Brazil’s G20 Summit, culminating in a Declaration embroidered with broad proposals but lacking in concrete commitments, is yet another demonstration of the increasing difficulty of forming international consensus.
The summit, which marked outgoing US President Joe Biden’s last major appearance, emphasised the need for urgent humanitarian relief in Gaza and a ceasefire in the Middle East – which might prove too little, too late in the light of Trump’s categorical backing of Netanyahu’s government.
Meanwhile, the Declaration’s language on Ukraine proved even vaguer than last year’s New Delhi communiquè. With the US lifting restrictions on the use of long-range missiles, and with President Zelensky unveiling Ukraine’s Resilience Plan, the Declaration referenced the “negative added impacts of the war” and welcomed “all relevant and constructive initiatives that support a comprehensive, just, and durable peace, upholding all the Purposes and Principles of the UN Charter.” However, it omitted more concrete statements on Russian aggression. With Trump’s shadow looming over Ukraine’s capacity to continue defending itself and its bargaining power in eventual negotiations to end the war, European delegations failed to secure stronger language.
Sideline diplomacy was also tarnished by escalating tensions and post-election uncertainty. President Biden did not meet Chinese Premier Xi Jinping (although he did so at the recent APEC summit in Peru) and was absent from the ‘family photo.’ Xi met with other Western leaders, including German Chancellor Olaf Scholz and British Prime Minister Keir Starmer, broaching the level-playing field concerns that have come to define trade relations between Europe and China. However, Beijing’s failure to acknowledge the confirmed reports of North Korean troops on European soil was likely detrimental to restoring the trust deficit between the parties.
The Summit also revealed divisions along ideological lines. Argentinian President Javier Milei, who recently congratulated Trump at his residence in Mar-a-Lago, signed the Declaration while rejecting elements related to the UN’s 2030 Agenda – particularly concerning climate action and gender equality. Clashing with Brazilian President Lula de Silva, Milei also opposed the Summit’s poverty and inequality alleviation themes, criticising initiatives such as a 2% tax on the ultra-wealthy and a Global Alliance Against Hunger and Poverty. Despite his steadfast championing of neoliberalism and free-market solutions, Milei held a first-ever meeting with Xi Jinping, discussing potential Chinese investment into Argentina’s lithium reserves – which the EU has tried to tap into through its increasingly contentious FTA negotiations with Mercosur.
Commitments to climate financing, which the Summit aimed to upgrade “from billions to trillions” as COP29 talks stall in Baku, were also questioned by G20 Members – particularly Argentina, Russia, and Saudi Arabia – and diluted in the final text. Despite these cleavages and incomplete ambitions, which call into question the unity of factions within the G20, such as BRICS, two trends at least managed to emerge distinct from the Summit. Firstly, the prominence of the ‘Global South’ gained even greater recognition, as demonstrated by Xi Jinping’s eagerness to link the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI) to global development, and by the formal inclusion of the African Union as a G20 member. Secondly, Western powers (including the US) finally acceded to reforming the UN Security Council to give a seat to the chronically underrepresented, such as African nations.
However, despite this bid to renew faith in multilateralism, perhaps the most concrete outcome – particularly for the EU – is the recognition that fora like the G20 are less the effective – albeit imperfect – consensus generators than they once were, and increasingly becoming stages on which to settle the contests of multipolarity.
Raul Villegas is a Junior Policy Analyst in the Europe in the World Programme.
The support the European Policy Centre receives for its ongoing operations, or specifically for its publications, does not constitute an endorsement of their contents, which reflect the views of the authors only. Supporters and partners cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein.