Can the G-20 improve its international image?

In mid-November, world attention could shift from conflicts in Ukraine and the Middle East to Brazil, where G-20 leaders will meet.

In the process of formulating the G-20 in 1999, there was no codified list of criteria to determine which countries would be invited to join the new forum. Finally there were 19 and one regional representative (the European Union), which represent almost 90 percent of the world economy. The name G-20 It was adopted on the basis that it was a round number, easy to say and not difficult to memorize.

The US subprime mortgage crisis in 2007 became an international financial crisis in 2008. G-20 leaders held their first summit in Washington DC in mid-November 2008 to address the crisis and prevent near collapse of the financial systems of several advanced countries. Since then, the G-20 summit has been held almost every year on the territory of the different members.

As host of the rotating presidency, Brazil has established this motto as the central theme of the G-20: Build a just world and a sustainable planet. To achieve this goal, it has also announced three priorities: (1) Fight against inequality, promote social inclusion and fight against hunger; (2) Fight against climate change, promoting energy transition and sustainable development, and 3) reform of global governance institutions.

It is worth saying that these discussion topics for the G-20 are all relevant and necessary. The question is, how to achieve these noble goals?

The proper functioning of an international organization requires three elements: effectiveness, efficiency and legitimacy. This means that what the international community wants to see is not just a joint declaration at the end of the summit, but down-to-earth collective action. Will the G20 continue to behave like a gathering or will it be an action team?

The following five questions may be relevant:

First, the G-20 should improve its image. While it did a good job in dealing with the 2008 global financial crisis by coordinating the macroeconomic policies of its members in a concerted manner, it has failed to transition from the role of firefighter to a steering committee to address such important issues as accelerating global growth. , the promotion of global economic governance, stopping trade protectionism, etc.

No wonder some people are complaining that the G-20 summit is a waste of time for world leaders, and suggesting that they meet and talk by phone or video as they did several times during the Covid-19 pandemic. , without flying thousands of miles to a conference room in the country of rotating presidency and thus contributing to reducing the carbon footprint. This type of criticism has gone too far, but the group really needs to show that it can meet the expectations of the international community.

Second, the G-20 must promote cooperation among its members in the spirit of united we resist and divided we fall. It is not strange that each country has its own national interests and ideals, but they should not be the cause of selfish actions that can potentially harm a community with a shared future for humanity. Once again, on many important issues, such as climate change, reform of international financial organizations, etc., developed countries often fail to take the same cooperative actions. For example, at the G-20 summit held in Rome in October 2021, it was agreed that members should take meaningful and effective measures to limit the rise in global average temperature to 1.5°C above pre-industrial levels, but there were no specific commitments to meet that goal due to the stubborn position of the bloc’s powerful members. In fact, the G-20 has not become a platform for consultation and cooperation, but an arena where developed countries choose to find fault with each other.

Thirdly, the most urgent issues of cooperation must be clearly determined. In fact, each member of the group has their own cooperation priority. This difference can be observed in both developed and developing countries, giving rise to a wide range of issues that need to be addressed at each summit or ministerial meeting. The joint declaration released by each G-20 summit clearly shows that the bloc wants to become a god that can achieve all goals, from protecting world peace to stimulating global economic growth, from reforming the WTO to the improvement of the international financial system, including food and energy security, as well as the achievement of the Sustainable Development Goals for 2030. It is not easy to solve all global problems. Therefore, a priority for cooperation must be established. For the moment, and in the near future, efforts must be redoubled to promote global economic governance.

Fourth, developed countries must set a good example in promoting global growth. Without a doubt, the global economy faces many obstacles and the most pernicious is protectionism, which harms both international investment and global trade.

Unfortunately, developed countries have become the vanguard of protectionism, rather than the promoters of economic justice. The best-known case today is the application of so-called anti-subsidy measures against electric vehicles (EVs) manufactured in China, harming the global electric car industry and also global efforts to address climate change. Therefore, it can be concluded that although previous joint statements issued by G-20 leaders aim to oppose protectionism, it has actually intensified, with developing countries as the main targets.

Last but not least, the group should carry out institutionalization as soon as possible. Broadly speaking, cooperation between countries would take two forms, namely, non-institutionalization and institutionalization.

Non-institutionalization refers to cooperation without a formal organization, without a defined purpose and status, although summit meetings are held regularly and joint statements or communiqués are issued after them. Without an established institutionalization mechanism, the G-20 has to limit its role to discussions or lip service among leaders through the production of non-binding documents.

Just like a person, the group might not be able to reshape their habit or personality, but let’s hope that starting with the summit in Brazil this year, this bloc will behave more like an action team what as a gathering. Otherwise, its international image will be further weakened.

*Senior researcher at Charhar Institute

[email protected]