• The Heritage Network
    • Resize:
    • A
    • A
    • A
  • Donate
  • America Declines To Lead

    20 people with very different backgrounds are unlikely to reach consensus on anything substantial. To forge such a consensus requires leadership. This week’s G-20 meetings produced nothing of substance, which is no surprise because the United States did not lead.

    First, let’s dispense with the idea that America can’t lead. The American economy is more than one-third larger than the second- and third-largest, China’s and Japan’s, combined. The dollar is the world’s currency. When they get nervous, central bankers all over the globe buy U.S. Treasuries, no matter how low the yield is. America, and only America, can lead.

    But we didn’t and we haven’t. Our last G-20 initiative, to fight government intervention in currency markets, went nowhere. One reason it went nowhere was suspicion that the real American goal was not to uphold the principle of open competition but rather to devalue the dollar. This suspicion turned into open accusation when the Federal Reserve moved to dump yet more dollars into the international system.

    So the U.S. switched from exchange rates to demanding limits on trade imbalances, as measured by the current account. This at least was mentioned by the G-20, but not a single action was taken by the group or any individual member. Nor should action be expected. Again, a key reason is lack of American leadership.

    Global imbalances stem first from imbalances in the U.S., as by far the largest economy. We haven’t saved enough. The economic crisis spurred ordinary Americans into saving, but the federal government immediately spent more to make up for it. Efforts to limit global imbalances run headlong into huge American budget deficits and extremely loose money that are explicitly intended to increase the American demand that is the single biggest factor in imbalances in the first place.

    Statists in the U.S. cling to the argument that, someday, huge budget deficits and wildly loose money will bring unemployment down. Even if you think the jury’s still out on that one, the verdict has come in another count: America has chosen to put aside its mantle of global economic leader.

    To add insult to injury, the U.S. apparently can’t even lead in a bilateral context. The anticipated trade agreement with South Korea, known as KORUS, didn’t materialize either.  KORUS would have been a signal to the world that America can move forward on trade. But either President Obama doesn’t want to lead or he’s so politically dependent on protectionists at home that he can’t. In any case, vague statements out of Seoul don’t obscure the clear picture of self-inflicted American weakness.

    Posted in International [slideshow_deploy]

    6 Responses to America Declines To Lead

    1. Glenn T, Corona CA says:

      America can and will lead, but America leading (as a nation) requires a point man capable of leading. Barack Obama is manifestly incapable.

    2. Gene, Cuba, MO USA says:

      There are a number of reasons for the fact that we 'didn't' lead.

      Obama is not a leader. He is an orator.

      The others present, all deemed leaders by those who sent them, are not as easily swayed by oratory. The want logical policies with proven results. What was presented to them was profligate US spending with yet another $600 billion dollars being printed by Bernanke. In the increasingly sober rest of the world that's viewed as a foolish policy.

      Can America lead again? I think so but not with Obama. His 15 minutes of fame are over.

      Obama just got "shellacked" in the midterm elections. As such, he is viewed as a diminished leader by the others, having been rejected by the US electorate, and likely to have less success in putting any new policies forward at home.

    3. Mike R. Las Vegas, N says:

      The only thing that Obama has shown that he can lead is an effective election campaign…and those days are limited too.

    4. Pingback: Morning Bell: A Failing Agenda Fails | The Foundry: Conservative Policy News.

    5. Pingback: Obama = A True Trifecta of Failure. « The Radio Patriot

    6. Mike H, Beijing, Chi says:

      I sympathize with your views, Dr. Scissors. Which is why I am at pains to understand why the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission's recently-published annual report places such a strong emphasis on the role of the RMB's value in the U.S. trade deficit. It even goes so far as to quantify the number of U.S. jobs lost as a result of China's currency manipulation (around 600,000 to 1.4 million depending on whether you accept Fred Bergsten's or Paul Krugman's estimates). I understand you are a member of this Commission; what are your views on its findings? Your testimony is widely quoted elsewhere in the report, but not in the crucial section dealing with the impact of RMB valuation.

    Comments are subject to approval and moderation. We remind everyone that The Heritage Foundation promotes a civil society where ideas and debate flourish. Please be respectful of each other and the subjects of any criticism. While we may not always agree on policy, we should all agree that being appropriately informed is everyone's intention visiting this site. Profanity, lewdness, personal attacks, and other forms of incivility will not be tolerated. Please keep your thoughts brief and avoid ALL CAPS. While we respect your first amendment rights, we are obligated to our readers to maintain these standards. Thanks for joining the conversation.

    Big Government Is NOT the Answer

    Your tax dollars are being spent on programs that we really don't need.

    I Agree I Disagree ×

    Get Heritage In Your Inbox — FREE!

    Heritage Foundation e-mails keep you updated on the ongoing policy battles in Washington and around the country.

    ×