that there will be a system that de facto as well as de jure is open transparent and Meritocratic without regard to nationality The US should consider Looking for a way to give up the crude form of veto It has at the IMF. We're on major decisions 85% of the votes are needed and the US has more than 15% It could still retain a veto in in the form actually Dominique Strauss-Kahn the managing director Mentioned this at a conference that The Center for Global Development cosponsored with CICE that perhaps there could be an arrangement where you could abstain So if there were 85% of those voting that would be sufficient I think some some of these inside baseball ideas Could be reframed and put on the table in a way that would get us moving in the case of Europe Europe could Work amongst the members with Italy's leadership possibly to reduce the Number of board members many of you will know that at the IMF Europe has one out of three eight out of eight board eight or nine eight of 24 Board members and both the Europeans and the US Could start thinking about particularly for selection of the heads of the banks having a double majority System which the Europeans are familiar with where there would need to be a majority of the weighted votes In the traditional sense, but also a majority of countries The latter would give small low-income countries an opportunity to do Coalition building and have some sense of influence in the way These heads are selected which in turn would make them more legitimate and more effective Let me just end by saying in this the g8 Probably has to say something But it's clear there won't be much they can say politically about climate change Given that we are the costs of climate change in the developing world are already substantial and it's absolutely terrifying What the implications will be for my fragile middle class and the poor That would be associated with the amount of climate change implied even with What's on the table in terms of legislation in this in the US? So we are a long way from leadership in Managing a problem that is going to be disastrous Unfolding gradually over the next 10 or 20 years not 80 years only next 10 years for the world's poor So back to where I started we need a little bit more vision a lot more vision as A sort of repeated agenda at this g8 meeting and any subsequent g8 meetings if the club continues and I would focus on Generating more understanding of the need for Multilateralism if we are to retain the benefits of a globally integrated economy and Continuing focus in the tradition started and enhanced say at Glen Eagles on the sense the logic of the world's richest countries and most powerful Focusing on the problems of the world's poorest people. Thank you very much Thank you, Dr. Versa. I'll take you to director said in Thank you, and I wanted to start by thanking the organizer of this meeting My obvious qualification to be part of the panel at that. I'm Italian I'm a good friend's some of the panelists and Oh, yes, and I'm known for having eccentric views That Brings me to very important points a disclaimer disclaimer I formally have to disclaim that the assessment of the viewers the proposal that I'm going to To present to you are not necessarily Reflecting the views of the IMF on my authority as a matter of fact, I will go one step further and say they definitely represent the view of my Mostly my eccentric somebody accused me of Excessive pessimist views on the the status and the prospect of the economy, but that is not what I would like to make a remarks on My remarks will be on the institutional aspect Of the global governance and obviously the focus will be on the IMF to the extent that I know something about that It's just the IMF and Then but I also would like to submit that some kind of ideas on this Some of some aspect of these global governance There have been a number numerous victims of these global crisis Included among the victims a number are very fashionable, but unsound notions theories these theories Pertaining to the alleged working of the global economy You might might not still remember the so-called new paradigm Or for instance the notion of decoupling the fact that the Activities of the country the economic activities of the countries advanced countries Could be the couple by the emerging markets economies and of course Amongst these discarded ideas that is also the idea very fashionable particularly Washington until recently of the totally relevance of the IMF The The reality is that Totally unrewarding perhaps, but the IMF has been trusted again at the center of the scene and it's very interesting to Evaluate that how that happened and why that happened you certainly Follow on these topics the recent evolution just to give you an idea how much The IMF is perceived to matter now The financial resource of the institution has been triple The G20 summit in London in early April Decided some way or the other to put at the disposal of the IMF One trillion dollar one trillion dollar. It's a lot of money The mandate of the IMF has been broadened to the areas, which were not the original core including some kind of coordination about the reform of the rules of the financial markets And even on one of the core roles of the funds, which is is called surveillance The funds have received much tougher and much more ambitious responsibilities Including the development of a so-called early warning system, which is supposed to anticipate and prevent the Recurrence of crisis such as the one that we are going through And just recently just a few days ago at the finance Minister meeting of the G8 in Italy The IMF has received the latest assignment, which is to develop so-called exit strategies Namely the policy which are supposed once we will be over this acute phase of the crisis To steer the global economy towards a normal path So clearly, you know, these are some but clear example of the fact that the IMF is back in business with the vengeance now Why that happened? because after all the so-called irrelevance of the IMF was based on some very clear Claims very clear statements They were saying that the IMF was lacking legitimacy It was just dominated by the advanced countries was not representative of The global the the international community and certainly the role of the so-called emerging markets were not sufficiently represented and also it was claimed that the Governance structure of the IMF was not adequate to allow the institution to discharge responsibility and Therefore the conclusion was that the organization was irrelevant was peripheral. It was ineffective Now the reality is just proof that that was not so So why? well Logically, if you adopt a very French Cartesian logic, which is not my my strength You could say that either the allegation were not true or the allegation were correct, but they were irrelevant But that is not my position my position that in reality some of the allegation were true The conclusions were not sound and the what's happened to basically two two factors one is that Very surprising particularly for bureaucracy and an international bureaucracy at that The IMF has been able to display a remarkable degree of adaptations internal adaptations Didn't have to wait for political leadership or pressure to undertake a number of basic internal changes which Mostly were not purely bureaucratic changes but had an immediate and major impact on the way the funds is Conducting his business one of the things. I just wanted to mention is that in the last few months The IMF has a top adopted a total new array of lending kids these are Financial facilities to support countries which need financial assistance And they were not able for whatever reason or were not willing to Go to the funds for that assistance for that type of assistance so the funds internally decided to change it that and It's unfortunate that those facilities has been hugely successful I'm saying this is unfortunate because it's a clear demonstration how much needed that type of Financial assistance is necessary So one reason why the IMF has been able to go back to the center has been this Intendant ability to change or which of course as Myself as a member of the board take absolutely no credit, but it is a fact The second aspect which perhaps is even more interesting in the context of our discussion Is that some of the allegation of the IMF lacking political legitimacy were true But how did you find that well by accident? What happened was that the G20? This is broader group, which to a very large extent has superseded DGA the G8 had provided the institution with that type of political legitimacy Which allowed all these kind of things that I mentioned to you It's inconceivable that an international organization received one trillion dollar in resources without the type of political support and Oversight that somebody and in this case the G20 has provided So that was not exactly what it was planet, but that is the reality what it had so My contention is that one of the basic reason why the IMF is back in business at the center of The efforts by the international community to handle the crisis has been exactly this kind of political legitimacy that he has received now G20 has done that G20 as I just mentioned To a very large extent a superseded the traditional role of the G8 What's next it's very difficult to go back It's very difficult for instance to imagine that even once the crisis is over The countries that have been decided to get together in this grouping of G20 plus will decide that To eliminate themselves Governments bureaucracy usually do not commit society So the notion which you could have be an alternative path of Gradually enlarging the G7 G8 G14 and something like that that by large it's out of the question Which of attention it doesn't mean that there is no role for the G8 Or that there is no role for a G8 plus they will continue to do But it's in a different way, and it's a different framework in my personal opinion there is a Still very much a need for the G8 or even preferably a G7 as a kind of Conquers as a kind of group of homogeneous countries We share pretty much the same type of degree of economic development and a lot of both Political and economic value. So there is to my My mind at least the need for maintaining G8 in that type of role as There is again my mind They need to use the the notion of G8 plus What in Europe what we call Variable geometry arrangement which is an approach which has been used very effectively in For many decades in the construction of the European community The the fact that Depending on the issues we are discussing The components of the membership of the group could vary very much So if we discuss energy there could be a certain Number of G with certain Representation which might be different if we discuss other issues. Okay, so there is a role for that But let's go back to the IMF and the real the governance of the global economy now we are in the process of Discussing with the objective of reaching an agreement very soon by the by the beginning of 2011 we have to accomplish a major reform of the IMF The reforms that the the leaders of the G20 has indicated that they would like to see happen are a New redistribution of quarters. I presume you're familiar with the notion of the quarters within the IMF Which is the share of the capital that which determined the the the role and the power At the board and at the other organic organs of the IMF so The reforms have to include that The reforms should include most likely some kind of Sleaming down of the chairs at the board and has already been mentioned perhaps a Reduction on the number of the chairs of the European countries in the board and also that is defined an aspect very important That is also has to be some kind of reforms of the governing organs on the IMF We are at the very beginning of this process although the time frame is very tight But we are at the very beginning of this process and on this aspect of the Internal organs of the IMF that has been a number of proposals some of them have suggested the opportunity of Transforming what it is now a council of finance minister, which is called IMC which represent the same Countries which are represented at the board this Political oversight counts is right now as only advisory power and Because of that the influence on the matters of the IMF are relatively limited and as I say one of the Essential aspect of a prominent role of the IMF is exactly to maintain this very strong Political legitimacy and oversight so one proposal has been to transform the role of this advisory council of minister into a decision-making body Which is a very interesting proposal because personally I don't think the IMF could Continue to occupy that type of role without that type of political legitimacy and political oversight now This kind of internal organ in my opinion goes in the right direction But it's not sufficient and very briefly without getting into many details I think so that there are some merits to take this What counsel as is called and not to utilize as one of the internal organs of the IMF? but to pull this council of minister as above the IMF and If you duplicate that then you have one council, which is the ultimate political body Oversign IMF the World Bank and the stability financial board So you come very close to what is for the first time a truly a truly global economic comes now Somebody could ask it well why that role has to be assigned to this type of council? And why cannot be taken by the G20 for example? But the problem the G20 has a number of very serious problems. First of all, it's a selective group By definition any G is a selective group The G20 is less selective than the G8, but it's still selected a Council like the board of the IMF now, which is based not on the principle of one country one membership but Constituency has the huge advantage of being truly universal because every single country which is member of IMF 185 countries through this Structure of a constituency is represented at the board or at the council huge advantage Second thing the G20 Is they are not really clear what are the criteria for selecting the individual countries which Which are part of the G20 Because genetically you can say yes We have brought it up. What was a club of the advanced countries and now that are emerging market as well But there are some countries which are not part of the G20 and probably they should For example, Spain is not officially part of the G20 Argentina it is So it's not only it's the it's a these homogeneous group But the criteria for Memberships in G20 are not Particularly rational in a certain sense and there are other problems the G20 has been very effective Both at the level of of minister and at the level of the head of governments But that is not a permanent body I mean they meet regularly, but that is not the same things are having a permanent body with a permanent structure and Of course, they could create a permanent structure, but why should they do that? They could find the type of permanent structure both in terms of the secretariat or in the terms of Research and a study department which the IMF and the World Bank already had They already had that so you know there are a lot of advantages But anyway, regardless of what is going to be the structure. I can think that with a lot of confidence I can make a projection that we will continue to discuss this issue for some time Thank you for that excellent overview of all the challenges that we see in many of these international Institutions going forward and I think before we some of our panelists that we'd hope they may be able to stay a little bit Longer so we can take a couple of questions And I'm sure we'll be able to talk about some of the structural issues of the g8 But just quickly all three of you have mentioned the problem of fragile states or fragile populations and how we deal with them And what are the specific countries of regions or populations you would highlight to the g8? And what specifically do you think they should attack due to address these in the short term? well just In some ways this is a bit frustrating because we've seen the debate on the hill about IMF funding and Accusations about bailing out certain places, but if you look at where the IMF is provided financial assistance during this crisis I would argue it's the places in which we have an enormous national security interest Pakistan Ukraine the countries of Central Eastern Europe in which we're Where the outcome their freedom in their prosperity the outcome of the long-fought and one cold war Mexico obviously have an enormous national security and economic interest in the stability In the financial viability of viability of Mexico Colombia the list goes on the fund is actually helped and supported and provide either direct assistance or precautionary Contingent line of credit to countries in which we We indicate are incredibly important to us And so this idea that somehow Providing assistance the IMF is supporting variety of rogue states and countries that don't deserve it don't need to be bailed out It is in our interest to have a stout a stable and viable Global financial and economic system and the countries that have been supported are exactly the ones that ought to be supported And we should be more supportive of what the IMF is trying to do I I agree completely with him in fact I quoted him in the congressional testimony that you mentioned Stephen on this security issue I would you know add two things one is in terms of places the eastern Horn of Africa in terms of concept I would say That both for the US and for the particularly for the US and for the G8 as a group We still don't really have an Adequate theory or we don't have early warning signals Embedded in the way we think about Security issues in the more than 50 states around the world Which failed to meet two of the three or four criteria that guarantee you have stability Those criteria being legit emissy Ability to maintain physical security in your own territory those sorts of things the center did a report that was Co-chaired by several former Congressional members some people up now in the White House were members and made this point that Development is about prevention as well as managing the crisis, but obviously in the case of the US I have to repeat Pakistan. I mean it's just a very good example where we didn't have a strategy During the Bush administration and now we have a tactic Emerging from the Obama administration, which is we'll spend more money on economic development but believe me the amount of resources from the banks including the World Bank lost wasted feeding patronage and corruption on Health and education in Pakistan since 1990 is very high So you need not just the rhetoric you need strategic thinking Yes, thank you Usually the last speaker has a hard time because all the good points are already been covered My perspective on the fragile style is somewhat different Of course, there are fragile styles has been mentioned Pakistan and so on so forth But I wanted to draw your attention to another dimension of this If I may borrow a notion from this Sociological points of view that are the new poor as a result of this recession There are new fragile States countries that you might not have considered and a lot of them are in Europe a lot of them are so-called transitional Countries which were doing very well up to the crisis and now Exactly for the same reason that they were doing so well They are suffering because those trends have been put into reverse team Mentioned the flow of capital export and something like that So I just wanted to draw your attention that there is a huge swat of countries in Europe in Eastern Europe going from the Baltic to the Balkans and Those countries are under tremendous pressures. They are financial economic pressures And if the problems are not handled in the proper way I would not be surprised if there would be some very significant repercussion even for domestic stability or for Security issue I'd like to turn it over to some questions. How about right in the front? Yes, my name is Nancy Alexander with the Hynrick Bowl Foundation I believe that yesterday when the War supplemental passed with the IMF money Chairman Barney Frank's Call or legislation language on having four billion dollars in Proceeds from the gold sales for low-income countries was was also passed and What's often not mentioned is When there's discussion of tripling the resources of the IMF Is the fact that depending on how you count that tripling only? 2.5 to 5% of that amount is for low-income countries of which there are 70 to 80 and Growing and so this is connected to the chairman's comment I'd like to know How important if you think it is important that this four billion in proceeds for specifically low-income countries Be discussed at the G8 summit and there be a call for general agreement that this money should be supported these proceeds supported and in relation to that The IMF is widely viewed as having a significant bias towards contractionary policy is one reason for Some 50 members of the house you know raising questions about additional resources for the institution and I wonder if you think that are concerned about not only the contractionary bias of the IMF but also the push on the IMF for exit strategy Is could exacerbate that That contractionary bias I'd appreciate your comments on both those issues. Mr. Sadeen. Do you want to start off with the second part of that question? If I start there and never finish Well IMF traditionally was standing for is mostly fiscal Unfortunately, it's no longer the case. That has been One aspect of the radical changes of the organization as a matter of fact that during this crisis The IMF has taken the leadership for pushing advanced countries to expand fiscal support measure and they came to basically Indicated that those con those countries that are in a position to do so Devoted 2% of GDP on fiscal measure, which by at least some countries major countries. It's a huge changes in this particular aspect the IMF is leading The rest of the international community in fiscal stimulus. That's the first observation. I would say the second observation is that I Would like to correct the impression that the IMF is pushing Perhaps prematurely for the exit strategy. We did not do that G20 and particularly G8 ask us To take a look at that and among among the exit strategy That is also the need to think about it how we are going to absorb the excessive fiscal Expansion monetary expansion that is necessary to do that But to say that the IMF is following in this crisis is traditional policy of imposing heavy fiscal constraints, which Could have the impact at least in the short term To make a best situation worse that I don't think is is not accurate if anything just One last observation this amount of money, which was mentioned the four billion dollar That should not give you the The idea that that is the amount of the resources That the IMF has put at the disposal of Emerging or low-income countries The IMF can use all of these resources To assist Countries that I needed We are doing that Until recently there was some kind of very strong Resistance particularly from emerging countries to use the financial resources of the of the funds Because they were afraid of the so-called stigma notion the fact that the fact itself that Going to the IMF was a bad indication of financial problems something like that And that's exactly reason why we've changed our lending policies and as I mentioned Before with the considerable success if there are more than a dozen countries 15 countries something like that which have Evailed themselves with that type of facility. Thank you Bravo on what? Dr. Students that I would just argue again on the exit strategy getting the mix between fiscal monetary policy Getting it right internally is incredibly important, but coordinating across various other Economic actors is really important because if you think about central banks I tend to think of central banks is either in two camps Stoics or Epicureans and The ECB is a stoic. They have a single mandate, which is price stability. We're Epicurean We we don't want to feel the pain We have a dual mandate how we make Decisions between us on how quickly we reverse this monetary stimulus whether it's raising rates or adjusting our balance sheets Has profound implications for capital sloshing back and forth, which means greater volatility in exchange rate markets Which has its own set of challenges so? Coordinating the exit strategy not advocating an exit strategy near term, but coordinating Advocating a coordination among the players and within countries between fiscal monetary policy I think is is is absolutely prudent exactly what the IMF should be doing I think we have time for maybe two more questions I'd like to take them at the same time in order To save time since our panelists have gracious to stay over there a lot of time here today I could take the gentleman in the middle and then the gentleman right there Okay, I'm Ira Strauss. I'm with the Committee on Eastern Europe and Russian NATO, but that has nothing to do with economic questions I'd like to ask about the governance issues and I would almost call it a new Washington consensus Which Nancy birds all represented the media consensus the rhetoric consensus of the West is in decline and it needs to have its role reduced in these institutions and In a sense, it's a victory for the anti g8 protesters over the years the g8 has to go Well in a sense what's being said is half gone When I read the statistics coming out of the IMF and I'm glad we have a representative here I don't see that story borne out at all and I'm afraid mr. Strauss Kuhn repeats the story But I don't see the statistics support him and I'd like to ask about this Statistics I see say the OECD, which is what the G7 really represents is still 77% of the world economy Or 55% in pf PPP terms And I shouldn't say still because that's as much as it's ever been when I last look at those statistics When America was supposedly in decline in the 1980s in Germany and Japan were taking over the world. It was 60 something percent Where's the decline? Where's the supposed economic reason for making all these changes? There can be other arguments to be sure Justice or injustice, but if we have reasonably well functioning institutions more effective than the multipolar UN system Is it very wise to be? Undermining their functioning in the name of a reality that doesn't exist Thank you. Thank you. I'm Steven Canada with the US Council for International Business and Going beyond the discussion of financial fixes and Governance and regulatory reform looking down the pike I think one of the speakers said that the GA could be a caucus well to what extent is there any thinking about The need for a better global growth model once we get through this financial mess Namely that the rest of the world cannot be an export-led economy and the US be a consumption Import-led economy. How does one get global balances that really work? Do we need a new Keynes in white plan of something of this nature? Is there any thinking going on in the IMF and where is the talk or Thought in the G8 on an informal basis as to how we get these global balances to really work effectively Tim I know you've been thinking a lot about that second question. Do you want to start off on that and then we can Sure, I completely agree with you I think if you look at the G20 discussion that occurred in Washington and in London And maybe even what's going to occur in Pittsburgh There is not enough attention paid to What is going to be the engine of growth going forward because we cannot go back to the to the The trend of the past pick whatever picked the last ten years or in the last five years Where the US consumer is the consumer of last resort the US consumers broke And it's going to be broke for a long time. We are bankrupt, especially the bottom half of the country and And and we look we live beyond our means we did so because we had access to cheap and abundant credit and Now we have a wealth loss in the US of close to 20 trillion dollars which affects consumption at the top of the pyramid and we have Credit constraints at the bottom of the pyramid and those at the bottom of the pyramid are also the first to be laid off and the last To be rehired and if they were still having a job their wages are flat The US consumer is not going to drive growth going forward as it has here She has in the past expansion in the rest of the world Some are starting to sober to that point not enough and I agree with you, sir We need to have a discussion about where growth is going to come from and the surplus countries are going to have to Spin more consume more at home and buy more of our goods or somewhere somewhere else is going to have to take up the slack And it's not obvious where that's going to occur But if you like to comment on that and also on whether the G7 or OECD can still represent the core group of the US Or the global economy I know one thing that George Kennan has said is that you I believe was George Kennedy that the more people you add to a discussion the Exponentially harder it gets to reach a substantive agreement. So with that and your thoughts on the architecture going forward I was hoping the team was taking the question of roving a presentation of Advanced countries and particularly European countries and I was going to take the second one Feel free to adjust both I Agree, I'm it's not clear to me that advanced countries are usually Overrepresented I do not agree that European countries are over represented Just to give an example if you go to the GDP United States will have the right to have something like 20 22% Shared in the MIMF and they graciously Agree to limit themselves to 17% now, of course the fact that it's enough 15% to have a veto power There's something to do with that But that is something else if you really go to see what is the weight of the European countries in the global Economy no matter how you measure you come you do not come with the conclusion that That one to 30% to 3% that it's over represented But we understand that there are other consideration not purely economic consideration, and we are not opposed I mean as a representative of the European group of countries We are not opposed of these kinds of shifts, but has to be put in the proper context now The question that I really like it is that the exit strategy, and I'm Unfortunately, I have to disappoint the gentleman because I cannot give you the answer of course we do have the answer But I cannot give you the answer because that is exactly what have just been commissioned to come up And it would not be very smart The day after they ask us to look at that to say here we have the answer Regardless if whether or not the answer is a good or is better we have you know to Valorize it any better, but one things I can tell you the growth model of The global economy after the crisis is exactly one of the topics that they have met Has been commissioned to think We are developing something like that Of course in order to come with The answer you have to start that it's not necessarily Intellectually, but usually it's very useful to start with a very good notion of what's going to be the framework What's going to be the economic environment? That you wanted to address And that is again, it's not the official IMF forecast outlook. It's my own personal Assessment and expectation In one nutshell if somebody asked me what is going to be the future of the global economy after the crisis my answer is that it's going to be a a bathtub Actually a Victorian bathtub and the reason for that, you know economies are found to give Recession and recovery a letter according to the shape of the profile of the of the Development of the of the economy V shape u shape f shape something the shape that I like is exactly this Victorian bathtub because two two two factors This loop of one side when you enter the recession the decline is very steep When you get out of that when we eventually will get out of the of the recession This slope of the recovery will be very very very very mild very modest But that's not at all the other peculiarity of this peculiar shape of a Victorian bath up is that the two sides of the bath They are not equal Meaning that even when we will be over this recession Not necessarily will go back to the same level That we had experienced before and if you ask me what is the level represent? Well everything it could represent the rate of growth it will present the level of wealth It could represent in a number of things but the basic notion the basic expectation that I have is that The future of the global economy after the recession is going to be very different from what we experienced before I don't think we could pick a better Topic to end this on with coining a new phrase in a new term after all the talk about L shape and w shape recessions to a Victorian bathtub shape recessions, so I applaud you on your originality And I hope you'll join me in thanking the panelists and welcoming Eric Peterson up for some final closing remarks on the conference Ladies and gentlemen it falls on me simply to thank you for coming today I've been tasked originally with coming up with some cross-cutting observations Let me simply offer very very quickly of four what strikes me is that as we watch this G8 summit unfold We need to be thinking about a range of unknowns of wild cards many of which have been discussed here today Iran North Korea future trajectories including VTV Victorian bathtub trajectory is going forward Senator Rob shared with us his very considered view on the broader complexities that we face going forward The urgency of the challenges that we face whether on the proliferation and security side or the economic and finance side We're underlined by our participants one time after the next and then what struck me is very significant Were linkages with other processes in the case of nuclear non-proliferation issues with the impending review We have these structures and procedures of the IMF the World Bank Group the broader regional Development Bank Community and finally climate change was mentioned here the linkages between global warming and of course the upcoming Copenhagen meeting at the end of the year We need to lace that in with the BRIC summit in Russia bilateral talks that have occurred between India and Pakistan We need to connect to the process as Nancy bird sauce suggested of those not represented G2 G20 G whatever the operative question is what is the institutional base of proceeding? So with those very Telescoped thoughts. Let me thank once again the co-sponsors of this event First and foremost the Embassy of Italy and then of course the diplomatic courier on a rolled We've been so delighted to work with you on this And I'd like to acknowledge my colleague Steven Schrager who has done an absolute great job in putting this together He and a superbly capable team have been a very significant Input in the success that this event has been so I'd like to thank him and the CSIS folks and the other folks the team So have made all this possible including of course the Embassy and the diplomatic courier So thank you very much ladies and gentlemen