It is not farfetched that the Group of Twenty (G20) might turn into a ‘World Economic Government', with an increase in the number of member states, or with amendments to its purviews. Since 2009, the G20 has become an economic forum that tackles and discusses problems, settles disputes, and takes binding decisions that the geo-economic blocs, or major countries, including industrial and emerging nations, adhere to. It was also clear through the disputes within geo-economic blocs or the policies of major countries that all strategic economic decisions remain in the realm of ideas until they are adopted by the G20, after which they are enforced at the international level. The relations within the G20 have also taken on a global proportion, as evident from China's compliance with the re quest by the United States and the European Union to adopt a flexible policy in determining the exchange rate of the Chinese national currency the Yuan (Renminbi). The G20 is seeking to make balanced decisions, or decisions with a global nature that restore balance to the global economy. Also, the member states fear the impact of the policies of other member states or economic blocs on their own economies. It is this assessment that is pushing the United States, China, Canada and other nations to be apprehensive vis-à-vis the possible impact of the crisis in the European Union, in particular the euro zone, or fearful that its austerity programs and budget cuts may affect the growth of the global economy, and cause a setback to the efforts of economic stimulus that began to reap some fruits, albeit in a limited fashion. The deliberations among the governments within the group are very similar to the discussions handled within coalition governments in certain countries. For instance, major member states are prudent when it comes to making individual decisions related to the global financial crisis, or as a result of the latter's repercussions and implications. Such attitudes were witnessed in matters of a global financial nature, some of which as a result of globalizations, such as in addressing tax evasion and controlling the channels that lead to tax havens. The G20's member states thus united their efforts to halt tax evasion, even when it sometimes violated bank secrecy laws, as happened between the United States and Switzerland. Meanwhile, the spirit of collaboration within the group is reflected in the attempt by its member states to obtain unanimous approval on decisions that certain states deem appropriate to induce financial and economic reforms. For instance, this tendency translated into the U.S President's proposal for a levy to be imposed on the banks that received taxpayer-funded assistance, a proposal supported by countries in the European Union such as Germany, France, and Britain which are also seeking to impose taxes on their banking systems. The developed nations in the G20 are attempting to secure consensus over the decisions, whether those pertaining to achieving balance in capital markets, foreign exchange markets or those related to providing financial assistance to the countries that have been damaged the most and which are most in need of financing, and even the decisions on climate change and greenhouse gas emissions. In truth, the G20 appears to be a purely economic forum, with less emphasis on politics, as its members avoid addressing divisive international political disputes. It should be mentioned that there are other international groups, including: The Group of Five (South Africa, Brazil, India, China and Mexico 2003), G8 (The United States, Japan, Germany, France, Britain and Italy in 1975, Canada 1976, and Russia 1998), G77 (a coalition of developing countries, founded in 1964 during a round of the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development, which has since expanded to include 130 members), the Alliance of the Bolivarian Alternative for the peoples of America (ALBA), the ASEAN group, a group of Independent States in Eastern Europe, and others. But unlike these groups, the G20 remains the only group that has not yet deviated from the scope of economic discussions in their financial and commercial intricacies, in particular the issues of growth, unemployment, jobs and other issues. It was suggested that the group will bring about an alternative economic framework to replace the ‘intensive neoliberal' regime that led to the subprime mortgage crisis, and subsequently, the global economic crisis. However, the leaders of the G20 have settled so far with rounding the corners of the harsh capitalism that ruined major financial institutions, global capital markets and the foreign exchange markets, causing them to lose more than half of their value (which had been at any rate ‘virtual'). After it lost its role as the sponsor of an economic system that represents the interests of transnational companies and the globalized financial system, the Group of Eight – as a result of the crisis – was replaced by the G20. This latter boasts a more diverse membership, centered on a bilateral G2 (the United States and China), as it has become difficult for Europe to be the third partner in the wake of the severe crisis in the euro zone. Within the scope of the ‘World Economic Government', the G20 chooses not to forfeit the two main pillars of neo-liberalism: free trade, and the free movement of capital. The first exploited, “through multinational companies, the differential social, tax-related and environmental standards among the different countries, and through the relocation of production units from the developed countries to the developing nations that have cheaper labor, leading to increasing pressures to reduce wages. As for the second, the exploitation took place through tax havens in particular.” (Le Monde Diplomatique, October 2009). Nevertheless, the G20 has begun enacting restrictions and regulations, and it is such trends that have rendered it a world economic government of a decision-making nature.
