G20 remains divided and independent

The G20 comprising 19 developed and developing countries has witnessed the storm in global diplomatic circles by US President Donald Trump. At the foreign ministers’ meeting of the group in Johannesburg, South African President Cyril Ramaphosa emphasised multilateralism and dialogue as the means to resolve disputes. He referred to the conflict zones in Sudan, Congo, Sahel and Gaza.

But the European countries in the group were focused on the conflict in Ukraine and with Russia. British foreign minister David Lammy said of his Russian counterpart Sergey Lavrov’s speech at an internal session that Russia showed no “appetite for peace”. Lavrov had attacked the double standards of the West.

Meanwhile, US Secretary of State Marco Rubio did not attend the meeting. This is imputed to the stand taken by President Trump over what he called the discriminatory treatment of the white minority in the expropriation bill about land. There was also no photo opportunity for the foreign ministers.

The dividing lines are clearly marked. European countries like France, Germany, the United Kingdom and the European Union (EU) have condemned Russia over the war in Ukraine. As had happened in earlier G20 meetings in Bali and in New Delhi, the Asian and African members of the G20 had refused to condemn Russia while urging for dialogue between Russia and Ukraine.

President Trump does not have much of an interest in groupings like G20, which had emerged at the time of the global financial crisis in 2007-08 because he is pursuing an economic policy which is America-centric. He has revived the tariff regime which had prevailed before the World Trade Organisation (WTO) had come into existence in 1995. Trump is pursuing a unilateral policy which does not involve global negotiations.

He wants to decide American economic and trade policy in America and he does not consider it necessary that there should be a multilateral trade dialogue and agreement. He is also not in favour of the WTO trade dispute mechanism because he believes that he has to take decisions and formulate policies keeping American interests alone in mind. The G20 mechanism of global deliberation and mutual consent is anathema to the American president.

It would be right to ask the question whether the G20 would survive the Trump tempest. It will because the other members of the group from Asia, Africa and Europe consider it both necessary and helpful to reach an agreement on how to deal with global economic challenges because they accept the fact that it is not possible for every country to draw the bridge and get behind tariff walls.

The economic revival of the many countries in the G20 and outside depends on the growth of world trade, and this cannot be sustained only through agreements and understanding. The Americans may withdraw from G20 but the others will keep the G20 an active get-together.

The members may not reach unanimity because there are too many divergences in the economic needs and challenges of each of the member-states, but the sense of solidarity of standing together to face challenges remains and it is a sense strongly felt by all the countries in the group.

The Americans may sulk and pretend to not care about the G20 or any other formal or informal grouping. But they will have to come back to it, at least after the end of President Trump’s second term in 2028. The G20 remains strong because the strong economies like China, Germany, Japan, India, France, the United Kingdom provide a strong support to the group. And whatever the ideological differences, China and the others are ready to deal with each other and talk to each other. Russia remains outside the European trade orbit, but China, India and many others in Asia and Africa are ready to deal with Russia. The G20 presents unity despite the divisions.