We need both of them—the architecture won't work without the U.S. and China
En junio, París acogerá una cumbre convocada por Emmanuel Macron para repensar los cimientos del orden financiero mundial, ese andamiaje construido tras la Segunda Guerra Mundial que hoy cruje ante desafíos que sus arquitectos nunca imaginaron. La pregunta que Macron lleva a la mesa no es menor: ¿pueden las grandes potencias —incluidas Estados Unidos y China— acordar cómo financiar un mundo que lucha simultáneamente contra la pobreza, el cambio climático y el colapso de los ecosistemas? La respuesta, o su ausencia, dirá mucho sobre la capacidad colectiva de la humanidad para reformarse antes de que la urgencia se convierta en catástrofe.
- Las instituciones financieras creadas en 1945 —el Banco Mundial y el FMI— operan con una lógica diseñada para un mundo que ya no existe, mientras los problemas se multiplican y los actores se transforman.
- China se ha convertido en uno de los mayores prestamistas del mundo en desarrollo, pero París denuncia que ese dinero financia con demasiada frecuencia centrales de carbón que agravan la crisis climática.
- Macron necesita que tanto Washington como Pekín se sienten a la mesa: sin ambos, reconoce, la aritmética del nuevo pacto financiero simplemente no funciona.
- La cumbre del 22 y 23 de junio busca generar el impulso político necesario para que las reformas ya iniciadas en el Banco Mundial cobren verdadera velocidad.
- Rusia no será invitada; el mundo en desarrollo y las naciones africanas sí, señalando quiénes son los protagonistas reales de esta reconfiguración.
- Lo que emerja de París determinará si el viejo orden puede reinventarse o si simplemente seguirá crujiendo bajo el peso de crisis para las que nunca fue diseñado.
Emmanuel Macron ha convocado para el 22 y 23 de junio una cumbre en París con un propósito ambicioso: reformar la arquitectura financiera internacional que gobierna el mundo desde 1945. El Banco Mundial y el FMI, pilares de ese orden de posguerra, fueron diseñados para una realidad que ya no existe. Hoy, los desafíos son otros —pobreza persistente, cambio climático, pérdida de biodiversidad— y los actores también han cambiado. China ha emergido como gran prestamista del mundo en desarrollo, y nuevas potencias han alterado el equilibrio de quién presta y quién pide prestado.
Macron es claro sobre lo que necesita: que Estados Unidos y China estén en la mesa. Con Washington, el objetivo es modernizar el Banco Mundial y el FMI, instituciones que requieren liderazgo americano para transformarse. Con Pekín, el desafío es distinto y más delicado: convencer a China de que reoriente su enorme poder financiero hacia proyectos sostenibles, alejándose del carbón y otros activos intensivos en emisiones que profundizan la crisis climática.
La visión francesa reconoce también que no existe una solución única para todos. Los países más pobres no pueden acceder a mercados privados ni asumir grandes deudas; para ellos, solo las donaciones y subsidios son viables. Los países en desarrollo con mayor capacidad podrían acceder a préstamos concesionales. El principio es adaptar el instrumento financiero a la realidad del prestatario, no forzar a todos por el mismo molde estrecho.
Rusia no será invitada. Las naciones africanas y del mundo en desarrollo sí tendrán representación amplia. Lo que se decida —o no se decida— en París en junio revelará si las grandes potencias son capaces de acordar cómo debe lucir un orden financiero moderno, o si el viejo sistema simplemente persistirá, incapaz de responder a los problemas que nunca fue diseñado para enfrentar.
Emmanuel Macron is calling a summit. On June 22 and 23, Paris will host what the French president frames as a reckoning with the global financial order—a chance to rebuild the machinery of international lending and development that has governed the world since 1945. The stakes, as Macron sees them, are nothing small: how to fund the fight against poverty, how to finance the shift away from carbon, how to arrest the collapse of biodiversity. But none of it happens without two countries sitting at the table. "We need both of them," Macron said this week during a video address to the Global Citizen organization, speaking of the United States and China with the tone of someone who knows the math doesn't work otherwise.
The arithmetic is straightforward enough. The World Bank and the International Monetary Fund, the twin pillars of postwar financial architecture, were designed for a world that no longer exists. China has emerged as a major creditor to developing nations. New powers have shifted the balance of who lends and who borrows. Meanwhile, the problems the system was built to solve—poverty, mostly—have been joined by others that the original architects never imagined: climate change, the unraveling of ecosystems, the cascading failures of a warming planet. Macron's argument is that the institutions themselves need to evolve, and that the summit in Paris is meant to be the catalyst.
With Washington, the priority is straightforward: reform the World Bank and the IMF. These institutions need modernizing, and the French believe American leadership is essential to making that happen. But China presents a different kind of challenge. As one of the world's largest sources of financing for poor and developing countries, Beijing wields enormous influence over where capital flows. The problem, from Paris's perspective, is what that money finances. Too often, Macron's team argues, Chinese lending props up coal plants and other carbon-intensive projects that deepen the climate crisis. The summit is partly an attempt to persuade China to redirect its vast financial power toward sustainable development instead.
French officials justify the timing and scope of the summit by pointing to how much the world has changed. The postwar financial order was built for a different era, when the challenges were simpler and the cast of characters smaller. Today's emerging powers occupy seats at the table whether the old institutions like it or not. The traditional focus on poverty reduction, while still urgent, now competes with climate action and biodiversity protection for resources and political will. Reform of the World Bank has already begun, but Paris believes it needs a push from the highest levels—the kind of momentum only a presidential summit can generate.
Macron's vision includes a recognition that one-size-fits-all solutions no longer work, if they ever did. The poorest countries cannot access private capital markets and cannot service large loans. For them, grants and subsidies are the only realistic option. Wealthier developing nations might manage concessional lending. The point is to match the financing instrument to the actual capacity of the borrower, rather than forcing every country through the same narrow aperture. The summit organizers expect broad representation from African nations and the developing world, along with major financial institutions. Russia will not be invited. What emerges from Paris in June will signal whether the world's major powers can agree on what a modern financial architecture should look like, or whether the old order simply persists, creaking under the weight of problems it was never designed to handle.
Notable Quotes
We need both of them— Emmanuel Macron, on U.S. and Chinese participation
The world has changed much since the current financial architecture was created at the end of World War II— French presidency officials, justifying the summit
The Hearth Conversation Another angle on the story
Why does Macron think a summit in Paris, rather than some existing forum, will actually change how the World Bank and IMF operate?
Because he's betting that bringing the major powers together at the presidential level, with a specific mandate to redesign the system, creates political pressure that routine governance channels don't. The institutions have been reforming slowly for years. A summit with the U.S., China, and the developing world all present at once is meant to break the logjam.
But China has no incentive to stop financing coal projects if they're profitable and the countries want them. What leverage does France actually have?
That's the real question. France doesn't have leverage in the traditional sense. What it has is a platform and a moral argument—that climate change is everyone's problem, and that financing carbon locks in future disaster. Whether that argument moves Beijing is another matter entirely.
The article mentions that the World Bank reform has already started. So what's new about this summit?
The pace. Reform has been glacial. Macron is trying to accelerate it by making it a headline issue, by getting the U.S. and China to publicly commit to a new framework. It's about momentum and visibility, not inventing something from scratch.
Why exclude Russia?
Because Russia is isolated over Ukraine, and including it would undermine the summit's legitimacy with the West and with many developing nations that depend on Western support. It's a political calculation, not a financial one.
If the poorest countries can only get grants, not loans, where does that money come from?
That's the unresolved question the summit is supposed to address. It requires wealthy nations and institutions to commit more grant funding, which means political will and budget space. That's harder to achieve than it sounds.