MIKTA, Middle Powers, and New Dynamics of Global Governance

The G20's Evolving Agenda

J. Mo, J. Mo, Kenneth A. Loparo, J. Mo, Mo Jongryn

• Publisher: Palgrave Pivot
• Year: 2014
• ISBN:
  9781137506467
• Topic: Politics & International Relations
• Subtopic: Globalisation
• Index: Politics & International Relations

This volume is the result of a 2013 conference held by the Asan Institute for Policy Studies (South Korea) on the 'middle power' countries of Mexico, Indonesia, the Republic of Korea, Turkey and Australia (MIKTA). Experts and policymakers discussed how members of the MIKTA can work to advance global governance in emerging global issue areas.

1

Introduction: G20 Middle Powers (MIKTA) and Global Governance

Mo Jongryn

Abstract: To meet important global challenges, the middle powers among the G20—Mexico, Indonesia, South Korea, Turkey, and Australia (MIKTA)—formed an informal consultation group to facilitate international cooperation in both economic and security matters. This chapter proposes potential policy priorities for the MIKTA in three stages: international economic cooperation, economic-security linkages, and traditional security cooperation.

Keywords: economic cooperation, global governance, middle powers, MIKTA, multilateral cooperation, multilateral diplomacy,

Jongryn, Mo, ed., MIKTA, Middle Powers, and New Dynamics of Global Governance: The G20’s Evolving Agenda. New York: Palgrave Macmillan, 2015. DOI: 10.1057/9781137506467.0004.

Since it first met at the leaders’ level in 2008, the G20 has established itself as the premier forum for international economic cooperation. It proved effective in enhancing international policy coordination at a time in which critical challenges in the international financial system called for a mechanism that could bring together key industrial and emerging economies. Although the forum has lost some of its original momentum in recent years—and only played a peripheral role in the Eurozone crisis—there have also been calls for the G20 to become involved in a wider array of multilateral issues, moving beyond its economic focus to tackle other global challenges.

Against this backdrop, the Mexican presidency of the G20 hosted the first ever meeting of G20 foreign ministers in Los Cabos, Mexico, February 19–20, 2012, to discuss pressing global issues on the G20 agenda such as governance, transnational crime, green growth, climate change, and food security and to reflect on other relevant challenges facing the global community. The new Foreign Ministers Meeting at the G20 is a potentially important tool for addressing global security challenges as well as building confidence among G20 members. G20 foreign ministers can take advantage of the unique opportunities that the G20 process affords. But they will face new challenges as they try to forge a consensus among countries with diverse interests and objectives.

Recognizing this mixture of opportunities and problems for the G20, the foreign ministers of Mexico, Indonesia, Korea, Turkey, and Australia (MIKTA) met on the sidelines of the Foreign Ministers Meeting in Los Cabos. MIKTA foreign ministers met again in September 2013, formally launching their informal consultation group. The South Korean foreign ministry explains the new group as “one between middle power nations that share core values of democracy and free market economy and have the willingness and capability to contribute to the international community’s development. The five countries chose Mexico as the first secretary for the new informal consultative body and agreed to discuss issues such as G20 governance, UN reforms, climate change, nuclear disarmament, and democratization.”

The MIKTA shares the sense that strong political leadership is required to address major global challenges in the years ahead, and that they as economically dynamic middle powers are uniquely positioned to facilitate international cooperation and negotiation and offer fresh perspectives and solutions. This is especially important at a time when 1) there are growing tensions between some G7 and BRICS countries, which have the potential to weaken the G20; and 2) European countries that have traditionally played facilitating and leadership roles in multilateral organizations are distracted by the Eurozone crisis, and will remain so. The MIKTA came together at a time when the members see an acute need for new global platforms. All five MIKTA countries have become increasingly active on global issues and are looking for new opportunities to contribute to global governance.¹ The purpose of this volume is to make specific policy recommendations for leaders of the new MIKTA group, building on previous research by the Asan Institute for Policy Studies on the role of middle powers in global governance.²

The MIKTA’s potential policy priorities span three agendas: 1) international economic cooperation, 2) economic-security linkages, and 3) traditional international security. These can best be addressed incrementally and sequentially to build up confidence.

Stage 1: Cooperation on international economic issues

The G20 is likely to be the MIKTA’s main platform for their cooperation on economic issues. The basic impetus for the new MIKTA group came from MIKTA members’ experience at the G20. Caught between the G7 and the BRICS, G20 middle powers began to coordinate with each other at the G20. Middle power cooperation at the G20 has produced many positive results, including the addition of new G20 agendas such as development and global financial safety net.³ For the MIKTA’s future agendas at the G20, four possible priorities stand out: 1) the core mandate of the G20 concerning the organizational effectiveness of international financial institutions (IFIs), 2) regional financial safety nets, 3) South-South development cooperation, and 4) the implementation of G20 commitments.

IFI organizational effectiveness—The governance of international financial institutions (IFIs) has been the core agenda of the G20 since its inception. Although much has been achieved in making IFIs more capable and accountable, more work needs to be done to modernize the governance of IFIs. There is a need for improved independent oversight of the effectiveness of IFIs. The MIKTA can play a leading role in improving the effectiveness of IFIs by carrying out joint assessments of IFIs, especially in “natural” issue areas for middle powers such as capital flows to small and mid-size countries, the quality of policy advice given to smaller countries, the representation of non-great powers in the governing bodies of IFIs, and the diversity of professional staff.

Regional financial safety nets—Each of the MIKTA member countries has played an important role as a regional power and would be keen to promote regional interests and issues at global governance forums such as the G20. Among regional economic issues, regional financial safety nets would draw the most interest because all have a stake in the economic stability of their region especially in light of their own experiences with financial crises. The MIKTA members can use the MIKTA as a platform for promoting regional financial cooperation and explore coordinated positions on regional financial issues such as currency swap agreements, monetary funds, exchange rate regimes, and linkages to IMF financing.

South-South development cooperation—Four of the five MIKTA member countries, South Korea, Mexico, Turkey and Indonesia, are emerging donors with a common interest in sharing their successful development experiences. Australia has considerable existing experience as a donor. Instead of each country conducting development cooperation individually, they could pool expertise and resources in order to offer development assistance in South-South or trilateral partnerships. One possible goal could be to integrate individual knowledge-sharing programs within a common framework with the long-term objective of creating a new development organization that embodies middle power perspectives and practices in development.

Follow-up on implementation of G20 commitments—One of the weaknesses of the G20 is lack of a strong enforcement mechanism. While maintaining the spirit of informality in the G20 process, it is important to think creatively about ways to improve the implementation of G20 commitments. MIKTA members arguably have a comparative advantage in the “watch-dog” role as they have more to gain from the success of the G20 than larger countries. In assessing the implementation of G20 commitments, the MIKTA may work with governments of non-member countries to help non-members participate in the G20 process and build trust in G20 decisions.

Stage 2: Cooperation on economic-security linkages

The MIKTA can move to a second stage of middle power cooperation by addressing issues at the nexus of economics and security. Among the issues linking economics and security, a number of issue areas are suitable for the MIKTA: 1) cybersecurity, 2) food security, 3) green growth and climate change, 4) the marine environment, and 4) maritime security.

Cybersecurity—Cybersecurity has become a new frontline for multilateral security cooperation. Countries, big and small, face ever-growing threats of cyberwarfare both from state and non-state actors. Yet, the international response to cyberthreats has been largely patchy and local. It is important that the international community addresses the cybersecurity issue as a global issue. Several efforts to find a practical solution on cybersecurity have been made to date both by the UN and its member countries. UN Resolution 58/199, adopted by the General Assembly in January 2004, specifically made references to the importance of a “global culture of cybersecurity and the protection of critical information infrastructures.” In May 2011, the United States called for a “unified response to cyberspace” in its International Strategy for Cyberspace, the first attempt to address cybersecurity as a foreign policy initiative. China and Russia have led international efforts to develop a code of conduct at the UN’s Group of Governmental Experts (GGE). The GGE is released its report in June 2013.

Nonetheless, it is clear that multilateral diplomacy is not keeping pace with the evolution of cybersecurity threats. There is neither a high degree of trust among great powers on the topic nor a deep consensus on core principles for the governance of cyberspace, such as the necessary balance between freedom, privacy, and security.

Minister-level cooperation at the G20 on cybersecurity could break some of these deadlocks. The member states of the G20 share the concern that militarization of cyberspace would create a vicious circle of competition among the states. As a meeting of the major economies of the world, developed and emerging, the G20 could offer a framework to reduce tensions around these issues. The G20 will need to adopt a step-by-step approach. At the first stage, member states should extend their cooperation in their fight against cyberthreats originating from illegal activities. Building on this practical collaboration, they can also work together to reach a consensus as to the appropriate state behavior on cyberspace. Such cooperative measures in the G20 would benefit not only the member states, but also non-members. To enhance its legitimacy further and mobilize the support for this cooperation, the G20 could engage the International Telecommunication Union (ITU) in due course. As the UN’s specialized agency dealing with the Internet and telecommunication issues, the ITU has the expertise and resources to address cybersecurity and propagate the putative consensus among its members.

The MIKTA can support G20 work on cybersecurity by proposing and participating in a working group on high-tech crime. There is a good precedent for this in the G8. The G8 Subgroup on High-Tech Crime began with a mission to enhance the abilities of G8 countries to prevent, investigate, and prosecute crimes involving computers, networked communications, and other new technologies. Over time, that mission has expanded to include work with third countries and on such topics as combating terrorist uses of the Internet and protection of critical information infrastructures. As tackling transnational organized crime is one of the 15 global challenges identified by the UN millennium project, the MIKTA’s initiative on this area can further complement the global efforts to enhance international cooperation in the midst of increasing cross-border crimes.

Another platform for MIKTA leadership is the Worldwide Cyber Security Summit. The Second Worldwide Cyber Security Summit in London in 2011 provided a useful framework for professionals to identify new ways of working together. At future meetings of the summit, the MIKTA can work with leading governments and private sectors to set a new model in fighting against threats associated with global Internet connectivity and information and communication technologies development. As a first step in collective leadership, the MIKTA should work as an assessment group to track the implementation and follow-up of summit commitments.

Food security—Poor agricultural yields in 2012 have created a new level of concern about global food insecurity. The G20 is already active in promoting international cooperation on food security. The Cannes summit of 2011 produced the Action Plan on Food Price Volatility and Agriculture, in which G20 leaders committed themselves to, inter alia, improving agricultural productivity, increasing market information and transparency, strengthening international policy coordination and improving the functioning of agricultural commodity derivatives markets. The G20 leaders also recognized the need for an international emergency humanitarian food reserve system.

Each member of the MIKTA has a strong stake in the stability of food prices. South Korea has one of the lowest food self-sufficiency ratios among developed countries. Food self-sufficiency is also an important goal for the government of Indonesia. Other countries are more self-sufficient. In all five countries, accessing affordable, healthy, and nutritious food still remains a challenge for the poor. Given the urgency of improving food security worldwide, the MIKTA should play a leadership role in negotiating a comprehensive food security agreement at the G20. In 2011, the G20 tried but failed to reach a consensus agreement on subsidies for biofuels and agricultural export bans, both of which are widely agreed to have contributed to the severe spike in food prices in 2007. The MIKTA can endeavor to find new compromises and approaches to addressing this sensitive topic in future G20 summits. Creating a regulatory or monitoring body for futures trading or derivatives markets is also an issue requiring G20 and MIKTA leadership.

It is critical to recognize a nexus between food, water, and energy, and all three need to be fully integrated if we are to deal with global food security. In that regard, the MIKTA can take initiative particularly on water management in the context of food security and green growth below. The MIKTA should work towards agreement on global principles for sustainable water management that include issues of infrastructure, technology, investment, and inclusiveness to protect the rights and livelihoods of poor people.

Green growth and climate change—After the pre-Mexico meetings in February and April 2012, the G20 asked the OECD, the World Bank, and the UN to prepare a report on inserting green growth and sustainable development policies into structural reform agendas, tailored to specific country conditions and level of development. The G20 also encouraged member countries to support voluntary self-reporting on current actions to integrate green growth and sustainable development into structural reform agendas. The G20 also established a study group for the Green Climate Fund in which South Korea, Mexico, Australia, France, Germany, China, and South Africa participate to consider ways to mobilize resources and support the operationalization of the Green Climate Fund, which was mandated by the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change in 2010 and is hosted by South Korea.

The MIKTA countries have a potentially important role to play in discussions of climate change as there are major differences between the G7 and BRICS members of the G20 in this field. The G7 countries led by its European members are in favor of using command and control measures to reduce emissions, but the BRICS would like to take voluntary steps to control levels of emissions and pollution. (The US position is uncertain, and may evolve during President Obama’s second term.) As bridging powers at the G20, the MIKTA should play an active role in facilitating and implementing G20 agreements on green growth. The MIKTA are well positioned for this leadership role because two of its members, Mexico and South Korea, are leading voices for green growth among non-G7 countries. The MIKTA can begin its example-setting work by self-reporting on current actions to integrate green growth into structural reform areas.

The MIKTA could also devise green growth indicators and publish a periodic report that assesses gr...

Table of contents

• Cover
• Title
• 1  Introduction: G20 Middle Powers (MIKTA) and Global Governance
• 2  Middle Powers and the Multilateral Pivot
• 3  G20 Middle Powers and Initiatives on Development
• 4  Middle Power Cooperation for Climate Change and Green Growth
• 5  Middle Power Cooperation and Related Issues in the G20
• 6  Middle Powers and the G20: Modest Proposals for Cooperation
• Luncheon Keynote Speech: Koreas Middle Power Diplomacy: How Is It Pursued in the G20 Framework?
• Appendix: 2013 Asan Global Governance Conference: Program and List of Participants