Depth report

　　

The geopolitics and geoeconomics of the world today are undergoing new changes since World War II.

    The evolution of the world structure with global influence after the Second World War has roughly gone through two historical stages and two major evolutions. The first stage was the "Cold War" period from the end of World War II until the disintegration of the Soviet Union in 1991. The Cold War confrontation structure built by the two powers of the United States and the Soviet Union lasted for 46 years until the disintegration of the Soviet Union, the "biggest geopolitical disaster of the 20th century" (Putin) occur. The second stage is from the September 11 incident in 2001 to the present day. Its theme is the global counter-terrorism operations led by the United States and the Western countries and related asymmetric wars. The world disputes at this stage are not only related to economy and resources, but also related to religion and civilization factors. Between the above two stages-the decade from the disintegration of the Soviet Union to the 9/11 incident, the unprecedented prosperity of the "unipolar world" in the United States was also a period in which extreme Islam gradually grew dissatisfied with American hegemony and accumulated dissatisfaction. Evolved into a terrorist attack on the United States. This decade can be regarded as a historical chain from the Cold War era to the anti-terrorist era.

    Think tank scholars at Anbang Consulting (ANBOUND) believe that the world today is facing the advent of the third historical stage, and there are many changes that show the characteristics of this new stage. For example, the focus of global geopolitics has changed. The priority goal of the US national security strategy has shifted from counter-terrorism to the suppression of long-term strategic competitors, and China bears the brunt (see Chen Gong’s analysis of the "Mattis Report" for details). The wave of anti-globalization and anti-free trade is unprecedentedly high, which has severely impacted the achievements of globalization in the past few decades, and the global trade and investment environment has deteriorated significantly. Global and regional international cooperation has regressed, Britain’s Brexit, European countries’ rifts have increased, the WTO’s rupture has increased, and US isolationism has increased. Some obvious phenomena that go against the trend of the times make people worry: Can the globalization process continue?

    The emergence of US President Trump has further promoted changes in the world pattern. The most representative phenomenon is the alienation of the relationship between the United States and Europe, especially the growing gap between the United States and Germany. The relationship between German Chancellor Merkel and Trump is not so good. After Trump announced its withdrawal from the Iran nuclear agreement on May 8, Germany's response to his actions was stronger than ever before. Merkel bluntly expressed her "frustration." She bluntly stated that Trump's decision "damaged the trust in the international order" and if everyone only acted according to their own wishes, it would be bad news for the whole world. The US media commented that it was only Trump that German companies opposed, but Germans became increasingly opposed to the United States.

    China, whose international influence is rising, needs to find its position as soon as possible in this changing situation, show its attitude, and find a way to cope with changes in the international situation. Chen Gong, the chief researcher of Anbang Consulting, put forward a new pattern that may emerge in the future world—the "1+3" world structure. This can be seen as a summary of changes in the current international situation, a new framework for understanding future changes in the world structure, and a method and proposition for China to seek correct development strategies in the future.

    The so-called "1+3" refers to the four major economic powers with world influence, the United States, China, Japan, and Germany, which are divided into two camps because of their different attitudes towards globalization. Among them, "1" refers to the United States, which represents the emerging wave of conservatism; "3" refers to the three countries of China, Japan and Germany, which continue to adhere to globalization and free trade in their economic propositions. Since the United States insists on pursuing protectionism and adopts the "America first" strategy, it has major differences in economic interests and concepts from the three countries of China, Japan, and Germany that still support globalization and free trade. As a result, the economic policies and economic propositions of these countries gradually differ from those of the United States.

How can Europe save the Iran nuclear deal?

    Ahundi: Can Europe, which is always indecisive, continue to support US policies while safeguarding its own economic interests? It may find that there is a conflict between the two.

    For China, when the United States is moving toward isolationism, China obviously cannot follow the United States. This is not in line with China's interests and stage of development. In the complex game of international economic interests, China is powerless and does not need to stand alone against the anti-globalization of the United States. Instead, it needs to cooperate with countries with similar economic values and economic strength. Among the major economic powers in the world, the only countries where China can seek to stay together for warmth are Japan and Germany. China will inevitably move closer to these two countries. It can consider making some concessions to Japan and Germany in its bilateral economic relations in order to reach agreement with them. More cooperation and concerted action. Finally, the world pattern may be a simplified "1+3" pattern. The largest country is the United States, and the other three countries are China, Japan, and Germany. It must be admitted that this is a result of the rise of the wave of protectionism in the world, but under this result, countries and enterprises still have a lot of room for development.

    Some people may ask, does the "1+3" world pattern mean that globalization has been fragmented and a new "compartment to resist courtesy" has been formed? Anbang Consulting’s answer is: not so. Although the "1+3" world pattern reflects the twists and turns of globalization, it does not mean that the general direction of globalization is completely reversed. The world will continue to adhere to globalization. Of course, since there is a "1+3" differentiation, it means that the world will not remain unchanged along the globalization of the past, but will change and adjust, but the general direction is still globalization.

    What we should also point out is that the "1+3" world structure that China will face in the future is a new pattern that is related to the past but very different. In particular, globalization over the past few decades has become a background familiar to all countries in the world. Under this, it is not easy to recognize and understand the new pattern of "1+3" development, and sometimes it is difficult to turn the corner. However, from the perspective of the research team of Anbang Consulting, from an economic perspective, it is entirely possible that the world will have a "1+3" pattern.

    The old globalization is facing challenges and changes, and the future world may form a new structure of "1+3".