Neo-liberal banking and trade systems are now accepted in China, India, and Brazil. The BRICS partnership with South Africa and Russia has gained political significance. Despite American pressure in the wake of the Ukraine crisis, Russia was not condemned in the G20 Summit statement. Is there an obligation here to China and India?
The date November 25, 1915, is inscribed in black ink throughout history. François Georges-Picot of France and Mark Sykes of the United Kingdom initially sat next to one another on that particular day. The problem of dividing the regions ruled by Turkey, the “Weak Man of Europe,” at the end of World War I. Even though Russia is presently busy with domestic issues, it is noteworthy that it is interested in this topic.
maintaining a Middle East map on the Sykes-Picot desk. Sykes grabbed a pencil out of his pocket, and Picot produced a ruler that was one foot long. They chose which parts of the Middle East would fall under their power over the course of the following five months using that pencil and ruler.
Drawing uneven lines, not striking the bullseye with precision. They just formed new borders by drawing straight lines, not caring who lived where.
To make it clear who would control particular territory, the map was painted in three different colours. Three portions: one for Russia, one for France, and one for Britain. This map served as the basis for a covert agreement that Britain and France signed in London and Paris in March 1916. The Sykes-Picot Agreement is the name of this arrangement.
It has been a century since the erstwhile Ottoman Empire was divided. The efforts to split apart the world are still ongoing. Wives and husbands have evolved, as has the way that families are divided. What could have been split with pencil marks on a map is now impossible.
This is due to the introduction of new competitors, which is the only explanation. The once-subjugated nations, now known as the “Global South,” have risen while the old players—the imperial and colonial powers—are currently rather unstable.
We need to look to the most recent G20 Summit that was held in Delhi, India, to see proof of this shifting reality.
World Change and the G20
The G20 coalition for worldwide collaboration was founded with the intention of managing global financial and trade systems according to the principles of cooperation rather than competition.
To do this, the European Union and the African Union, along with the 19 nations that are currently the richest and wealthiest in the world, formed the G20 in 1999. The organization’s member nations will profit if international commerce and financial systems can be administered on the basis of cooperation rather than competition.
This objective was considered when the G20 was formed. Prior to that, the G7—consisting of just seven of the richest nations—was founded in 1975. They all avoided discussing the concept of sharing. But nobody departed who did not find this obvious reality astonishing. They now wish to celebrate that achievement.
Fresh players
The United States first attempted to establish the G33 and G22 coalitions before joining the G7 and G20 alliances. Making this coalition more reflective of the reality of the evolving global scene is the same-minded objective. But there is no denying the significance of the G20 alliance, which was founded in 2009 with China, Russia, India, Brazil, and South Africa.
As a counterbalance or alternative alliance, Russia is crucial to the Global South as long as it exists. The coalition has openly contested traditional Western supremacy, challenging the underlying premise that we, not the United States, will rule global trade and banking. Whether or not they choose to. While the West is fading, these southern nations are rising on the other side.
G20: The Issue
The issue is that global economic and political factors have changed away from supporting American hegemony over the past 20–22 years. Washington desired to take control of the global economy after the collapse of the Soviet Union. This did not really occur. America lost its position as the world’s economic leader because of the structural flaws in Western economies.
Given that they have been involved in numerous wars, their military leadership is also under question. Additionally, there is a distressing internal issue. The conservative Republican leadership in America favours isolationism over assuming a “global leadership” role. The ’empire’ that attacked Iraq in 2003 is no longer America.
The economic and military hold of Western European alliances will wane as a result of American weakness. They have not yet recovered from the world economic crisis of 2008. Russian invasion of Ukraine in 2022 has made the crisis worse.
In the face of difficulties, China and India have emerged as leaders as a result of these events. The resilience of these two nations in the face of difficulties is astounding, notwithstanding the global economic crisis. They now wish to celebrate that achievement.
The countries of the Global South, particularly China, India, and Brazil, are the centre of attention because they have advanced economically by embracing neo-liberal trade and banking systems.
This system’s main tenet is the elimination or reduction of state influence over financial management. They stand to gain the most from globalisation. However, the United States ignored the threat they posed because it was important to it to maintain Western dominance.
China has been admitted to the WTO despite disparities in financial management in the hopes that it will eventually increase its openness. The United States was the country that promoted this the most.
However, as the world economic crises of 1990 and 2008 have demonstrated, radical economic governance is hazardous over time. When the G7-controlled banking system fails, a global financial crisis results. The Global South needs to think about taking an alternative path to avert this calamity.
The COVID-19 situation in 2020 kept the United States and its affluent friends busy. Even though they donated some of their created vaccinations to the Global South, they were hesitant to share the production of these medicines. Different beliefs were a contributing factor in this.
Global South participation in the economy
Some laxity in G7 and G20 policy has resulted from the Global South’s growing influence on the global financial system. Due to issues like debt reduction and the fragility of foreign debts, which entered their agendas, especially after the 1997–1998 Asian financial crisis, they can no longer afford to disregard their interests.
This is both a reflection of reality and an attempt to broaden the G20 coalition. The Global South, however, isn’t pleased with mere nods and outward displays of good faith, and this is the real truth. They desire a significant seat at the table.
Examples of this include projects like the creation of a World Bank under the BRICS, the use of alternate international currencies, and similar endeavours. Even if the results of these efforts have not been especially thorough, the coalition’s political significance has undoubtedly increased.
This was made clear at the G20 Summit that took place in New Delhi on September 9 and 10. The United States’ denunciation of Russian aggression in Ukraine was one of its top priorities. The United States took the lead in strongly denouncing the attack during a meeting held in Indonesia last year.
But this time, not a single criticism of Russia was made in the final communiqué that was adopted. Instead, it is universally agreed upon that a country should not infringe upon another’s sovereignty, only pledge to do so. In essence, the United States was forced to accept this worthless statement because of pressure from China and India.
It goes without saying that some Americans were extremely upset by it. John Bolton, a former national security adviser to President Donald Trump, is one of them. In a piece for The Washington Post, he suggested doing away with the G20. The G20 has only partially succeeded in preserving the world’s jungles after countless summits, consultations, and common statements.
India and China
Bolton and others concur that India has profited the most from this summit. They currently hold a prominent position on the global scene. In addition, this gathering has highlighted the rivalry and conflict between China and India, the two largest nations in the global South.
Xi Jinping, the president of China, did not go to the meeting. However, he attended the BRICS Summit with parliamentary representatives that took place in South Africa barely two weeks ago. Long-standing disputes exist between China and India. One factor might be President Xi’s absence.
However, it’s possible that the issue of leadership alignment is the main factor. China has already created a “mini-alliance” with Russia through which it has played chess with the West. India is not a member of such alliance and is not likely to join. New Delhi is on the verge of deciding that the West and the United States hold the key to its future, not China or Russia.
Due of this, the nation has joined the Quadrilateral Security Dialogue (Quad), a geostrategic discussion between the United States and its allies who oppose China. According to an analyst for Al Jazeera, “Russia is India’s past, and the United States is its future.”
The contacts and disputes between these two nations will decide how the Global South secures its position in the world summit as a strong coalition.
More post our website: Politics News
