Intelbrief: G-20 summit reveals deep geopolitical divisions and growing rivalry

AP PHOTO/THITTA AURANAKA, KULUM, FILE

The recently concluded Group of Twenty (G-20) summit in New Delhi, India exposed some of the deepest geopolitical divisions among the world’s most advanced economies. Many of these trends were evident during the COVID-19 pandemic, but have accelerated in recent years, particularly in relation to differences in economic policies and climate change. The US and some European countries have sometimes struggled to catch up with other countries in the bloc. Weeks after Beijing and Moscow sent representatives to attend the BRICS summit in Johannesburg, South Africa, the leaders of both countries, China and Russia, did not attend the summit. The G-20 summit’s final report failed to condemn Russia’s aggression against Ukraine and offered only lukewarm language about the implications of the conflict, a reflection of efforts to maintain a united front. Countries such as Brazil and South Africa appear more willing to listen to the Kremlin’s views on aspects of the war in Ukraine. Defending the language used in the final report, U.S. National Security Adviser Jack Sullivan commented, „From our point of view, it is a good job of standing up for the principle that states cannot use force to violate the territorial acquisition or territorial integrity and sovereignty or political independence of other states.”

Despite progress on issues such as global debt, digital technologies in the Global South, and financing for the world’s most vulnerable countries affected by climate change, China’s deficit and barriers to cooperation on key global challenges remain. . China’s no-show at the G-20 represents Beijing’s attempt to shift focus to multilateral forums where it retains more influence. Some have speculated that domestic issues, including China’s economy (high unemployment and declining exports), may explain why Chinese President Xi Jinping decided to stay home. Xi has recently avoided major global arenas, including a May summit between China and the Central Asian nations of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan, while devoting time to high-impact summits for China. The meeting came as the G-7 leaders were preparing for a summit in Japan.

The G-20 summit saw the US commit to continuing its partnership with India, not only as a bulwark against a rising China, but also as a responsible actor in Asia. President Biden hosted Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the White House in June, where the leaders discussed a range of issues, explored potential areas of cooperation in artificial intelligence and quantum computing, and assessed the fallout associated with war. In Ukraine. At one point during the summit, President Biden and other world leaders announced the creation of a new rail and shipping corridor to rival China’s Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The proposed corridor would connect India and Europe via the Middle East, and while the plan is sparse on details, there are clear geopolitical hurdles, especially considering the countries involved and their relationships. Apart from the US and India, other participants include the European Union, Israel, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates (UAE) and Saudi Arabia. The plan is ambitious, to say the least, and important details regarding funding for the project and timelines have yet to be revealed at length. Also, there are some obvious political obstacles that can derail this effort. Pakistan and Iran have been omitted, while the inclusion of Israel and Saudi Arabia has led to much speculation.

As the African Union (AU) was welcomed into the G-20, countries from the Global South gained more prominence. According to many analysts, developing countries have a stronger voice than ever before, with issues directly related to them receiving more attention than in previous summits. When the G-20 was initially formed to deal with some of the global financial crises of the 1990s, rich countries dominated the discourse, often providing advice. Global institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank have been pressing countries in the Global South, including Brazil and Indonesia, to speak up more. India’s hosting of the summit put New Delhi at the center of the world’s attention, but not the spotlight — many used the event as an opportunity to criticize Modi’s Hindu nationalist government, while highlighting the lack of press freedom in the world’s largest democracy. Yet Modi tried to focus on positive and strategic partnerships. Even as China tries to position itself as the champion of the Global South, Xi’s absence presents an opportunity for Modi and India to fill the void, advancing New Delhi’s vision, ideas and goals at the summit. It gave Modi a platform to boost his standing domestically and a winning data point for his supporters as he looks to be re-elected for a third term next year.