Turkey is going to host the G20 Summit in Antalya in November 2015. This summit is of critical importance in the present stage of the global crisis. As I stated in my previous article, we can see that the crisis in the EU and U.S. is intensifying at the moment and it can no longer be overcome with the existing monetary system. This year's G20 Summit will seek far-reaching solutions for the basic problems of the system. It is a question of debate whether the summit will be able to develop integrated solutions for its topics such as global growth, economic improvement, energy policies and the new rules of global trade.
Turkey has much to do to help facilitate the gradual replacement of the G8 by the G20 and for the reconstruction of all top economic and political institutions of the system in line with the common interests of the whole world, rather than caring about the interests of G8 countries alone. I hope this summit will be a starting point in this regard. From my standpoint, the main theme of this year's G20 Summit and all other G20 meetings to be held in the future should be a quest for a new monetary system until finding an alternative to the existing Bretton Woods monetary system. During this year's summit, developing countries should introduce an alternative monetary and trading system to the current one, which was founded with the Bretton Woods Conference in 1944 and started to collapse in 1971 when then U.S. President Richard Nixon removed the dollar's dependency on gold. Although the system was supported with the introduction of the euro in 2000, it could not be prevented from collapsing.
Today, the global economy, particularly the European economy, cannot overcome the crisis that broke out in 2008; quite the contrary, the crisis is escalating in new phases. One of the major reasons for this is that the monetary system that was introduced after World War II no longer matches the realities of the world economy. The monetary system that was launched after World War II does not bear the dynamics that can meet the requirements of the global economy hereafter.
Today, it is inevitable to bring an alternative to the Bretton Woods system that was not an agreement but was an imposition inflicted by the U.S. During the Breton Woods Conference, American economist Harry Dexter White's plan, which represented the U.S.'s perspective, was agreed on versus that of his British counterpart John Maynard Keynes in order to reconstruct the capitalist system.
The White Plan put forward a fixed exchange rate system based on the dollar, which ensured the convertibility of the dollar to gold and would be run by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank. This, beyond any doubt, was the U.S.'s economic hegemony in action. The White Plan implicitly accepts that only countries that have deficits in their foreign payments should adjust the rate of exchange. In other words, the plan did not foresee that the U.S. would have deficits. For many years, the IMF functioned as a supervisory authority that made countries having deficits devalue their money at certain rates to close this deficit, in accordance to the White Plan.
As for the Keynes Plan, it suggested establishing a clearing union that would act as a kind of global central bank. The commercial transactions of this system would be based on a new global currency called the bancor that would also be dependent on gold. In 1944, we faced a completely different monetary system, which is one of the mainsprings of the current crisis. Today, developing countries should conduct their commercial transactions with their own currencies and establish new customs unions based on them rather than relying on a euro and dollar-driven system. China's investment plans as a part of the New Silk Road that was announced at the Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) Summit in Indonesia showed us that the direction of capital and commodity flow is shifting from the west to the east. Now, capital flow is added to commodity that started to flow from the east to the west in the 1900s. Now, the target should be reaching a new monetary and trading system that is based on G20 consensus. This consensus will disclose a new trading network and its legal superstructure.
The dynamics of change were based on the U.S. after World War II; however, they are now poised to be based in Beijing and Istanbul. Investments that will be made in new energy lines and commercial transits under the leadership of countries such as China and Turkey in the next decade will re-determine borders and economies. These integration investments will be the investments of the great markets of Asia and Europe, with the EU and the U.S. taking the lead. These investments are poised to connect the continental markets of Asia and Europe independently from the borders of nation-states. Russia, China, India and Turkey are the key countries of this integration.
The importance of Turkey is also increasing within the context of EU membership. It is a proper strategy for Turkey to unyieldingly insist on EU membership currently, despite the current crisis and disarray that the EU experiences. This makes Turkey a country that has the potential for changing both its east and west.
It goes without saying that the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) will only be possible with middle and southern commercial transits that will connect Europe and Asia-Pacific passing through Turkey. The Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP) will conclusively be established when a railway line, which can also be defined as Middle Corridor starting from South Korea and passing through China, Kyrgyzstan, Uzbekistan, the Caspian Sea, Azerbaijan, Georgia and reaching Europe via Turkey, is completed. Moreover, the fact that this line will coincide with the southern road in Turkey is indicative of a new period. This great integration is the only way out for Europe. For all these reasons, the critical role of Turkey, which will host the G20 and B20 summits in 2015 as a part of the G20 presidency, is never coincidental.
It should be noted that G20 countries are not ranked in accordance with their national Gross Domestic Product (GDP) but were formed in a way that can reflect diversity that represent the globe in terms of population and geography. In this regard, it is ignorant disinformation to assert that Turkey cannot take part in the G20 if its dollar-based GDP falls.