The 50th annual G7 meeting was just held in Apulia Italy as leaders work, so they say, to coordinate economic policy in the context of rising geopolitical tensions. It seems at this 50th G7 gathering, however, it is far more about geopolitics, and the shadow of Trump, than it is about global governance policy efforts.
The G7 leaders, the U.S., UK, Canada, Japan, Germany, Italy, and France have been tasked with host Italy to discuss in various sessions: climate change, migration, and international development, as well as a discussion on AI led by Pope Francis. But that is not the ‘heart’ of summit discussions at this G7. It is rather discussions on Russia and the Ukraine War. Most pertinently, G7 leaders reached agreement to utilize Russia’s seized assets, most of which were frozen in the EU financial system, to provide a loan of up to $50 billion in support for Ukraine.
And there was a heavy emphasis, identified in the G7 Leaders’ Communique, of China. The Communique took on China for its continuing support for Russia. As noted by FT contributors Henry Foy and James Politi:
The joint statement at the end of their summit in Italy included a far tougher stance towards China than in the past, exposing the escalating frustration both in the US and Europe with Beijing’s critical support to Russia during the war in Ukraine.
We will continue taking measures against actors in China and third countries that materially support Russia’s war machine, including financial institutions, consistent with our legal systems, and other entities in China that facilitate Russia’s acquisition of items for its defense industrial base. In this context, we reiterate that entities, including financial institutions, that facilitate Russia’s acquisition of items or equipment for its defense industrial base are supporting actions that undermine the territorial integrity, sovereignty, and independence of Ukraine. Accordingly, we will impose restrictive measures consistent with our legal systems to prevent abuse and restrict access to our financial systems for targeted individuals and entities in third countries, including Chinese entities, that engage in this activity. We will take robust action against actors who aid Russia in circumventing our sanctions, including by imposing severe costs on all those who fail to immediately cease providing material support to Russia’s aggression and by strengthening domestic enforcement and stepping up our business engagement to promote corporate responsibility. We call on financial institutions to refrain from supporting and profiting from Russia’s war machine. We will take further steps to deter and disrupt this behavior.
Concluding on China, the FT suggested G7 leaders no longer underestimated China’s strategic actions toward Russia and economic ones toward all the G7 countries:
A second person familiar with the talks said: “The era of naivety towards Beijing is definitely gone now and China is to blame for that, honestly. … “China is everywhere in the G7, to be frank,” said a senior EU official. “The question we have is how to calibrate our actions to take in response.”
For analysts and officials the G7 Communique expressed much about taking on China and heightening the ‘new Cold War’ rhetoric. A good example, David E Sanger of the NYT and author of New Cold War: China’s Rise, Russia’s Invasion, and America’s Struggle to Defend the West.
The point here is the noted diminishment, if not outright absence of global governance policy expression and leadership. At the G7. Of course it is not that the leadership didn’t identify collective economic policy. How could it not in ever too long annual Statement - yes 36 pages - which started with a series of presumed priorities including a long list of notable global governance priorities:
Engaging with African countries, in a spirit of equitable and strategic partnership. As they work to deliver sustainable development and industrial growth for their people, we are advancing our respective efforts to invest in sustainable infrastructure, including through the PGII, and we launched the Energy for Growth in Africa initiative, together with several African partners.
Acting to enable countries to invest in their future and achieve the Sustainable DevelopmentGoals (SDGs), recognizing that reducing poverty and tackling global challenges go hand in hand.We are doing our part to achieve better, bigger and more effective Multilateral DevelopmentBanks, making it possible for the World Bank to boost its lending by USD 70 billion over the next ten years. We are calling for action from the international community to address debt burdens.
Reinforcing global food security and enhancing climate resilience, including by launching the Apulia Food Systems Initiative. https://www.g7italy.it/wp-content/uploads/Apulia-G7-Leaders- Communique.pdf 2
Reaffirming our commitment to gender equality. Together with International Financial Institutions, we will unlock at least USD 20 billion over three years in investments to boost women’s empowerment.
Taking concrete steps to address the triple crisis of climate change, pollution, and biodiversity loss, including by submitting ambitious 1.5°C aligned Nationally Determined Contributions. We will spearhead global efforts to preserve forests and oceans, and to end plastic pollution.
Affirming our collective commitment and enhanced cooperation to address migration, tackle the challenges and seize the opportunities that it presents, in partnership with countries of origin and transit. We will focus on the root causes of irregular migration, efforts to enhance border management and curb transnational organized crime, and safe and regular pathways for migration. We launched the G7 Coalition to prevent and counter the smuggling of migrants.
Deepening our cooperation to harness the benefits and manage the risks of Artificial Intelligence (AI). We will launch an action plan on the use of AI in the world of work and develop a brand to support the implementation of the International Code of Conduct for Organizations Developing Advanced AI Systems.
Fostering strong and inclusive global economic growth, maintaining financial stability and investing in our economies to promote jobs and accelerate digital and clean energy transitions. We also remain committed to strengthening the rules-based multilateral trading system and to implementing a more stable and fairer international tax system fit for the 21st century.
Acting together to promote economic resilience, confront non-market policies and practices that undermine the level playing field and our economic security, and strengthen our coordination to address global overcapacity challenges.
But this was a gathering where Russia-Ukraine and then China’s support of Russia dominated, so we are told, leader discussions. As note by David Sanger in the NYT:
But the change in views about China reached far beyond the questions swirling around an endgame in Ukraine. European countries that had worried a few years ago that the United States was being too confrontational with China, this year signed on to the communiqué, with its calls for more robust Western-based supply chains that were less reliant on Chinese companies.
A CSIS report led by John Homre and Victor Cha urged that the G7 expand its membership and “foster a more stable and predictable world order.”
This CSIS report speaks to the global need to elevate the Group of Seven (G7), a bloc of industrialized democracies—the United States, Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the European Union—to foster a more stable and predictable world order.
The authors urge an enlargement of the Group - suggesting:
... Australia and South Korea. They bring significant capabilities to the nine priorities identified by G7 leaders, are like-minded partners, and display the trust and reliability required of G7 members.
The G7 should establish a formal leader-level outreach mechanism to the Global South and middle-power economies to demonstrate inclusivity and confer legitimacy on the body as a global governance institution. The outreach partners should include the African Union, Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC), the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), China, the G20, and the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation (OIC).
But realistically that is not where the G7 is. It is about critical geopolitical matters to Europe and the United States. If anything, any long view of this Summit - 50 years on - and for a number of us one can cast back to 1975 and Rambouillet, this Informal is much shrunken and quite isolated.
It is worth noting Paul Poast’s assessment in WPR of the G7 at this 50th year:
While the group has evolved, its long-term survival is once again unclear. There are concerns that Trump’s disdain for international cooperation could return in 2025. Nations in Europe, notably Germany and France, are witnessing a far-right resurgence, which could also undermine the G7’s coherence as a gathering of the liberal democratic world’s leading nations. For that matter, this year’s host, Italy, is currently governed by the far-right Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni, whose party has its origins in the country’s fascist movement.
Hence, there are once again questions about the summits’ future, let alone whether they will produce more iconic images and momentous outcomes. In short, it’s unclear if the G7 will make it through another five, let alone another 50, meetings.
The shadow of Trump - and his possible return - explains many pronouncements by the current G7 Leaders. Diminished and ‘in a crouch’ seems to best define today’s G7. But even so, it is fair to say that our gaze shifted long ago to the G20. Trump, no Trump, key Middle Powers represent a significant presence and influence in the G20. That’s where to turn our gaze and focus.
Image Credit: AP