New Delhi – The G20, a Group of 20 major economies, navigated a challenging diplomatic terrain recently as they reached a hard-won consensus on addressing the conflict in Ukraine while glossing over other divisive issues in their summit declaration. The summit, primarily convened to address global financial matters, left many observers disappointed with the limited concrete achievements in this domain.
The unexpected consensus achieved in the summit statement regarding the Russia-Ukraine conflict managed to avert a potential schism within the G20. Furthermore, the inclusion of the African Union as a new member marked a diplomatic victory for host nation India and for developing economies. However, these gains were overshadowed by the overall sense of disappointment.
“The G20 has historically thrived as a multilateral forum when it could forge consensus, not just in words, but in action, to tackle serious global issues, such as global financial crises,” noted Michael Froman, President of the Council on Foreign Relations in New York. Froman, who previously served as the U.S. trade representative and chief negotiator in G20 and G8 talks, emphasized the importance of focusing on tangible actions moving forward.
The summit declaration refrained from directly condemning Russia for its actions in Ukraine but underscored the human suffering resulting from the conflict. It also called upon all nations to refrain from using force to acquire territory.
Few had anticipated that the G20 would reach a consensus on this document, especially on the first day of the two-day summit, given the group’s earlier failures to agree on a single communique during the year due to disagreements related to the Ukraine conflict. Had the summit declaration not been reached, it might have signaled a deep divide within the G20, potentially undermining its relevance, with the Western nations on one side and China and Russia on the other.
The G20, initially established as a platform for finance ministers and central bank governors in 1999, expanded to include leaders after the global financial crisis in 2008. However, its core role of coordinating responses to economic issues has been diluted due to the necessity of reaching consensus, which often results in weaker agreements.
This year, resolving differences related to the Ukraine conflict and other issues required an extensive 25 days of negotiations, including leading up to the summit. Svetlana Lukash, the Russian G20 negotiator, described this summit as one of the most challenging in the forum’s almost two-decade history.
Patryk Kugiel, a senior analyst at the Polish Institute of International Affairs, argued that the G20’s requirement for unanimous decisions has hindered its ability to make concrete progress on pressing global challenges, such as climate change and debt.
During the New Delhi summit, leaders agreed to pursue tripling global renewable energy capacity by 2030 and acknowledged the need to phase out unabated coal power. However, no specific timetable was set, and the phasing out of coal was to align with national circumstances, recognizing its continued importance in many developing economies.
The summit also addressed debt vulnerabilities in poor countries and called for the strengthening and reform of multilateral development banks but did not establish concrete goals. Additionally, there was no progress in persuading Russia to rejoin the Black Sea initiative, despite the declaration’s call for the safe flow of grain, food, and fertilizer between Ukraine and Russia.
While the summit declaration fell short of concrete achievements, it was hailed as a significant step forward in finding acceptable language to address the Ukraine crisis by most major G20 members. Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, representing Russia in the absence of President Vladimir Putin, acknowledged India’s presidency for uniting G20 participants from the Global South.
The United States, Germany, and the United Kingdom praised the declaration, and though China did not provide an official statement, the state-run news agency Xinhua indicated that the G20 still held potential.
President Xi Jinping of China was notably absent from the meeting, with Premier Li Qiang representing Beijing. A French official present at the summit stressed that the G20 remained capable of forging consensus between different regions of the world.
Despite the lack of substantial progress on global financial issues, Harsh Vardhan Shringla, India’s chief G20 coordinator, asserted that the summit had indeed advanced the group’s objectives.