At the end of the climate summit, Joe Biden said, “We are at a time similar to the Industrial Revolution, and we have the opportunity to create a new global economy centered on the adoption of environmental protection and renewable energy.”
The views expressed by European and Asian leaders are similar.
At this new stage, we will see the return of more civilized international relations. It should be clear that global production chains may make some changes, but they will not change because former President Trump wanted so much.
Advances in digitalization and decarbonization will be at the core of strategies, as well as re-stabilizing the center of production, new energies and construction and drivers of change and economic growth.
It is also true that the areas of education, research and health are leaving the crisis more relevant and challenging than they already are.
Finally, the role of the state as a stimulus agent for major movements is reaffirmed, especially as the epidemic has shown an unsustainable increase in economic and social inequalities.
The post-epidemic epidemic opens a new era for non-rejection countries that have made progress in the fight against the spread of the virus.
However, the choices of the past may make this new phase more or less difficult. For example, the countries that most supported the development of wind power are now fully competitive and already have a part of the future. Conversely, countries that strongly specialize in old energy, such as coal and oil, will have the same difficult task as Russia.
A unique case is the challenge facing the United Kingdom: the decision to leave the EU in 2016 was fulfilled earlier this year, opening up a movement towards the unknown. The country has grown the least since 2010, with the most severe recession since the Brexit debate. It didn’t seem to be a hindrance.
Two positive things have happened since the beginning of the year. On the one hand, the immediate Brexit did not have the supply crisis many expected in January. With more effort, the goods were shipped satisfactorily so that there was no shortage of trade supplies.
After flirting dangerously with herd immunity, Boris Johnson excelled at locking and mass vaccination, giving him the opportunity to return to a certain normalcy in early summer. However, sooner than imagined, long-term challenges began to emerge.
Serious political divisions have developed in the UK. During the discussion, separatists in Scotland were greatly strengthened, and in the run-up to the elections they may seek a new referendum, seeking to leave the United Kingdom and join Europe.
At the same time, a massive tension has arisen in Northern Ireland, where trade unionists (pro-British) are threatening to revolt against the settlement of a border in the sea separating England, while the hypothesis of a hypothesis is a link between the two Irish.
After the initial success mentioned above, the difficulties of trade with the continent prove, as expected, enormous, because they depend on the negotiation of a number of specific agreements in many fields. Maintaining uniform English exports to the European continent is not easy and some markets will be lost.
Finally, London threatens its position as a European financial hub by flying business to Amsterdam and other markets within the continent. Question: How big is this loss? Can negotiations be brought in from Asia?
Facing all these changes, overcoming the trend of stagnation and formulating a long-term strategy will be strong challenges. Neither the Conservative Party nor Boris Johnson seems to have that status.
According to Bruno Licht, London is being asked to start Brexit in England, ending in “Great Britain” and ending in “Little England”.
* Economist and Member of the MP Associates
