Round The World

New Delhi, 21 July 2023

G-20 Meeting

CONSENSUS ELUDES

By Dr D.K. Giri

(Secretary General, Assn for Democratic Socialism) 

Not unexpectedly, consensus eluded the meeting of Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors (FMCBG) of the G-20 countries in Gandhinagar on 18 and 19 July. The divergence between Russia-China bloc and the US-led alliance on Russia-Ukraine war persists. The meeting ended without issuing a joint statement. Many observers would have perhaps anticipated a consensus statement under the current chairmanship of India known for her inherent strength of accommodation and balance. However, that was not to be. New Delhi’s posture of ‘neutrality’ on the Ukraine war should have helped develop a consensus. On the contrary, no G-20 meeting in India has so far ended with a consensus document. 

Instead, India released a document which is called the Chair Summary that records the discussions and disagreements taking place in the meeting. According to the Chair Summary, China and Russia objected to the mention of Ukraine war, in particular the phrases like “immense human suffering” and “exacerbating existing fragilities in the global economy”.  Several members condemned the war and the tragic consequences it has been causing in terms of shortages of supplying of food, fuel and fertilizers which come largely from Ukraine and Russia. They specifically referred to Russia refusing to extend a deal to allow Ukrainian grain export through the Black Sea. Indian Finance Minister Nirmala Sitharaman briefing the press after the meeting said of the majority view that, “food passing through the Black Sea should not have been stopped or suspended.” 

Although India has so far remained neutral on the Ukraine war, it has expressed deep concerns about the gravity of the conflict in terms of its impact on developing countries. New Delhi had set its focus as the current chair of the Group on the need to help countries grappling with food shortages and debt crisis following the Covid-19 pandemic and the Ukrainian war. 

Majority of the low-income countries is in debt distress. Before the meeting, on 16 July, the US Treasury Secretary Janet Yellen, had said, “A key priority this week is to redouble our support to Ukraine as it continues to defend itself against Russia’s illegal and unprovoked attack …. ending this war is first and foremost moral imperative and the single best thing we can do for the global economy”. The IMF Chief, Kristalina Georgieva, almost endorsed the perspective of the Treasury Secretary when she said, “The world today is more shock-prone and fragile, with climate change, pandemics and Russian invasion of Ukraine all causing widespread turmoil.” 

The Outcome Document comprising 26 paragraphs and two annexures, released by the Chair indicated the majority opinion on the war. It stated that the war was constraining economic growth, increasing inflation, disrupting supply chains, heightening energy and food insecurity and elevating financial stability risks. There were also different views on war situation and sanctions. While recognising that the G-20 is not the forum to resolve security issues, it acknowledged that security issues can have significant consequences for the world economy. 

Let us note that India is aspiring to be the voice of the Global South. New Delhi is certainly utilising the opportunity as the Chair of G-20 to move towards accomplishing such aspiration. During the G-20 process, India has been trying to mobilise support for reforms of multilateral banks, other financial institutions to facilitate the development in low-income and vulnerable countries. 

After the third meeting of G-20 meeting in Hampi in Karnataka, India’s G-20 Sherpa, Amitabh Kant, said that India’s focus was on development issues. He underlined, “there will be a contentious issue (read Ukraine war) and that will be the issue of geo-politics which we are not discussing at this stage at all. Our priority is developmental issues, inclusive and sustainable growth and progress, more finance from multilateral institutions, sustainable development goals (SDGs), technological transformation and gender equality.” He was emphatically evasive on the Ukraine war. He said, “It is not a creation of developing and emerging countries, it is not a priority for us…. Our priority is not war. That is not our priority at all. That may be a priority for somebody else.”  

To be sure, avoiding a reference to the war while discussing its consequences is not a prudent methodology for an authentic discussion. The critical link of the war with economy cannot be lost on the managers of G-20 in Delhi. It is true that lack of consensus on the Russia’s invasion of Ukraine has blocked any joint statement after the G-20 meetings so far. In the G-20 Declaration in Bali last year, similar divergences among the members were evident but they agreed on the use of or threat of nuclear weapons and sought “peaceful resolution of conflicts”. 

The Summit in India should do better in closing the gap on the war. The best would be to nudge Ukraine and Russia and their respective allies -- formal and informal -- to end the war. India should diplomatically pull all stops in accomplishing this objective. 

To be fair and objective in our assessment of India’s efforts on building a consensus, Prime Minister Modi is trying his best. While video-addressing the Foreign Ministers’ conference, he said, “We all have our positions and our perspectives on how the current geo-political tensions be resolved. We should not allow issues that we cannot resolve together to come in the way of those we can”. He lamented that the two principal goals of the post-World War-II international political order, preventing conflict and fostering cooperation were elusive. 

All in all, it would have been a great diplomatic heft for India to have been able to build consensus on the causes and consequences of the Ukraine war. Indian officials maintained that Russia-Ukraine war is beyond the remit of the G-20. It may be technically correct, but not in the real world of distress and disruption of the world economy due to the war in Ukraine, let alone the pathetic loss of men and material in the war. Like Modi said to Putin that, “it is no time for war”. In the run-up to the summit in September, India should continue to harp on ending the war and Russia and Ukraine coming on to the negotiating table while reiterating a no-war strategy in dealing with bilateral problems. ---INFA 

(Copyright, India News & Feature Alliance)