The world took on a Kantian dimension, particularly after the fall of the Berlin Wall. Such a framework validated the primacy of law, economic interdependence, the negotiated and peaceful settlement of disputes, and the voluntary dilution of sovereignty. In other words, the collectively accepted economic and legal framework had gained precedence over politics. Europe contributed to this, notably through the “Brussels effect,” which emphasized order and legal norms within globalization.

Each country integrating into the international order was more or less part of these 4 dimensions.

This phase of globalization has had a positive dimension. It has allowed the Global South to experience a period of sustained growth. The share of emerging countries in global GDP is now greater than that of developed countries. In the space of 25 years, their relative weight has reversed. In 2000, advanced countries accounted for 60% of global GDP (in purchasing power parity) compared to 40% for emerging countries. By 2025, according to IMF data, this figure is projected to be 60% for emerging countries and 40% for developed countries. Even though China has played a crucial role, the shift is significant.

* * *

However, the framework defined by the 4 rules has been weakened in recent years and the phenomenon has been accentuated by the arrival of Donald Trump at the White House.

The rule of law is no longer the norm. We have just seen this with the operation in Venezuela, regardless of any legal judgment. International law was not respected and was never perceived as an obstacle to the operation.

Economic interdependence remains a valid factor, as trade has been very dense with the new map of the manufacturing sector, in which China accounts for more than 30% of global production. This could change, however, given the desire for autonomy that underpins American policy.

The peaceful and negotiated settlement of disputes is weakened. The threats and actions by Washington against the French judge of the ICC are an illustration of this.

The balance between economics and politics has shifted. Politics now carries considerable weight, even if the measures taken often have an economic slant.

Much of this change and its acceleration is a result of recent choices made in Washington, leading to a new kind of approach to economics and politics.

The world has shifted from a framework that could be represented linearly through adherence to rules and conventions to one where rules and conventions are no longer perceived as respectable. China, Russia, and now the United States are aligning themselves with rules they define themselves. The world is no longer the same, and the macroeconomic consequences will be considerable.

To be continued…