The G20 summit - communi(que)ation breakdown
By Ben Rosenbaum. Reading Time: 3:30 mins
The G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro was overshadowed by global tensions, escalating crisis, diverging priorities and unsatisfied leaders. Under such circumstances, it is interesting that the summit produced any results at all. Even more interesting is that, on closer inspection, it hints at greater shifts in the global power structure.
Foto: Ricardo Stuckert / PR
We live in turbulent and fast-moving times. With so many events, crises and conflicts around the world, it was easy to not hear much about the G20 summit last week, save perhaps from the often-repeated video of Joe Biden walking off into the jungle after a press conference. And with COP29 going on at the same time, it is no surprise most of us paid attention to other things. Although justifiable, overlooking this summit of 19 prominent developed and emerging countries (plus the EU and the African Union) risks overlooking some significant talking points and noticeable shifts which occurred during the meeting.
Hosted by Brazil’s President Luiz Inácio Lula da Silva, the first day of the G20 summit saw the launch of a new “Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty” to which over 80 countries have signed up. The alliance championed by the Brazilian President seeks to increase cooperation between countries and organisations to achieve the United Nations Sustainable Development Goals 1 and 2, respectively ending poverty and hunger, and wants to provide policy instruments ready for implementation. Although it is now endorsed by all G20 member states, Argentina only signed up to the alliance after further negotiations. The widely anticipated first face-to-face meeting between Argentina’s President, Javier Milei, a far-right politician, and the left-leaning Lula was described as frosty, which is just one example of international tensions overshadowing the summit.
Another one of these tensions surfaced around the final communique issued by the G20. Lula was criticised for pushing through an agreement on the final draft a day before the summit ended, with German, French and American representatives saying their leaders were not in the room when the communique was agreed. But the manner of negotiation was not the biggest issue, it was the content. The leaders of Canada, France, Germany and the UK were united in their position that the statement fell short in condemning Russia’s invasion of Ukraine and was weaker in affirming support for Ukraine than last year’s communique.
There was also division among the leaders about other passages. This is reflected in the communique’s vagueness about the escalating conflict in the Middle East, even though on the latter point Germany had pledged before the summit to come out with a strong statement condemning Hamas’ attack on 7 October 2023, which is not included. Next to affirming the Paris Climate Goals, there is also little new on climate action in the communique, dashing the hopes of COP29 negotiators who had hoped for a strong signal from the G20on the direction to take in the fight against climate change. One of Lula’s other priorities has made it into the communique, though, namely the higher taxation of the wealthiest people on the planet (although there are no details on how this is to be accomplished).
Beyond the lack of influence on the G20’s position on Ukraine and the Middle East, Western leaders seemed to be more reacting to rather than driving the summit’s events. Next to Lula’s big initiatives, Chinese President Xi Jinping announced Chinese plans for scientific cooperation with Brazil and African countries, as well as the lowering of barriers to trade for the least developed countries. This sends a strong signal to the West that China is deepening its ties with the Global South and extending its influence.
The next G20 summit will take place in South Africa. Olaf Scholz commented on the fact that this will be the fourth time an emerging country has held the G20 rotating presidency, saying that this shows how the global power structure slowly shifts. Beyond that symbolism, this year’s summit already made clear that the Global South countries are becoming an increasingly independent, powerful bloc with their own initiatives, while Europe and the US have increasing difficulty with setting the agenda or pushing through their own priorities. It will be interesting to see how this will develop in the coming years.
