The Delhi G20 Foreign Ministers Meeting (FMM) experienced some disappointment for the hosts following the
Sharp differences between the Western powers and Russia-China combined had sprung over the Ukrainian conflict. They were supposed to discuss ways to deal with falling economic growth, increasing inflation, lower demands for goods and services, and rising prices of food, fuel, and fertilizers.
Hectic efforts of Indian diplomats did not yield the desired result at the Delhi FMM two days later to offset the fallout of the failure of the Bangalore meeting.
However, notwithstanding the absence of a consensual resolution, it has to be noted that foreign ministers of the US, UK, Russia, China, and France sat together face to face to present respective views on crucial issues facing the contemporary world like global warming, multilateralism, food and energy crisis, terrorism, and above all the chilling impact of the war in Ukraine.
There were other high-profile representatives from member countries whose views added value to the significance of the Delhi meet.
Typically, summits do not produce expeditious results because agreements have many accompanying technicalities that need to be processed in the ordinary course. Things have to go through the mill.
In recent years, India has been playing its cards carefully, enhancing its visibility on international fora. Several leaders expect India to play a constructive role in reducing the severity of the world’s challenges. Post-pandemic reconstruction is a formidable task before G20.
As the host, India had appealed for all members of the fractured Group of 20 to reach a consensus on issues of particular concern to poorer countries even if the broader East-West split over Ukraine could not be resolved.
“The US Secretary of State tried to highlight the role of the US in addressing world crisis; the divide was palpable,” wrote the Mint on March 7. He demanded that Russia withdraw from Ukraine without delay.
The Indian External Affairs Minister, S Jaishankar, was forthright in assessing the situation and said, “There were divergences on the issue of war in Ukraine, which we could not reconcile as various parties held different views. If we had a perfect meeting of minds on all issues, it would have been a collective strengthening of multilateralism, promoting food and energy security, climate change, gender issues, and counterterrorism.”
It has to be recalled that after the finance ministers’ inability to come out with a consensus resolution because China and Russia both objected to a joint communiqué that retained language on the war in Ukraine drawn directly from last year’s G20 leaders summit declaration in Indonesia, the cloud of disappointment fell on the Delhi FMM.
AP reported that the second day’s talks had begun with Prime Minister Modi’s video address to the audience. He had urged them not to allow current tensions to destroy agreements that might be reached on food and energy security, climate change, and debts.
Modi said, “We all have our positions and perspectives on resolving these tensions. We should not allow issues we cannot resolve together to come in the way of those we can. In a nod to fears that the increasingly bitter rift between the US and its allies on one side and Russia and China on the other appears likely to widen further. Multilateralism is in crisis,” Prime Minister Modi said.
Before we evaluate India’s presidency of G20, it is fit to run through the press interview of the Indian Minister for External Affairs, which he gave after the G20 meeting.
It has to be remembered that, speaking at the G20, Russian foreign minister Sergey Lavrov said, “It is time to reform the UN Security Council. In the UN Charter, every state must adhere to any other state’s sovereignty and territorial integrity. This invasion (of Ukraine as per the West) reflects the reaction to the war the West was preparing for many years, and that is why it was arming the Ukrainian regime.”
Combining his assessment of the situation in the light of divergent opinions of two main groups, the Indian Minister for External Affairs expressed that the G-20 delegations agreed on many issues, including climate action, biodiversity, gender issues, new emerging technologies, etc.
He said, “I want to put a percentage on how many issues there was a consensus. If we had had a perfect meeting of minds, we would have a joint communiqué. But there were divergences, and these concerned the Ukraine conflict.”
Regarding foreign ministers’ unequivocal condemnation of terrorism, Jaishankar said, “20 Foreign Ministers urged developed countries to fulfill their financial commitments and were able to come to a consensus on the Russia-Ukraine conflict.”
This is a subtle way of saying that the G20 meeting has shown a clear divide in which the haves and have-nots have taken divergent positions.
Secretary of State Blinken demanded that Moscow renew a deal to allow the export of Ukrainian grain. “Russia has deliberately and systematically slowed its pace of inspections, creating a backlog of ships that could be delivering food to the world today,” Blinken said during his speech.
He added that it was imperative the G20 speak up on behalf of “extending and expanding the grain initiative to strengthen food security for the most vulnerable.”
It is amusing that Blinken is concerned about the food difficulties of vulnerable (Europeans) but ignores the suffering of ordinary Russians made to bear the brunt of sanctions imposed on Russia. Does Blinken think that the people he cares for are humans and those living in Russia are not?
The significant takeaway from the FMM is that the Group of leading economies meeting in New Delhi expected the host (India) to promote itself as a rising superpower while leveraging its position on the global stage to bridge the gap between the West and Russia.
Experts expect India to be at the center of bitter global divisions, particularly over Russia’s war in Ukraine. But it is also an opportunity for the South Asian nation to position itself as the voice of the Global South and as a potential mediator between the West and Moscow.
In his remarks as the host of the meeting, Prime Minister Modi infused the audience with a strong hope for development and peace through the concerted efforts of G20. His message was loud and clear.
“No group can claim global leadership without listening to those most affected by its decisions. India’s G20 Presidency has tried to give a voice to the Global South. We should not allow issues that we cannot resolve together to come in the way of those we can,” he concluded.
- KN Pandita (Padma Shri) is the former Director of the Center of Central Asian Studies at Kashmir University. Views expressed here are of the author’s.
- Mail EurAsian Times at etdesk(at)eurasiantimes.com
- Follow EurAsian Times on Google News
