The G7 summit in Bavaria begun for Barack Obama and other national leaders of Germany, Japan, Italy, France, United Kingdom and Canada just a few days ago. Prior to this year’s summit, it was called the G8 with the inclusion of Russia, who has been excluded after the Ukrainian dispute. Obama stated in regards to Russia:
“Putin wants to recreate the glories of the Soviet empire”
As a matter of fact, behind the President’s words and European head of state’s confirmations, there is an undertone of the awareness of not being as influential as after World War II, for as much as the G7 represents only the 32% of the global purchasing power parity GDP. Interestingly, whilst the G7 meetings continue in Germany, the first BRICS’ inter parliamentary meeting occurred in Moscow; a group of nations (Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa), with the aim of increasing interdependence, with an eventual new geopolitical equilibrium above and beyond that of the G7.
Therefore, acknowledging the two old giants’ difficulties, the delineated course of action is the increased cohesion between United States and European Union. Therefore, a lot of focus would be placed upon the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) is a free trade agreement, theorised in 2013, between the European Union and the United States. The essential purpose is integrating the two markets in order to facilitate the investment flow and the access to respective good and services’ markets.
With such a viewpoint, one must gaze to the G7’s themes, from the general agreement on penalties and pressure to Russia about the Ukrainian issue, the priority of ward off “Grexit”, until the acceleration TTIP’s request. The potential pact that Obama would sign within the end of the year is as of yet not public, but it has launched an intense debate. According to a CEPR’s study, in case of a full Free Trade Area’s realisation, the impact on European GDP would be of approximately 0.48% within the 2027, but Obama is convinced that the agreement would drive the EU to greater economic growth and prosperity. Proponents also claim that it will create jobs and help small businesses.
Critics including Joseph Stiglitz argue that the agreement will involve a lack of consumer rights’ protection and bring into question even the economic positive impact on GDP, because of the consequent depression of domestic European demand. In addition, some fear that genetically modified food from the US could find their way onto European shelves.