by Mark Silva
The first European leader to visit the White House of President Barack Obama this week will arrive offering a "global grand bargain.''
British Prime Minister Gordon Brown, a former finance minister, said today that he will be seeking Obama's backing for a "global grand bargain" to rescue the world economy when he meets with the American president in Washington on Tuesday.
"As part of the grand bargain the whole world must agree, as Europe has done, on the need to reject protectionism, which is the road to ruin and the route to deeper recession," Brown said after a European Union summit in Brussels. That bargain, the British PM said, should include new regulatory standards for financial markets and cross-border supervision of financial institutions, including hedge funds.
Brown's ability to forge a partnership with Obama on the economic front may be constrained by the British economy's own crisis, analysts say.
Former British Prime Minister Tony Blair and former President George W. Bush had struck up a strong trans-Atlantic alliance based partly on their commitment to the war in Iraq but also including their push for dramatically stepped up world aid for the poorest nations of Africa. They gained widespread support among major industrial nations for the African humanitarian initiative, but ultimately both saw their standing at home overcome by public opposition to the war in Iraq.
Brown is seeking a consensus on economic matters before he plays host to a summit of the Group of 20 industrialized and emerging nations in London on April 2 - which is likely tol represent Obama's first trans-Atlantic venture as president.
""President Obama and I will discuss this week a global new deal, whose impact can stretch from the villages of Africa to reforming the financial institutions of London and New York," Brown wrote for an article published in the Sunday Times.
""I think President Obama will agree to it too,'' Brown said in Brussels. "Bold global action, a global grand bargain is not only necessary but it is vitally urgent to deal with the challenges of the world economy... We must and we will succeed.''
Brown said EU leaders had backed calls to provide the International Monetary Fund with "at least 500 billion euros (630 billion dollars) to deal with economic crises.
Wire services contributed.
Comments
America has the most to lose if all nations reject protectionism. Tariffs are out of whack and already aren't fair to America, unchecked or lack of EPA rules in second world countries favor labor there, and the low cost of labor abroad is already unfair to America. We've had too much Bush lack of protectionism for too long. Bush connived us a Super Bowl of an uneven playing field in the last eight years. He hates American workers. No, we already have too much against us. An agreement to reject protectionism will hurt America more. Is Obama the new Bush? Gordon Brown is not welcome in my country to tell us how to do trade or foreign policy. Let Brown and his followers reelect Obama in 2012. Oh, right, they can't. It's up to us if we like what Obama has done--or not. Hope Obama does not kiss Brown's feet. Britain is not so Great anymore. They are having a worse recession depression than we are. No wonder they want us to give up our recession tax dollars to them and other Euronations.
Posted by: Vivian | March 1, 2009 11:10 PM
Markets are tumbling right now abroad.
So it seems they care not what Brown may work out today.
Posted by: ornery | March 2, 2009 2:08 AM
Spot on Vivian. We need to open up all of our international trade agreements and audit how we have been doing in them. Any of them trading with 3rd world countries needs tarriffs added to help bring up their labor rates. Bushco really screwed us, as did Clinton in this department. We need to practice fair trade, not free trade. Even UK and the other 1st world countries would agree with this concept.
Posted by: Xcellentform | March 2, 2009 8:03 AM
Ornery, looks like our markets are dropping like a lead weight today too. Maybe today will get a fancy name like Black Monday, or Bloody Monday, or Pug Monday.
Posted by: Xcellentform | March 2, 2009 11:38 AM
I think Obama Monday would be appropriate. That can be added to Obama Tuesady, Obama Wdenesday, Obama Thursday, and Obama Friday.
.
On Nov 7, 2006, when Harry and Nancy were elected in the majority, the DJIA closed at 12,157. On November 4, 2008 the DJIA closed at 9,625. Finally, today it closed at 6,763. A 44% drop since Harry and Nancy took over and almost a drop of 30% since BO's election,
.
Should we hacve expected anything different from the European Socialists?
Posted by: Terry | March 2, 2009 6:52 PM
Whoa, tickle-me-terri, where did the top of your market go? You are trying to make a point that it is the dems that caused this right? Where did the 14,000 mark go you nut? If I were to audit your numbers, I'd say you are missing a good 2,000 points there Einstine. Of course, that would be the most important 2,000 points, as that is where it started and could have been spearheaded with reform. It is also a direct link to the era that led up to the decline. So thanks for posting your timeline, it makes things look much clearer. It also makes you look like the deciever that you are.
Posted by: Xcellentform | March 2, 2009 11:33 PM
Horrible Form,
.
Since you can only talk a good game about "auditing" the numbers. You probably wouldn't know how to conduct an audit if you had to. The DJIA closed at its highest point on 10-9-07 at 14,165. That high point occurred after Dimiwt and reid took over the leadership posts and thus began the great REPO (Reid-Pelosi-Obama) stock market slide.
.
"Of course, that would be the most important 2,000 points, as that is where it started and could have been spearheaded with reform. It is also a direct link to the era that led up to the decline." Why don't you back-up this silly statement with some facts.
Posted by: Terry | March 5, 2009 10:20 PM