Here in Washington D.C., the nation’s capital, we were drilled over the past few days to expect the snowstorm of the century. A minimum of 12 inches of snow were forecast and major anticipatory adjustments were taken. For example my health care office called to let me know about their closure – since the commute would be unbearable. Schools were closed (or on a ‘contingency’ basis), and even the visit of German Chancellor Merkel was postponed due to concerns about the plane and its landing.
The effects of politics on international marketing is determined by both the bilateral political relations between home and host countries and the multilateral agreements governing the relations among groups of countries.
The government-to-government relationship can have a profound effect, particularly if it becomes hostile. Numerous examples of the linkages between international politics and international marketing exist. One such example involves British-Icelandic relations, following the Icelandic government’s 2008 decision to assume control of three of the country’s largest banks hit hard by the global credit crunch.
Iceland initiated a deposit freeze that affected deposits of approximately 4.5 billion pounds from British citizens.
The British government promptly used its anti-terror law to seize and estimated 4 billion of Icelandic resources, which, in turn, forced Iceland to cover the losses of British depositors at a cost to Icelandic taxpayers of more than 2.2 billion pounds. With a population base of only 300,000 people, such new debt was huge.
While the U.K. chose to adopt this “stick” approach, the Dutch government secured a commitment from Iceland to pay back its savers using a different tactic, perhaps more conducive to long-term good neighborly relations. It offered to loan Iceland the money.
Excerpt from the 9th Edition of International Marketing by Michael Czinkota and Ilkka Ronkainen.