An Interview with Financial Times’ News Editor Derek Brower
Derek Brower, the Financial Times’s U.S. news editor, came to Sackville on Thursday, Feb. 5 as part of the Ron Joyce Presents Speakers Series. Before giving his talk entitled “From NATO to Trade: Will the Global Order Survive?”, The Argosy interviewed him on the details of what a changing global order may look like.
Brower described the current order as “whatever Donald Trump and the United States wants it to be, with a few exceptions.” He explained the top country in the current hierarchy is the United States. This power is sustained by raw military might and a huge budget. Brower’s key examples were “when Donald Trump decides to send B2 bombers to bomb Iran’s nuclear facilities,” and “ordering aircraft carrier groups to the Middle East just after he’s snatched the leader of a country from his bed in Caracas, [Venezuela] and rendered him to New York in one day.”
When looking into U.S. strategy, Brower referenced the Monroe Doctrine, specifically “the U.S. being influential in its own hemisphere: in the Western Hemisphere [and] in the Americas.” Referencing the Secretary of State, Brower explained, “Marco Rubio has explicitly talked about that after they intervened in Venezuela and effectively took over the country’s oil sector.” The reasoning was reportedly that this oil was needed and deserved by the United States, especially compared to China and Russia, who was in their “backyard.”
While gaining influence, the U.S. has also taken isolationist measures: it has left the World Trade Organization, World Health Organization, and decreased its funding for the United Nations. When asked about the impact these decisions will have on the current global order, Brower said it will set back efforts on climate change and the energy transition. He explained “efforts to prepare for the next pandemic, to restrict funding for fossil fuel projects in the developing world, to contain the spread of diseases in poor parts of the world, and to fix poverty levels” are all at risk.
Moreover, institutions like the IMF and the World Bank were all “institutions that we thought would have a perpetual influence on the world and shape the trading terms of engagement from powerful countries with poorer countries.” Currently, these institutions are not stable and are not predicted to last. Brower predicted the approach of the United States, which will dictate the new global order, will be entirely transactional. It will not participate in a global order that does not satisfy the interests and needs of the U.S., as its key policy will be to put America first. Looking away from the U.S., Brower suggests, “The rest of the world may try and cope without the U.S., but copying without the main thunder of the UN or these other bodies is going to be difficult.”
When asked about the chance of the current post-war global order collapsing, Brower answered by saying, “It’s over.” However, he said being over does not mean collapsing, but rather a replacement is on its way. He referenced Carney’s speech in Davos, agreeing, “this order has been based on fiction anyway.” Saying, “U.S. power has always been used when the U.S. wants to use it […], what Donald Trump has done is expose the fallacies that were always there,” such as democracy being used as the reason for intervention when it was truly oil, as seen in Venezuela.
Brower also argues against the virtues of the global order, explaining: “globalization has ultimately led to a kind of populous movement; the Kyoto and other climate agreements have done nothing to stop emissions rising every year; the UN has not stopped genocides in several countries.”
When looking to the future and at the chance of a new global order, Brower references several different political bodies. Brower says the European Union is a softer recreation of the current “form of capitalism and liberal democracy.” Moreover, China and the U.S. are working to create a new global order that is based on dependence on them, whether it be for technology or security.
Yet, overall, Brower argues that a multilateral system based on mutual benefit through dependence and trade is no more. The great powers ─ the US, China, and Russia ─ will decide the new global order, and the notion of partnership will disappear.