G20: United for progress or divided by politics?
The Group of 20 (G20) is touted as being a group of global powerhouses. Comprising 19 sovereign states and two economic blocs (European Union and African Union) – it is in fact a group of 21.
Collectively, G20 members represent around 85% of global GDP, over 75% of international trade and about two-thirds of the world’s population. With an annual rotating Presidency, the Group operates in a troika system, with a previous host (Brazil), a current host (SA) and a next host (USA). It became 21 members when the African Union joined as a permanent member in 2023.
The G20 was set up specifically in response to the 1999 Asian financial crisis, to bring together the world’s major economies to discuss, coordinate and promote international economic cooperation and financial stability. Over time, its agenda broadened to include social and environmental challenges, sustainable development, climate change, health, trade and governance – aiming to create a more stable and prosperous global economy through collective policy coordination and cooperation
So, my question is, what happens when one of the powerhouses is belligerent and behaves in bad faith, jeopardising the very purpose of the group? Do the other 20 members stand up and say ‘No’ to the rogue state blocking progress, or do they let one temperamental global player derail the entire process?
US President Trump’s eleventh-hour announcement that the USA would boycott the Leaders’ Summit, after initially nominating VP Vance to attend, cited (the absurd myth) of white farmer genocide and land confiscation in South Africa. The real reason – he’s proven time and again to push a racist, misogynistic, homophobic agenda – even voicing not supporting South Africa’s progressive themes of Equality, Solidarity and Sustainability.
This is the same man who, since taking office 10 months ago, has wielded a wrecking ball to the global economic architecture and international aid systems that have been in place for decades, causing chaos and financial turmoil for governments, the private sector and citizens worldwide.
The USA is powerful; we all know this – but is it more powerful than the other 20 members together? I’m not an economist or financial expert, but surely a group with an overall GDP, population and trade of the 20 combined is more powerful than one.
On the other hand, there has been broad support for South Africa, with endorsements from friendly states, the EU, the AU and the Holy See (Pope and Vatican). Our President and diplomats have been working hard to garner support for South Africa and the G20 to counter the malicious, unsubstantiated attacks by the Trump administration.
Suppose this forum is truly about creating a more stable and prosperous global economy through collective policy coordination and cooperation for the benefit of people and the planet. In that case, a disruptive or destructive member should be suspended or expelled.
I don’t know enough about the G20’s governance process beyond the fact that it operates on a consensus basis. But surely there should be some recourse for a rogue member? Though this has likely never occurred before, and no one anticipated it, there’s simply no precedent. It perfectly captures the bizarre reality of Trumplandia.
This problem is even more significant as South Africa is to hand over G20 Presidency to the USA as the next in line. It’s going to be a little awkward when the country that is supposed to take over the Presidency just doesn’t pitch up. It also means that all the hard work done by South Africa and the other members will be for nought. The Trump administration will almost certainly start by undoing all the progress the Group has made since its formation in 1999.
So what to do? Stand up to the bully. I have three suggestions for the other 20 members and their conundrum about the next host country: 1) Let South Africa host again, we’ve already done the work, and this way we can continue what we started; 2) Skip the USA and give the Presidency to the next in line to host or, one other suggestion I have heard, is to move it slightly North to Canada, who are currently chairing the G7.
On the other hand, I question the value of these groups, and whether they have, or ever will, result in changes to the global financial system, poverty and inequality. The money spent on organising the hundreds of events could be better spent on getting life-saving medicine to people and communities affected by global aid funding cuts. However, that’s a story for another day.
If G20 members put their foot down — or if Trump again chooses to walk away, as he has from so many global forums — the upside is they wouldn’t even have to change the name. There are 21 members, one less makes 20. Let’s make it official.
We will not be bullied. All we can do is hope that the Group does the right thing for people and the planet – a G20 working towards a world of equality, solidarity and sustainability.
#PushForward4Equality
