Brexit, populism and current threats to the international order

Brexit, populism and current threats to the international order



Director General Colossus a todos muchisimas gracias por estar aqui voy a cambiar Angliss for cortez a con con nuestros invitados my name is Mariana camp pero and I am the executive director of the Mexican Council on Foreign Relations Committee it is a great privilege to welcome two distinguished guests from Chatham House the Royal Institute of International International Affairs in London who will discuss today the many issues raised by the 2016 praxis referendum of course its impact within the United Kingdom such as the implications of a Deal or No Deal or a sensible deal the likelihood of calling for a general election its impact on Europe and the upcoming European elections the cost that the economic uncertainty has had on GDP growth in the United Kingdom in addition to the risks of losing access to the 500 million customers of the European market and now this morning there was an article in the FT that said that the the likelihood of a Scottish referendum has also gone up but also and maybe more importantly how this historic event was also a reflection of the bigger trends that we are seeing around the world such as the rise of populism a backlash to globalization the rising inequality and a growing divide between cities and rural all of these are just examples of the threats on the current international order and for these please join me in welcoming dr. Lesley VIN January and dr. Robin Robin is the director of Chatham House and an expert on the UK foreign policy and European political and economic security dr. Vindi Murray is the head of the u.s. of the Americas program Dean of the academy for leadership in international affairs at Chatham House welcome to Mexico the conversation today will be moderated by ambassador and Rijo simple the founding president of Quebec seen a senior adviser at Chatham House and a former ambassador to the United Kingdom ambassador thank you so much for making this possible and finally I want to thank Ricardo Gonzalez Orta partner of Deloitte national director of taxes and the legal services at Deloitte and Carlos moyá was not yet with us also partner of Quebec Sea and corporate members of Quebec City they have been an incredible support and thank you for their generosity and allowing us to have this event in this amazing space today's agenda will consist of a presentation Bower by our panelists followed by a conversation with ambassador Rosenthal after that if we have enough time there will be a Q&A session with the audience and finally Ricardo Gonzalez Horta will provide the closing remarks and a comment and a comment on the economic consequences of uncertainty I am sure this will be a very interesting conversation and maybe we will we will leave this room understanding what the backstop really means thank you so much and ambassador the floor is all yours Thank you Thank You Mariana and a special thanks to our friends at Deloitte for hosting us today for me it's a very special occasion because I've been involved with Chatham House now for I'd say about 25 or 30 years from when I was first posted to the UK back in the 1970s 70s late seventies all the way through now when I thanks to Robyn's invitation form a part of a group of senior policy advisers at Chatham House so to have the director of Chatham House and the director of the US and America's program in Mexico for the first time is a privilege and an honor so welcome to both of you we're very happy to have you before I ask Robyn to lead off with a brief presentation I wanted to mention one thing that I think is very important over the years I've tried to push Chatham House to have a Latin American focus in addition to all the other focuses foci over the world that it has and I'm pleased to say that with the generous support of corporate sponsors and others we finally now are about to have already launched and about to continue to have a Latin American program at Chatham House which Leslie is going to head and we're very pleased that that's now going to be part of the London scene as we go forward Latin America is a very important region with the UK either in or out of the EU we don't know yet but whether it's in or whether it's out it's a very important region for the UK and for international affairs for Europe and therefore for Chatham House so we're very proud to be able to do that so Robin start us off you have been following brexit obviously because you sit in London most of the time you understand the the dynamics between what's going on in the domestic political on the domestic political scene what's going on in the negotiations between the Europeans and the UK and probably have a good insight as to first of all why has it taken so long since the referendum for things to finalize they're still not finalized the new deadline I think is in October but there are European parliamentary elections coming up now at the end of this month and the apparently Prime Minister may would prefer not to have to participate in those elections because she fears perhaps a conservative defeat to a great extent so lead us off on that I'd also like to ask you about populism because you have I've heard you talk about it populism is a funny a funny thing because some people define it one way others define it a totally different way opposite way so I think we'd be very interested to hear you speak on that and after your presentation I'll ask Lesley to talk to us a little bit about transatlantic relations how Lesley is an American so she she has insight on mr. Trump which of course here in Mexico is very important we need to have insider transatlantic relations what's going on with the u.s. in its foreign policy towards us here in Mexico Latin America and if we have time at the end I'll bring up some of the subjects which are in the headlines today Venezuela Cuba because we also think that those are important then both of these wonderful people have been following and know a lot about it so Robin lead us off welcoming us here for all of comics Steve of being our hosts great to be able to dip into the sea here in Mexico City and also for being such a champion and supporter of Chatham House for for so long and longmate continued at me add as well and I think almost impossible for us to come here without having had our Latin America initiative launched I think that's why it's taken me so long take I'm so embarrassed to sit up on the stage here with you and for us not to have this new initiative underway even though we've been able to involve many people from Latin America well in our work really including this is part of our purview even from London which tends as you know not to look to this part of the world quite as frequently as it does to others the timing for this visit is great timing is interesting I suppose as well because of what you've asked us to talk about this title and as I was thinking about it on the flight over here I try came from San Francisco which was interesting as it's so nice to escape from brexit mania on the west coast of America but you know one would want to start almost with international order of populism and then end up with brexit but let's let's start at the other end but I will take advantage of your follow-up question and put it right at the beginning which is what does populism mean to me I think populism is a platform it's a political platform of the populist and populist are not the people populist politicians in my opinion populist of politicians who work off public anger and frustration and often that anger and frustration is justified it may have been long growing it may be driven by deep structural reasons it may have been driven by bad decisions taken at a particular point in previous years but the people or a large majority of them in a populist environment are angry and populist politicians to my mind take advantage of the anger they don't necessarily share the experiences of the people who they seek to represent in many case it is tactical opportunity that is used push an agenda that maybe somebody had held for a long time before but now their moment can come forward and in the end the populist platform in my mind in a nutshell is providing trying to provide simple answers to complex problems and they might be right in their analysis of the sources of the anger but the reason populism carries a pejorative sense is that is a simple answer to a complex problem brexit is a good example of populism at work the British people were deeply divided and had been increasingly divided in probably the ten years leading up to the 2016 vote and those divisions are very similar to the divisions we see in the United States similar to the division as we've seen emerge in countries like France and Spain even Greece and but in our particular case they manifested themselves particularly strongly around the European question and Europe became for the populist politicians the opportunity to pursue a longer-term agenda which was Britain leaving the EU as if that answer was the answer to all of the problems that reflected the division in the country of course the reason the brexit and I will go into all history but the reason the brexit campaign in the end was successful was that it was able to be the answer to everyone to their problem without anyone having to coordinate their answers now so you have those people for whom immigration was seen as imposing an excessive burden on the provision of public services health care housing schooling in deprived areas of the United Kingdom and that that immigration was associated with the government's loss of control over immigration from Central Eastern Europe that started in 2004 very much a British decision to open up its market to all of those people but for many others certainly in parts of the labour party who were relatively open about immigration this is an opportunity to constrain a European Union that was seen as a driver of market liberalization of deregulation and the Jeremy Corbyn agenda he's been skeptical about the you for 30 years the reason he did not campaign actively as the leader of the Labour Party to remain was he himself in a way didn't fail it in his heart he doubted it so and I argue go through each of the elements here of the different teams who all coalesced around the brexit debate but it points partly to where we are today we've gone from brexit being a psychodrama you know sort of almost inexplicable mental aberration as it's seen by many people outside the UK to actually becoming paralysis this week the UK is paralysed over brexit that's not a good place to be I've been relatively relaxed I would say even about brexit in the sense that it is almost a process I think the countries had to go through I think the parliamentary process has been doing what parliaments do argue debate but in Parliament's not in the street there's no riots there's no you know there's a few protest marches but this is a very British type of debate in their sense and Britain has dealt with revolutionary moments in the past through quite pragmatic discussions unlike France and other countries but the problem we have right now is that the small window they was for Teresa may to get a deal through back on May the 13th was closed and it was closed principally because brexit is trying to put together impossible requirements trying to keep Britain integrated into the European market to keep it growing economically as successfully as it has done in relative terms in recent years and to make sure that that growth continues to take place in the more deprived areas of the United Kingdom including around his home manufacturing zones which are the ones that are in benefiting the most from access to the European market but which have also taken in the bulk of the immigrants and which are themselves therefore conflicted one of the interesting things Robin is from my platform from where I see things the Brits really never embraced Europe they were very interested in the economic benefits of having access to this large market but if you go to any place in the UK you won't see lots of European flags you won't see European symbols on the number plates of cars it was it was a it was a difficult decision at the time but in general there was never there was never this thing that you see everywhere else in the European Union where people gave up to some extent their national identity for a European identity this didn't happen in the UK so it's probably not unusual that today you see a country hugely divided between those who want to stay and those who want to leave because the levers to a great extent want to leave the politics of Europe they want to leave the court system they want to leave some of these standards that have been imposed on the UK by Europeans European bureaucrats in Brussels so what what is going to happen how are we going to see the end of this process the problem here is is I mean you AB see right in your analysis Britain has always been a reluctant member of the European Union island nation I talked about continental Europe and Britain yeah we were Victor's of sorts at the end of the Second World War we were not invaded we were bombed but we survived we've never we've always been an offshore balancer to over centralization of power in Europe in a way the EU is an over centralization of power in Europe that Britain has never felt comfortable being part of but these debates and this reason to want to leave applies to a minuscule proportion of the people in them I call them the high priests of brexit and these are people who have wanted to get Britain out of the you for the past 20 years and their reasons are about national identity and sovereignty Britain's having a different direction to the centralization as a seen process of European integration but Britain has struck a pretty good deal on this front Britain is not in the eurozone therefore not subject to all of the pressures the European Central Bank the Britain is not in the Schengen Agreement still control your controls his borders Britain is not in all of the areas of human as fervor of justice and Home Affairs of some of the police cooperation is there Britain has been one of the biggest resistors on defence integration of Europe Britain was having its cake and eating it which is what it's accused of trying to do with the the brexit deal but if you ever asked a question do you want to stay you would bring out exactly under that that deep instinct that this is not a natural state for Britain which was why George Osborne the Chancellor this checker David Cameron's good Ally advised him as strongly don't do it this will be unpredictable but David Cameron having won the Scottish referendum the other referendum I think you know the way he was managing the Conservative Party but he thought he could get away with it even closely now what this means therefore to your question of where do we go the reason we don't have brexit right now today is for a various is 30 members of parliament openly I know it sounds like there was a hundred and fifty votes it was 200 votes against the third vote was lost by 58 seats 58 seats means in essence 30 people voted against now you swing the other 30 you would end up with a with with a with a 58 vote it in fact if they abstained you would end up with you know one or two votes if it was thirty people ten of them were the Irish Democratic Unity Party say something about the backstop the other twenty would I call these a hardcore high priests or brexit for whom there is only one type of breakfast that will work which is what I call the cathartic brexit there's no point leaving the EU if you don't touch your arm in the process of doing it and have to put a new bionic arm on you have to feel the pain you have to kind of wake up from this slumber of being tied into an unnatural European Union and go and find global Britain over the waves you can tell by the way I'm describing this that I am NOT a supporter of that view I think it's romantic it's rather nice we know romanticism and emotion are very powerful in politics and they have a very clear emotional view but they are terrified that the deal that Theresa May has struck to leave the EU is going to tie the future negotiations up in such a way that Britain will not be able to have a cathartic brexit because the one thing you must remember that Teresa may steal is simply the deal to leave we're gonna pay 40 billion euros we'll give equal rights to you citizens and we have a two to four year period in which to negotiate the future arrangement and in that time we carry on being a non-voting member of the EU but there is no future deal agreed nothing nothing has been agreed but the Irish backstop to this insurance policy to make sure that there will be no hard border between the north of Ireland and the Republic of Ireland that insurance policy is seamed by the brexit is the high priests as tying the hands of next government or the current government into having to have a very close relationship with the European Union close regulatory alignment close involvement the customs union and that's why they blocked it does this also to some extent the backstop issue and the Irish issue go to the heart of the eventual possibility that Northern Ireland and the Republic joined forces in one way or another in a federation of some sort and that the UK loses part of its Northern Ireland Northern Irish belonging if you like there's you get emotional stuff is important here the Catholic the citizens of Northern Ireland are pretty close now the 50-50 with the Protestants I haven't either forty nine point eight percent or fifty zero point one something like that and yet support for unification of some sort of the island of Ireland which at any point the people of Ireland can choose as part of the Good Friday Agreement in the struck back some fourteen years ago it does not completely tally to religious feeling I think there are many Catholic in Northern Ireland who are quite happy to be members of the United Kingdom citizens of the United Kingdom but want to be able to have that easy relationship with the rest of Union so the most likely outcome of a drive towards unification or even a demand for an independence and unification referendum I think would come if there is a no deal outcomes and all of the polling shows if a No Deal outcome comes in a number of the large support of the Catholic purport of the population may good the other way even some of the Protestants might as well for business reasons so again this is another reason why tourism a is so determined not to allow a no deal to happen because there's former Prime Minister John Major and Tony Blair's are as I've warned you will leash things you do not understand and again it was another of these blase comments the made by Boris Johnson and others how the whole Irish thing it's all blown up into a big so a populist comment Leslie yeah I kind of have to question I mean it are the brilliance of what Robbins described here is to illuminate that you know there there's certainly underlying conditions and trends that created the possibility for populist politicians to put themselves in the driver's seat and change the direction of politics in the UK surrounding brexit and certainly in the US and in Mexico but very far from inevitable that this needed to happen or or was going to happen and if you look at you know in the u.s. case and the in the in the UK case on those you know in the u.s. case on the presidential elections 2016 in the UK on the brexit referendum the numbers are so close but but the what the populist politician does what the politician does who's and I agree with Robin Dumas edits certain leaders is that they either willing to play hardball in a way that actually a lot of the professional politicians aren't they're really willing to to go you know below below the table and and to mobilize outside of norms that have been long established certainly in the UK in u.s. context and to use tactics that have been seen to be outside the bounds of legitimate political behavior and I when I observed certainly in the case of brexit as an American who's lived in the UK for a very long time since 2006 the thing that struck me the most during the referendum and in the in the 12 months after the referendum was the extent to which the dignified civilized educated well mannered British establishment did not get out in campaign right so people did not leave I remember sitting actually at Chatham House in the in the days before the referendum and there were people who expressed concern but if you if you look at a comparison I think it's actually a really good parent comparison it's not long ago we had Stacey Abrams who who ran for governor in in Georgia unsuccessfully but she ran a really extraordinary campaign if you look at the difference between what she was willing to do to try and win in terms of going out to every single County in that state going out to every single constituency making that case and you sort of compare it to what happened surrounding the brexit referendum the the populist politicians did that they used the media they made the argument they were they were out with their people and and those who didn't want to leave which were a very significant percentage of the population and a very significant percentage of the establishment governing politicians they did not they didn't put themselves out there they spoke not Chatham House which is you know wonderful and we appreciated that but it was not speaking to the popular vote and it was a popular vote so one of the key issues of courses things don't we tend to read backwards that there's an inevitability because there's growing inequality because there's wage stagnation because there's increased division because there's polarization because there's partisanship because there's a divided media environment but in fact a number of things that happen happened because of a series of political tactics and strategies and you know it rained like you've never seen before in the day of the brexit referendum but if you remember and I was it at the University as I was and nobody turned up to universe at the University right the students didn't turn up on that day rained in the southeast which ISM it rained in the southeast so the turnout was down right these things all have a very significant impact and I guess the last comment on that is the same can be said about the period since the referendum that we all know it didn't need to be framed and the the question of how to deal what in Britain's future relationship with Europe what it needed to be what it would be the options became framed in a certain kind of way because of the political dynamics that Robyn's talking about not because it needed to be this way and of course if it's possible because of the things under has points to that the case for Europe had never been made the identity had never been created or consolidated across and throughout society and so it becomes possible to create a very hard brexit narrative which gets a lot of traction and it makes it difficult to have the kind of negotiation that is critical now but it takes a lot of political mobilization and and very certain tactics and the populist politicians are far more willing to leverage those than the ordinary politicians that were so used to having certainly in the US and UK context now we're going through a little brexit here I don't know if it's little but we're going through a process in Mexico with a new government that was elected with massive support historically massive support which is a government that at the end wants to change the existing order in Mexico that wants to challenge the institutions that we have built up over the last 30 or 40 years that wants to bring Mexico back into a rather isolated position within the international order that is anti-globalization that is anti what it calls neoliberal conservative whatever that plays a great deal with the media as a strategy to be able to get its message across president lopez obrador those daily press conferences every day of the week Monday to Friday for about an hour and a half the this coming after a government that didn't have a single open press conference in six years the present president Pena Nieto met with journalists but he never had an open press conference where people could ask questions freely we here see a lot of the parallels between this government and and this president and mr. Trump in the way they use the media in the way their core support group which is only about 25 to 30% of the population will support them no matter what without any questioning if you like on whether they tell the truth or don't tell the truth mr. Trump I think passed the ten thousand falsehood mark sometime last week President Lopez Obrador has probably already a few hundred under his belt in the five months he's been president so there are lots of parallels and now both of these people have been called populist mr. Lopez Obrador will tell you that his definition of populism is helping the people the people who have not been helped by globalization by neoliberal policies by previous governments mr. Trump will tell you that his populism is getting more jobs to the United States employing more people resuscitating the Rust Belt and part of the farm belt and those parts of the US economy that have that have been if you like a little bit on the margins of prosperity but in both cases this speech really is rhetoric rather than reality I mean mr. Trump has fundamentally done for his elite wealthy group of people more than he certainly has done for the rest of the country and so far mr. Lopez Obrador who comes from the PRI who comes from the established political part of Mexico has also run into problems even though he controls Congress which Trump doesn't in getting all of his agenda through so I'm interested in your take on this as an American but also sitting in Chatham House from from the perspective of the UK because part of one of the reasons if you like that was put to the British people to get them to support leaving the European Union was that it would allow them to have a closer relationship to other countries including the United States you remember that debate with mr. Trump in the campaign as to whether they would be at the head of the line or at the back of the line in negotiating a new trade agreement do very interesting things here there I think there are some some real parallels as a suggestion or basis we closed microphone I'm it was one of one of the things that that that drama it sort of builds on what you said that he so masterfully does in making that argument about and seeking and speaking to the base medical fitness and proposing to deliver the thing a number of benefits oh and by the way and every said thank you this is so wonderful thank you so much and I should say that I don't claim to be an expert on Latin America we are hiring an expert so please with great humility but it really is Andres and and Julian together who we wouldn't be we wouldn't be we should be doing it we've known we've wanted to do it but without Andres it would not be happening so we are tremendously grateful to you and then we really we really do mean that you sort of put your energy behind us and and you and you've kind of pushed us in the direction that we've that we've wanted to go but we wouldn't have done it without you so thank you very much I think that the the other the other part of that right it's a nuance but it's you will you will give you that you need you that you do you deserve certain things you've been left behind but it's framing it both demand in the case of trumpet I think there's a parallel here and I'm gonna get to the values question in the UK it's framing it not only as you need more but it's you have you need more and they've not they've taken it away from you right it's always against somebody else and that becomes critical in understanding why it is that it's so possible to hit how many bosses drop to thousands it's probably many many more that's poor tracking but it's easy to hit 10,000 falsehoods if what you're saying is that that fact is just their way of trying to take something away from you which is me Donald Trump because it's it's it's all about that basic claim which is why things like the Muller report aren't changing the way that the base thinks about Donald Trump because it's framed as the Democrats are trying to undermine the politician that you elected so it doesn't become about the facts it becomes about a certain kind of division that framing is also playing out internationally right trums Trump's sort of his rhetoric has all been about you're doing poorly because they have taken away from you whether it's Germany on cars whether it's China on any number of things it's always about the other ring so the facts become much much less relevant and I guess the other you know we have we've talked much about the economics but and this is where there is a parallel with the UK there are many parallels but the on the social values the other thing that you know Trump hasn't delivered when we talk about you know economic strategy the tax cuts have done very little for his base but he has delivered on the values dimension because he's delivering on the Supreme Court and that matters a lot that matters a lot not only to his base that matters a lot to the Republican voters and that defines a lot of the division in the United States where you stand on any number of core values and that gets to the identity question he's delivering that in the Supreme Court is the promise of potentially delivering that and great until dwarfed and he's to bring that across the court system in the United States on this sort of question of the UK and brexit and Europe there is an identity question that underlies all that about what does it mean to be protected and and that that's played again very masterfully in a way that it becomes much less significant economically and it becomes much less what facts are if it's some level this is something about who we are it makes me they're very difficult to to to fight without by the way I should just quickly mention something that Mariana did not mention and that is although this is Chatham House we're not under Chatham House Rules it's it's on the record so I just want to make sure that everybody knows that Robyn I just want to come in on the back of some of these very important points that Leslie was making I mean let's we have to be honest with ourselves the people for a large proportion of people in Britain America many parts of the European America have a right to be angry yeah they have not had a good time we all know the numbers yeah 20 years of stagnation in real medium wages in the united united states and through large parts of the united kingdom thoroughly impoverished areas we have been guilty of looking at aggregate numbers of GDP and GDP growth by three percent of all the world's doing well son marriage might be going by four or five some might be growing as zero or even be negative there's the famous line that came out in the brexit debate which apologizes for those you've heard it before but there was a debate where all the people in favor of remaining the EU spoke out the audience he says look we're in the EU we've got the lowest rate of unemployment we've got the highest rates of foreign direct investment we've got the highest rate of GDP growth you know in but why would you leave that you and somebody shout on the back that's your GDP mate not mine and that you know there are real winners and losers and the brilliance of the leave campaign was to zero in on those that sense of injustice and angry and the winners and losers element of globalization and we could throw in here they did do it with some us provided money and technology not Russian by the way but even then can you criticize a campaign for mobilizing three million voters who had no reason to vote for the past five to ten years because they felt they were not represented so even that's a thing I think to to criticize him up now the question becomes what are you doing with it is there a policy if populism becomes economic nationalism that's okay I mean you know budala mare the French finance economy minister peter out Maya the German economy minister are flirting right now with economic nationalism we need European champions we've got a fight China we've got a fight America we need more of an industrial policy Trump is doing economic nationalism China's of the Chinese are screwing us we need a better deal we need more jobs back here I don't care about Apple if they keep the global supply chains don't help my voters they don't help people in Ohio whatever it's a fair point so economic nationalism is being actually co-opted partly by mainstream parties and Ecko and economic nationalism doesn't have to be populism the worry for me is when populism it becomes simply a route for division the other populism normally is it's me against you it's us against the establishment it's and it's not just us against you did the Democratic sense they are dangerous they are enemies the other becomes you know turned into into the enemy and I think music to the ears of the Mexicans here I'll say our last point on this I'll finish here and this is what we're having to watch in Europe is where's the line between this call it economic nationalism and the drift from populism to off for at Arianism because that is the move we have to watch out for authoritarianism is when you start to say well we need therefore to change the institutions because as the Polish governor said the courts are against us so we now need the executive to control the courts or Viktor Orban says the press is not really representing the people we need to own the press now when you go to that level that's not populism anymore it's populism morphing into aura terrorism so the question becomes is how strong your institutions I'm not worried about the institutions of Britain I'm not worried about the institutions of America but I'm worried about the institutions and you might be a worry about America yeah I mean because our institutions are are first of all recent our democratic institutions are recent they are still vulnerable especially when the executive has control of one at least one of the other branches of government and is looking to try to control the other branch the judicial so I agree with you I mean in the u.s. nobody worries first of all because Trump doesn't have today a majority in the lower house of Congress and even though he has named people to the Supreme Court it is still to a great extent an institution highly respected autonomous institution in the u.s. here in Mexico it's a bit a bit of a different story and we are in that penumbra of what you've just described as the transition from populism to authoritarianism or dictatorship where the executive says this is what I want to do and I'm going to do it I don't care whether you like it or not I don't care whether it goes against the law I mean we had we have a case now just to mention one of many where the president has ordered in writing his ministers his cabinet to ignore a constitutional amendment that was passed in the previous administration without going to make it a constitutional change so from a legal point of view that is authoritarianism that is no longer populism I mean I guess I would I would say that I think it's um I think it's more complicated in the u.s. context I think people are very much worried about the institution's they're very much worried about whether or not the Supreme Court becomes something that's very partisan and doesn't feel independent they're very much worried about whether the changes in the Republican Party put us in a position where it's very difficult thing about bipartisanship and where will Congress succeed in ensuring it's its mandate which is oversight of the executive they're very worried about you know micro-level things like whether or not elections work on a on a on a very local level voter suppression is happening across a number of dimensions and so I think the debate about institutions and across the courts right of the courts being second and will they become less independent I think there's a very serious concern in the u.s. about the quality of institutions in large part because the quality of institutions is linked fundamentally and I think we've always known this but we know it we're now than we ever knew before to the norms right the expectations of the appropriate behavior that's pursued to shore up those institutions and that sense of beliefs but also you know more broadly people shoring up that appropriate behavior around those institutions is is being eroded that there's a very I'm sure many of you have seen at the the book on when democracies die Levitsky that and they talk about forbearance and toleration as being two really important norms that shore up institutions right that you that you know when you know to respect the opposition you know when to hold back there's a sense of restraint that's embedded in the political culture and those things are being eroded so I think there is a very you know it's sort of too stark to say is it good is American it gonna turn into you know a fascist or authoritarian country that's not the concern the concern is that the quality of democracy is fundamentally eroded in incremental ways and that become very hard to to reverse in the short to medium term Robin I wanted to hit the third item on our on the title of our of our event today and that is the threats to the international order we've talked a little bit about the threats to national orders both in the UK the u.s. partly in Mexico what are the threats as you see them today in priority shall we say what's the most important threat you see and and perhaps one or two others and how do you see these threats working themselves out do you think that the international order is is is something that is robust enough to withstand the assaults that mr. Trump or Gigi ping or mr. micawber or Angela Merkel are looking to as you call it to go back to some economic nationalism to to withdraw a little bit from the post-world War two Bretton Woods WTO mechanisms United Nations and and how do you see that developing over the short term so I think from my perspective at the top of my list right now is my spice talk about it it's this transition of the United States from being of the most powerful nation in the world that believed it was benefiting from the world boarded-up create to the most powerful nation in the world believe it is not benefiting from the order that it created and therefore saying you know what I'm gonna use a little bit of this muscle in some ways that maybe we haven't used it before because you know we weren't it you've been defending this world order for a long time now people have been free riding on it those Europeans not spending enough on defense and just running big trade deficits against us or the Chinese have come in we brought them into the WTO and you know what they're not playing by the rules we thought and in fact they're not going in the direction we thought politically either time to play a hardball and you know we will pick and choose who we need to have as allies and we'll ignore whether they also uphold some of the norms and rules we believe in Saudi Arabia Egypt and then you know other times and we want to think that country's an enemy will suddenly bring all those rules out of the draw Maduro and say Oh democracy must survive unless you've got this weird situation at one moment you've got the US administration you know talking about liberal democracy will never be defeated in the next minute they're trying to put the Muslim Brotherhood as a terrorist organization to help CC you know entrench further power as an authoritarian dictator in Egypt so that you know in my lifetime and I have lived and I'd be fortunate live in the gilded era of that post-war period no major international wars in my world in my part of the world and nothing that is escalated you know beyond the obviously terrible horrors and civil wars that had continued to happen all over the world in that world order international order sentences it's not happened you know once America slips the leash it's not so much what America might do is that everyone gets worried and everyone starts looking over to themselves when everyone else starts looking up themselves we've got some pretty interesting models from the 19th and early 20th centuries of what happens so then if you know the things what you do about it as I said part of this America if it's if it's economic nationalism and it only goes that far Trump says I'm to rewrite the terms of trade with China I'll try and rewrite in terms of trade with the European Union Mexico here you know in Mexico Canada exactly CEMEX if I'm going to get the WTO tightened up which it needs by the way I will bring more investment back to the US less global supply chains that's fine that's the rebalancing as I said earlier I think we can live with but if it drifts over to and you could see this in the US administration obviously to here Leslie's view on this from strikes me as somebody who would be willing just to rebalance yeah and then maybe sit back inside the order or let the next president go back to it if they want to but there are many people United States for whom the rise of China this is my second thing on my list of worries and it emerges from the first the rise of China is seen as an existential threat to the United States does not get on top off now and in a hard way yeah in a way where you use that American power then you're not gonna be able to do it later better to do it now while China is not as strong as it will be in ten years time and in fact let's make sure it does not get as strong as it wants to be in ten years time so then you have to rely very much on a country like China saying oh okay maybe we'll slow down on getting so strong maybe we need to let America still be the writer of the rules you know this is many as they said they're many said teen Rees taking place in China right now this is the centenary of the I think it's 4th of May 1919 student rebellion that you know in essence was the beginning of the collapse that pre-communist period was then led to the foundation of the Communist Party in 1921 and then is taking power in another big universe from 1949 so China is all about right now re-establish your national identity which is more round about nationalism I mean the Communist legitimacy is being melded together with nationalism you put that nationalism alongside an American in security and economic nationalism maybe drifting over to a security nationalism that's worrying now I'll stop here and just say what can we do about it there's many bits and pieces between China America I'll leave that to Leslie to say I would say that European nations and the EU and those countries that have benefitted from this world order are gonna have to step up and not freeride anymore the EU is doing it it's truck trade deals with Japan close I think to trying to do one with Mexico completely one with Singapore Vietnam the Japanese without America went ahead Mexican clued TCP TPP the new compressor progressive transport Pacific Partnership this is a time where this in other words when what brexit is so badly timed you need the UK on the rules-based order side of this debate not trying to play cheerleader to a trumpian america if that's what we have written is and trying to buy and sell more products to turkey or to you know to some other country and keep them happy that's not the global Britain I have in mind but I think therefore there is a role and will be looking to countries in Latin America Mexico being a logical one you know where's Brazil were Argentina those countries have heft and with engagement can they be part of that coalition if you want to call it Japan South Korea Australia New Zealand maybe Mexico others the European Union plus Britain in or out you know there is a group out there and we've got to take some ownership a bit like you think we didn't fight enough in brexit for the for the world we were benefiting from and didn't understand what it was going wrong let's not make that mistake on international order yeah and then of course the problem in that is that Britain is not unfortunately well placed right now to to think strategically or with any amount of bandwidth about how to engage you know the the narrative of global Britain so far it doesn't really have much to it other than you know the two words so that I think this is one of the tragedies of brexit is just the extent to which it's taken tremendous intellectual horsepower I mean it away away from thinking strategically about Britain's role in the world there is phenomenal intellectual horsepower in the UK and it's it's just been turned into a highly consequential but very narrow and very limited debate I mean I'm completely with Robin and and and in this this view that the the economic the sort of international economic architecture is inevitably going to have to be renegotiated because there is no domestic support certainly in the u.s. on either side of the aisle for keeping things as they were there's there's broad consensus that America's relationship with China needs to be really thought I think that Americans are much more divided on this very unpleasant way of interacting with Europe that the current the u.s. president has but on China I think there's just truth that's been a long time coming he was knocking out an open door although interestingly I think it was yesterday I saw on on Twitter that Biden was trying to reframe the narrative on China and and it was fascinating to watch the responses to it by leading foreign policy thinkers in the u.s. saying what is what is he doing Democrats are saying what are you doing Joe Biden you can't walk back the China threat because we'vewe've that's that's their the other thing I want to say is that you know the the other thing that's changing a huge amount is of course on the US side and it's important for the transatlantic partnership is the extent to which commitment to liberal values is going to become the part of international order and the transatlantic partnership and certainly this US president doesn't think that they should be there are plenty of American presidents who have talked the talk of democracy and human rights and failed to to back it up but there aren't very many presidents who have simply said we don't want to be part of it we don't believe in it we don't care have you know and that's kind of what this president has done and not only in terms of really important friends and allies but important in terms of really important of values and commitments that have been there you know the entire the entire post-war period they're just being shed so one of the questions that comes out of this is you know are we looking at a rules-based order is that all that we can you know is that all that we can aim for and that's a big ask and are we basically giving up the idea that it's liberal yep international order and people have varied you know countries have very different views on that people have very different views on that but there is a sense that there's that is the critical shift and part of that's to do with the fact that China and India and ending up any number of emerging powers didn't ever really like that liberal international order anyway that perhaps the 1990s right the post Cold War period were perhaps about over extension and overreach and part of the backlash is about liberal countries right countries that fashion themselves as being liberal internationally as well as the emerging powers don't want that democracy and human rights and that's the sort of constraints on sovereignty remember that you know the high priests of brexit don't like the European Court of Justice they don't like that part of values part that infringes on sovereignty so I think that you know with the 90s in some ways may have may prove to be an exception but we're undoubtedly moving into at best a renegotiation of a rules-based order I think neither of you have mentioned Russia hmm as a threat to the international order mmm any thoughts for President Putin and those around him who share his world view this isn't perfect I mean because the more the more the world becomes free-for-all yeah with without structures the more room there is for a country like Russia which is ruthless self-interested and insecure to leverage that insecurity and it has so much more influence and power in a world in which there are no rules compared to the world in which there are rules which is why you know the big shock to Vladimir Putin was to work wake up to the realization that maybe the EU was a more of a threat to his view of a centrally controlled Russia than actually NATO mate it was a rather useful enemy and you know he could use it to mobilize people but he you had there was nothing he could could get his hands on it was a set of values than norms that penetrated into society and he's done his best to be frank to undermine the EU more than NATO since then and the irony is you've got the United States in its value-free context allowing economic nationalism of Steve Bannon to also be a form of me first nurse that actually looks to Russia as an example and buying the Russian propaganda that we're upholders of traditional family values which involve obviously torturing and imprisoning people but you know without trial whatever those family values are but you know it's my poor views I don't mention Russia because it's kind of simple President Putin I think believes that Russia inside a globalized world will be a Russia that gradually loses influence and loses sovereignty because its economy would get meshed into the rest of the world and with a hundred and twenty million slowly declining too much territory and a system of government that is not capable of taking advantage of globalization the way Western systems are Russia will gradually lose influence so he's into spoiling a spoiler if we start undermining our own system what's not to like and but I don't see Russia as systemic and I'm more what Russia is doing right now is still still today defensive everyone talked about Russia as oh they're playing it so brilliantly they're out there you know making it russia's world no he's managed to hang on to syria just now they had the port of Tartus since 1958 they've had the air base in Latakia since the 1960s they nearly lost it they've had Crimea as their main naval base forever they nearly lost it you know you go through each of these these examples it's still in my mind a defensive player it's a spoiler you just need you just need to be awake to it and aware of it I think more people are now than they were pre prior prettier Ukraine yeah yeah I just wanna add one thing to that I mean III pretty much agree with that but it does depend on where you sit and I think we are all dog isn't of the very real security concerns that people on the eastern part of Europe havin and those are genuine and they're legitimate and they're worse now because of America's the current administration's position with respect to NATO the uncertainty of the transatlantic partnership working effectively through NATO and so those I mean that's very real and very genuine so I know that robin mean and we all sort of at the systemic level it's a different question the other the other area at though which you know it's brush is not doing itself any favors and and the model report has certainly reveal this but you know it's it's certainly creating domestic problems for democracies right actively working to sow division and undermine the integrity of elections and that's real and that's serious and I think that it's not systemic in a sort of geopolitics way as it was one of the major threats but it is a very significant thing and and public opinion you know is the public is aware of this and and very unsettled by it I think I've completely agree I may be being over emphasizing too much at a point and I think you're you're right to pull it back Lesley to to the real threats to you know political systems and centuries in Europe and in Western Europe as well look at the connections into the marine lepen party to the lega Nord in Italy and where where Russia could pull some of those instincts from populism towards authoritarianism so I suppose that my frustration is the the big debate right now to my mind is how we deal with China because then we look at Africa the belton Road initiative we're all worried about what has tended to come with this just give the money and you'd rather give it to a government that's stable you know particularly worried if it's if it's not zero sack in Malaysia who of course has turned out to be devolved in huge corruption scandals but at least he struck the deals on the rail deals with with China so China as it goes global a bit like we did back in the early 20th century 19th and probably even into the second half of the 20th century has has been backing up autocratic leaders and even being allowing a certain manner crashing to go on if you look at how quickly China's trying to pivot right now on the Melbourne Road initiative to get it back into a place where it will be at least somewhat acceptable to Western Europe at least and maybe to some of the host countries and here in Latin America maybe we had 12 of the map American countries who signed on to Belton broad Mexico hasn't but what they but what China might do if at least you can have a debate with China about okay maybe we need some environmental regulation maybe there needs to be some transparency on the bidding process there's a debate to be had because China is secure China believes it can win in a globalized world Russia is the opposite and there is no debate to have with Russia so when Russia starts to want to interfere in Libya when you see some of their private security forces and parts of Central Africa you gotta get worried because there they really will support autocratic regimes and corruption because that's the model one of the very interesting more recent developments brings me to the issue of Venezuela you saw that the failed if you like movement that why though tried the day before yesterday in one way or another was played by the US administration as a Russian interference in the eventual plans for mr. Maduro to leave Venezuela and so on and of course the Russians first of all the the Venezuelans owe them a lot of money they've been lending a lot of a lot of things to Venezuela but more importantly for the Russians I think it's a very exciting moment to be able to poke the eye of the US to go back on the Monroe Doctrine and say you know that's no longer the case we are here and we participate with the case of China it's even more so because China has invested also an enormous amounts of money in infrastructure projects in Latin America and the the fact that these two shall we say vestiges of on the one hand the cold or in the case of the Russians and the rising of importance of China within this region of the world is also something to to reckon with and something that is it's very different from the way we were behaving before and then you have the u.s. responding by saying we're gonna put an embargo at blockade not an embargo a blockade on Cuba in order to make sure that the Cubans stop receiving oil from the Venezuelans and sending the material and the support that they're sending so any thoughts on Venezuela and Lesley as you follow it yeah I mean I guess my you know my one reaction certainly to the last few days has been that with respect to u.s. engagement that it hasn't been wise and I and I and I and I think you know the entire this is the decision to recognize is a is one of the most important diplomatic tools that exists and and should be taken very carefully and even if it might be the right thing to do it doesn't make it the right thing to do as it were or the effective thing to do and I think that the you know the u.s. that Mr Lopez Obrador would be very happy to hear you say yeah but I mean I'm very pragmatic you know I'm probably one wants the right outcome but the question is not putting that first it's putting that you know at the end of a strategy and I think the US has taken a very quick line and then sort of pushed itself into a corner in terms of its ability to actually facilitate some sort of pragmatic negotiation that could lead in a constructive direction which is not an easy thing to do in any case but I think the this sort of the tweets right shoring up the the that not a coup that didn't look like it was going to have a lot of traction in any case I've not been an intelligent the it's a very it's a very difficult as you say a very difficult situation because one doesn't one wants to get rid of mr. Maduro in general because we understand what the damage he's done to Cuba and Chavez MO and so on to Venezuela sorry but on the other hand he does have a core group of some board he is a populist he is an autocrat he has managed to polarize the Venezuelan population enormous ly interestingly enough the people who supported Chavez originally the marginalized the the poor the the ones that did not benefit from any of the oil riches that Venezuela has and so on no longer support Maduro so he has lost that core group of support and I think he knows it and he's worried about it and there's a clear question as to whether he can hang on for much longer I don't think he can I think this was sort of the beginning of the end of the of the regime it'll take perhaps a little bit more for the pushing to to function the US has been all over the place on this talking about all options being on the table military options the Assistant Secretary of Defense changed the travel plans yesterday instead of going into Europe he stayed back in Washington because he wants to make sure that the pre positioning of strategy and all of that and then you have mr. Bolton and you Elliott Abrams all of these people sitting there you know talking and Trump threatening right which he loves to do he threatens us all the time I don't think there's any country that has been more threatened by mr. Trump than Mexico we've been threatened with a wall we've been threatened with with deport mass deportations we've been threatened with economic sanctions with tariffs with whatever you want and he does it constantly yesterday was another day in which he decided he was going to bash Mexico so we are very accustomed to it and we're also very accustomed to the fact that many of these threats are empty yes they do not really represent a strategy they do not represent that policy they just represent his occurrence at the moment of what he thinks would be a good way to move something from one direction to another when he's always talking to his people at home yeah right it smells like multi-protocol signaling creddies it is a very important part of his going to his base about the border and as we know because we've seen the money that he's asking the next set of money from for strong borders and immigration it's gonna get worse right that's Mexico cool because that is going to be the number one issue in the 2020 elections immigration borders that kind of security so it's going to get very nativist and very very nasty why don't we take a few comments questions from the audience I see lots of interest right away we have about 20 minutes so let's see I saw Enrique inaudible and then you we need microphones I have a mic doesn't isn't being used so if somebody will take it and give it to and we can then we can move from there so please identify yourself so that Leslie and Robin know who you are and we kill you I do I work for Exxon Mobil and my question has to do with your discussion about this kind of rudderless international order that you describe and i will be very curious about your thoughts on one country that was just mentioned in passing India and a country that was not mentioned Germany who seemed to be in the middle of this big vectors that seemed to be at play so so that's my question thank you okay Nadeem karate estrada I'm curious to know how much you feel that Facebook had to do with Gregson there's been I've watched a TED talk yesterday about it and has been New York Times articles about the citing this Zuckerberg is not willing to turn over data of targeting people who have shown in polls that they're leaning to be persuaded in any political judgement and how they've been bombarded we know this and you mean Facebook specifically or a social media in general I just want to talk about Facebook because that's what's been uncovered and talked about now I don't and through social organizations Facebook and how it contributed to Prague Center okay thank you we'll take one more one more and then we will over here and then we'll give them a chance to respond and we'll have another round thank you my name is David Angolan destroyers ambassador to Mexico and various other countries here I thank you very much to the comments our fantastic you know to clean struck by the comments on China and on the question of the maintenance of the weather it's going to be a liberal international order rules-based order or not in that context you know 2008 we had the local recession and one of the great outcomes of that and was of course the g20 and the role that the g20 played in in trying to preserve the international liberal international order what role do you see for the g20 in addressing some of these questions particularly those issues that seem to have become central to many of the debates including in this country such as inequality and how to address and where it could have all outcome for people as a function of some of these great international drivers like global thank you so we yeah I'll jump in I probably want to see some better look there so I'm on Germany Rica no one's in a good position right now I can't think of a major country Lesley was mentioning you know Britain's completely AWOL in a believe on all these big debate at the moment because the government cannot process at least American government's uses will have some capacity to do International Affairs even if the White House doesn't drive it in the Soviets Africa policy and this Balkans policies would be quite constructed in the last couple of years but Germany is I think undergoing a very difficult transition of its own and is gradual the Helmut Kohl through to Angela Merkel if you listen to Hannah Graham Karen Bauer ek case you know the new lead person who's good to take over from most probably from Angela Merkel as Chancellor she's come out with quite a hard-edged line trying to get voters back on the CDU side that they lost in the immigration push there's a much more skeptical attitude the United States Angela Merkel herself for said we're gonna have to as Europeans take more responsibility for our future we can't trust you know the United States quite as much as we did before and yet within the European Union they can't recreate as Britain leaves the EU they can't recreate the old franco-german motor the franco-german motors they're now it's not a motor it's like a defensive lock they will hold on to each other so neither goes off with others into other directions but they can't be an agenda setter and there was a hope briefly when Michael came into power that would happen but it's not there could spend a long time talk about what I want to make is their own the basis of their own self-identity is weakening an America that was backing European integration that they could treat as their principal Ally now their question no we can't follow American all of these things and we're getting criticized in fact weird enough seated as the bad boy in the trumpian narrative of the trade relationship and some of it is true that's always some of it is justified and at the same time within the EU and enlarging you without the UK takes away the triangle that they managed quite carefully Pro integration politically with France Pro economic integration with the UK so well I'd say about Germany is then they're not in a position to lead we just need to make sure they do not become a spoiler themselves within European integration I don't think they will mind there anytime soon there's a lot of rebuilding going on in Germany and a lot of atomization of the politics there as you well know as well I'm so very little about India except that having just come the Facebook question is relevant this having just come in from San Francisco I spent a couple of days meeting with technology companies and so on it's a big discussion there was all about India because actually India is the swing player on where technology might go and where technology might go with politics and is Modi gonna take it in a negative route potentially in a more populist slash nationalist route or does India have some of the checks and balances through its federal system through its parliamentary system to be able to hold it back the reason India never comes up from me at least in these big conversations it is not a country that has the capacity or interest right now to act strategically having around this border yes the relationship with China which seems to be improving from what I see at the moment although obviously they have the fears about Sri Lanka specially it would go back into more pronate pro-chinese orbit that might happen if this is presidential election but they're focused on their neighborhood terrorism and like China this huge internal agenda of how they deal with their massive young population who with climate change are getting less than this opportunity in the agricultural economy and yet may not have the manufacturing transition to go through so I think if I were an Indian leader my god I've got session in term agenda there's almost no time to play it you know more broadly politically I think on Facebook very quickly the movie that came out for an uncivil war that was put on TV the other day was absolutely explicit in its fingering if you want to call it the aggregate IQ role in this process so Cambridge analytic aggregate IQ all linked to Robert Mercer the US billionaire and also political activists very heavily on the right there seems to be a fair amount of evidence and there's a very good Guardian journalist who's done a lot of work on this that they in a way used almost the brexit debate as a test run for the Trump campaign all these for trying out the Tea Party mode not the Russians there was some all the poll the numbers show a heavy amount of of maybe a spike in Russian bot activity in the two or three days before but what one you could argue look what won the referendum was the one two maybe three million people who voted who not voted before it was the fact that was a 72% turnout rather than the 68 percent turnout for a 65 percent turnout the 65 percent turnout remained would have won at a 72% the people who came out were people who'd not voted before and according to the reports that have been put out there they were given data now whether this data was true Loftus Facebook release through Cambridge and Antigua I don't know so I can't comment on it I've heard reports to that effect but I don't know it but what they did do very cleverly was I did that was most able to be used through the Facebook mechanism of creating communities by dropping in stuff that football you know clickbait and then we saw the clique they came in they then started feeding in immigration and then you kit and bubble bubble so it did play a role but did these 3 million people not have a right to vote I go back this point again what I said earlier so yeah we could have remained and we would remained because people would not have heard how frustrated so many people in Britain well Facebook might be in trouble on this but there's a deeper saying why don't I leave the g20 for a minute and let you take that on I'll come it's this time yeah now the g20 question I mean yeah clearly a much better you know important forum because the distribution of economic power is radically changed but I think you're the interesting part of your question is you know what can it do to help state to give States the space to address domestic concerns that are partly a product but not entirely of of inequality and that's the really tough question isn't it because that's where it's sort of winding back at the clock to how we used to think about cooperation in the 1950s and 60s which was to give states and governments the room to take care of their people right the welfare state and all the rest of it but I you know I I don't know I'm still skeptical and nervous even with more players in the room or possibly with more players in the room that there's the you know the the global context has changed so much the level of integration is there the willingness and the ability to grant those exceptions I'm you know cautiously pessimistic thank you could just tell me that it's necessary tackle to the cautious pessimism it strikes me the g28 did a great crisis management role in 2008-9 at best it could be a crisis manager again I at a strategic level and right now you have to ask if there's another crisis today certainly in Europe they say the Italian banking sector went crazy with China step in this time with the standoff that it has and China was critical in providing lending and its stimulus package as you know it was a huge player in getting out of the 2008 crisis the one place where it's been useful has been this very technocratic area of the Financial Stability Board and setting some of them the guidelines for strengthening up the Basel process so when it when it gives its authority to technocratic process is to work I think it has played a useful role but I do think those technocratic proceeds will get to inequality that in the end ends up being about national governments and probably some sort of trade or forum on some of the big rules between big players and the g2 it is so diverse now in this free for all world it's even the less I think as Lesley was saying capable of of coming to some really strategic answers we take one more question and then I'm going to ask Ricardo to come up in and do a conclusion Ricardo Gonzalez Horta from Deloitte Miguel I think and then our it has been a wonderful eye size set of opinions and set of comparisons that I have heard today my name is Michaela ringy I'm an OBE so I am worried about Britain and I've been worried about Britain for a long time because the I think the as you well put it we don't have I don't have to repeat anything however the vote the vote then happened on that poll I don't think it will would be the same if there was a new one so basically a very narrow comment or a question however you want to interpret it what do you think will happen and I think you said it but I would like to see it more clearly what do you think will happen between Scotland Northern Ireland the world and its big question but I mean how does that affect the world Europe and obviously what we've been looking for – since we are going to go international with more free trade agreements if you leave the European Union then we will have to cook up something to be United thank you thank you me in other news good morning thank you very much it's been fascinating I'm Alec Brown Gort I represent the University of California here in Mexico a quick question very very broad we've all heard that people who don't know history are destined to repeat it blah blah blah much more I like the comment history doesn't necessarily repeat itself but it rhymes right now I think in some of your comments reflect that there was some thinking about parallels with the 1930s the rice of authoritarian government and fascism so on but there are also I think parallels to the period before 1914 to the end of the first period of broad globalization very quickly which era does this rhyme better thank you yeah I mean you know I'm very skeptical of the I I guess I would be on the side of there are some things that are the same but there are so many things that have changed and I and I tend to be I mean people really do and it's it's valuable right like to run the 1930s analogy in particular but yeah I don't think any of them actually stress-test all that well which isn't that there aren't some interesting things there and obviously this comment is more this questions more for Robin but I'll just say very quickly that I think I probably differ from Robin on this I mean you know I hope I'm why don't know if I hope I'm right or am I wrong but I don't see Brooks it happening anytime soon you know I think this is gonna go on for a very long time and we watch I'll be wrong on October 31st but I think we're gonna be an ace to the kind of altered space and it's a question of whether that can come to us you know stable staying place but I think that I think it's not happening anytime soon Robin I suppose if I had to pick I'd lean towards the 1930s I mean I know the us-china thing is there for the 1914 through the disco trap but I think the Chinese are so determined not to be Germany is who I'm saying they so read their history and they're so aware of their history their so trying not to fall into that trap that I hope that they will avoid it I think we're much more for my take in that nineteen thirties period where the impact the delayed impact of the Great Depression and what is done to political structures and systems combined with technology which is just awakened people's engagement that provided many more effective routes forward Leslie described the underhand methods of the the more extreme populist hard those people who are using this technology way more actively and aggressively than the people I would call it more on the right side of things so Aibileen towards the 1930s now at least we went through the 1930s again so you know some lessons have been learned and be hard for fascism to come back up again but some other type of competition might come through on Miguel you've been worried about Britain for a long time we should we should discuss why we won't member in for a long time like the bridge has been underperforming economically for a long time and that's part of the brexit conundrum is that you know British productivity is stagnated for a good ten years prior to the brexit debate you know our primary and secondary education lack of investment infrastructure low levels of R&D investment small amounts of long-term patient capital I mean you can add up the north/south divide you know and this is the irony of our exit is that maybe I'll come to you whether my happen if bricks it happens British politicians will have nowhere to hide they will have to take on those issues in a far more aggressive way than they have in a way not well they've not done in previous years because they will be in a much more precarious position economically I hope that kind of discipline if we are to leave will be positive and there is something about politicians having a sense of agency as analysts we can say what politicians should do a politicians tend to do things when they kind of want to do them or feel they have to do more driven to do them and if Britain leaves my only silver lining on that is that British politician will reacquire a sense of agency but for whatever reason they see many of them to have lost as members of the EU they just can't play the EU game like other EU politicians player logically they should they've got a good hand to play but they don't play it they spend all the time cutting bat resisting so what will happen next Robin Robin Leslie show we will have here sometime next year yeah I'll be held against what I say yes absolutely so what I could see this being a limbo for a long time but I think the British political system will not accept and MPs will not accept an extended limbo I also do not think they will accept a second referendum unless and this is where I'll come to my point the only way through right now is either and No Deal that Britain just leaves and takes it and takes his chances and what it'll do then it would change anything it'll then start negotiating for the next four years if we if we leave the No Deal the first thing we'll have to do is to start negotiating a deal and there'll be a six-month gap so the No Deal won't be a No Deal the EU will say all right okay it's No Deal like if we better take six months to get ready for it and let's see if we can agree at least some basic parameters so there'll be disruption but it won't be like falling off a cliff flee if you come to withdrawal you then get two to four years of aid to negotiate the future relation whatever happens I think remain person in my mind is the least likely outcome except through a referendum and I suppose this is all down to the Labour Party now the Conservative Party can't deliver it will labour come through and this is an incredibly difficult abate they've not wanted to own it they want the conservators to own it my instincts tell me they won't come up with a solution but if tourism a were to say accept my deal and I will allow a referendum to take place with the referendum I'm sorry once it was the reading into the other time but the referendum could be on two things it could be on the deal whatever that is or it could be a retake of the 2016 what do you want a bow that is do we stay in or do we leave yeah yeah believe in No Deal but the interesting thing is that I've talked to lots of lots not but to many remain people who voted remain who today would not vote remain again because they are very annoyed at the way Europe has treated okay this would be my close report if there is a second referendum I think the likelihood of voting leave is actually high i album if i you so that's why i think i can't give you the route right now because it's just too complicated I'd love to see it but I think we'll be out this time next year and you think we might be and so we'll have to come back and see what happened sounds great Cardo I I want to first of all again express my appreciation both to Robin and to Leslie for making the trip here but also to Deloitte and specifically to Ricardo Monsanto sorta Deloitte partner and the National Director for fiscal and legal services which is probably the most important part that the boy does anyway for some concluding remarks and then we'll thank will thank all of all of the panelists and Deloitte together thank you very much yes No okay so thank you very much for this presentation I think it's been fascinating and insightful for a lot of us a brexit looks like something very far away from Mexico but it does has consequences in the global economy Mariana ask me a little bit to talk about the economic consequences of uncertainties so that's one of the biggest questions and difficult to answer I've been doing some research and as good economists always do the figures vary significantly when we try to analyze what would be the potential consequences of a brexit so I assume that the Economist and my good friend girls are having fun just doing a lot of economic reports you cannot hear me okay so they'll be there there will be practical consequences coming out from brexit for the businesses there will be consequences for those businesses that are located in the UK – in businesses in the European Union there will be consequences maybe less for businesses that are located in the European Union that trade well with a United Kingdom and there will be important consequences for the value chain in the whole in the whole continent and either even for countries such as Mexico that they have a free trade agreement or an agreement with the European Union we will have to renegotiate something with the UK because otherwise automatically that all uto rules will be will be enforced so even though breaks it looks far away yet for Mexican companies doing business or Latin American companies doing business in the European Union they will have consequences there are some economies that already say that there are consequences from the time in which breaks it to us announce when the referendum results were announced and there are several Ellis's that already say that part of the effects of inflation part of the effects on the growth of GDP are already affecting the UK economy and what we've seen in practice as Deloitte is that we see a lot of our clients asking what they should do in the future and it's a very difficult question to answer but we've seen companies beginning to take decisions of slowing down their investment in the Kyokai as you know the UK is seen as a gateway to the European Union as a very good place to establish corporate headquarters and from there move to the to the European Union but we are seeing some other companies asking themselves whether it's right to be in the UK or to have a UK Head Quarter to do business in the European Union we've seen some companies deciding to invest UK companies deciding to invest outside of the UK just because their value chain will be affected so they are beginning to decide to put some of their manufacturing operations out of the UK into European Union to avoid effects on tariffs and non-tariff barriers that consequence in the future will definitely vary if there's a soft or hard that breaks it the consequences are very different very different if there's a heartbreak seed that means that that WTO rules will immediately be in effect on the trade and relationship between the UK and European Union and when we say that WTO rules will be applied that means that a lot of the goods going from the UK into the European Union's will be subject to an increased tariffs and that will affect their businesses but not only that if they come up with a negotiation that could be it close to a free trade agreement then you have a lot of barriers non-tariff barriers of goods that will affect the UK good to go into the European Union and vice-versa so in any case either either a heartbreak seat where the WTO rules will apply or a soft break seat where they might come out with something like a free-trade agreement there will be effects as I was telling you that the analysis made by the economist vary significantly but if we take a good scenario from from some of these studies apparently in a heartbreak seat scenario the effect in GDP could go between 2 and 3% and in a soft bracelet could be between 1 and 2% so regardless of the scenario either a moral moderate soft brake seat or a heartbreak seat there will be significant consequences for the UK economy finally some of the lessons from Mexico I would say is first as Andres was saying somehow we're leaving our small brake seat with NAFTA obviously the expectation is that we will not leave NAFTA and the Van Outen after will come enforce that t-mek but the reality is that Mexico has also suffered significant consequences out of this negotiation since President Trump announced that that NAFTA was going to be renegotiated we do have a lot of our clients multinational clients that have decided to slow down their invest investments in Mexico so there are consequences very similar consequences in our context of the renegotiation of NAFTA and and another important comment is uncertainty does have consequences and as well as Andres was discussing uncertainty in Mexico creates economic consequences we have a government that doesn't send clear signals to the investors so one day we hear the government saying we will respect the law but the next time the next day we see a memo coming out saying a well but this education law you can forget about it right in regard to what the Congress is then we hear a government saying we'll attack corruption which I believe we all agree which is great but the next day we see that 70% of government contracts are signed directly then we say we will respect private investors but we will cancel the the airport or or we will respect respect the institutional order but we will unsign specific persons that don't have all the necessary capability within the institutions to take care of them so our lesson for us regardless of the global arena is that we have to limit in a limited answer eliminate uncertainty in Mexico if we keep with this level of uncertainty the same consequences as those that we discussed on breaks it will happen to Mexico investment will slow down businesses will be very careful and a lot of businesses will just stop investing in Mexico so that I think that's a good lesson for us to learn so with that I would like to appreciate your participation I would like to thank our speakers Andres Robin Leslie and Mariana for being our partner thank you very much and I thank you very much for your comments thank you muchas gracias muchas gracias Ricardo we value our partnership with Deloitte a great deal and fortunately we were able to to do this this morning and I will ask Robyn as director of Chatham House to commit to come back to Mexico City next year 2020 s the question when we can talk about all of the things we talked about today with greater certainty or greater uncertainties we don't know you answer but in any case thank you both for being here and thank you Mariana for organizing this [Applause]

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *