This post will be broken into three major parts: the G20 London summit, the NATO address, and North Korea.
G20
It was an economic summit, so it stands to reason that the only real issue was the global recession. The French and Germans beforehand had let it be known that they wanted to focus on really strict international oversight. This shouldn't come as any surprise. This two countries have the most pull in the European Union. The Germans are really big fans of regulation and have really suffered the least of all of the European countries (of the G20 leaders, it is arguable that they and Brazil are the only ones who may actually see a turn out of the red really soon). It is in their best interest to not dump money into the global economy, opting instead to be good stewards of everyone else's mess. Sarkozy just runs left when he gets scared.
Other little controversies: China keeps yapping about going off the American dollar standard. They'll shut up if things turn around; it's just posturing. But if things keep heading this way the massive loans we have with China will be called in, and America may be in for a world of hurt. The Londoners protested, but I heard an interesting perspective on the protest. One onlooker said it looked like every sign said something different. Were this president Bush, I can guarantee it'd be all "Fuck Bush" signs. The far left movement suffers from a major weakness. Its a massive coalition of a whole lot of special interests. That's why people were so worried with Obama's naivety. He has a lot of special interests to stand up to for a guy with so little experience doing so.
- US$500 billion for the IMF to aid struggling economies,
- US$250 billion to boost world trade,
- US$250 billion for a new IMF overdraft facility,
- US$100 billion to assist international development banks in lending to poor countries.
NATO
It's the sixtieth anniversary of NATO. Anders Fogh Rasmussen is the new Secretary General. He was prime minister of Denmark. Well, he's actually more of a cog for the United States. He leans left socially, but tugs the foreign policy line of America, so I guess things could be worse. But I fear that's what keeps NATO from really being effective. There's no political dynamism or compromise.
Back to the accomplishments (because I'm not covering Obama's fucking speeches). The only thing people really cared about here was the war in Afghanistan, and as I expected, Europe was willing to say they were willing to help, but anything substantial remains to be seen. It won't be coming. America has committed another 30.000 troops and assured everyone else in the world community that they are just looking for emotional support.
North Korea
I have done enough research on the six party talks. I may give you a run down later. I need to read a few more articles. But what I can gather is that this is not a big deal and not something we need to take lightly. The problem is not the missile and not the potential for it to hit America. Those are astonomically improbable if you take them to the first imaginable worst cases. The problem is much more indirect. If North Korea postures itself to be a nuclear power three things will happen. Near Eastern/ North African countries will have a legitimate supplier of information that can really escalate major crises around the world. Japan will preemptively attack North Korea. China will feel the need to step between the two countries in the second point. The first point is the most serious. The second will encourage individual vigilanism to fuel the first's fire. The third will send a political rift through the Far East and jeopardize some really important financial ties.
Dear World.
Don't provoke giants. Don't tell dirty secrets.
Matt
