ALONG THE ANGLOSPHERE:

The trends we have looked at thus far highlight the resilience of global connectedness during the pandemic. Record levels of international trade and strong rebounds for most other types of international activity hardly endorse the idea that the war in Ukraine might be the last straw for an era of globalization already hobbled by the pandemic, the U.S.-China trade war, and the UK's exit from the EU. The war does imply a setback for the growth of international flows, but nothing close to a retreat to a world of self-contained national economies.

Could the war, nonetheless, have a large effect on the geography of international flows? Yes, but the pivotal country to watch in this context will be China, not Russia. To gain some perspective, consider how much of the world's trade -- and other flows -- takes place between countries on different sides of the current conflict.

On March 2, 2022, the United Nations General Assembly voted on a resolution condemning the invasion and demanding the withdrawal of Russian troops from Ukraine. The 141 countries that voted in favor of the resolution (plus Taiwan, which is not a UN member but has aligned with the countries voting in favor) conducted 61% of world merchandise trade among themselves in 2020, and 70% of the world's combined trade, capital, information, and people flows took place within this group of countries. The high proportion of international flows among this set of countries, which includes the U.S., EU, Japan, and South Korea, suggests some limits on the extent to which this conflict itself could reshape the geography of globalization.

Tweet   @brothersjudd