India Has A Point: The Ukrainian Conflict Shouldn’t Hold Back Global Co-Op On Other Issues
For as well-intended as the advice shared by India’s G20 Sherpa is, there’s no guarantee that his country’s Western partners will heed it. Their objective interests would be served by doing so, but powerful groups within those branches of their permanent bureaucracies that formulate foreign policy will do their utmost to continue hijacking this platform in pursuit of their ideologically driven interests.
The impending trifurcation of International Relations risks further worsening the many preexisting problems that most Global South states are presently experiencing, which can in turn contribute to making the global systemic transition even more chaotic. While the US-led West’s Golden Billion might cynically stand to gain to an extent by exploiting the aforementioned uncertainty, it’s arguably in their objective interests and those of the Sino-Russo Entente to preemptively assist the Global South.
To that end, multilateral cooperation through the G20 is imperative, though therein lies the challenge since the West has attempted to hijack this platform in order to turn it against Russia according to the insight shared in the latest article that was just published by its Ambassador to India. A day after he shared this perspective, India’s G20 Sherpa Amitabh Kant shared a spiritually similar sentiment, albeit in much more diplomatic and neutral language in keeping with his country’s political traditions.
In his words, “There is a challenge of the post COVID impact of 200 million people going below the poverty line, there is a challenge of 100 million people having lost their jobs, there is a challenge of global debts, there is a challenge of climate action; there is a challenge of recession in one-third of the economy; and there is a challenge of global debt impacting 75 countries in the world.” As such, he then strongly advised, “the one issue, the Russia-Ukraine issue, cannot hold many other issues back.”
Kant has a point since it’s these challenges that he described which should take precedence at fora like the G20, especially at this pivotal moment in the history of International Relations, instead of needlessly politicizing what’s supposed to be a purely economic-financial platform. “India’s Chairmanship Of The G20 Has Been Exemplary” since its masterful mediation efforts and the deep respect that all participants have for it prevented members of either de facto New Cold War bloc from walking out in protest.
That in and of itself, not to mention the two “G20 Chair’s Summary and Outcome Documents” that were released in spite of the inability of those two sides to agree on the joint statement’s language pertaining to Ukraine (let alone whether it should even be included in the first place), is an impressive feat. Had a member of either de facto New Cold War bloc been hosting this year’s events and not a truly neutral state like India, then the G20 might have already become paralyzed and frozen indefinitely.
The fact that the organization is still kept alive is due to the adroitness of Indian diplomacy, which is now focusing on convincing the participants not to let the rest of their upcoming meetings be influenced by their disagreements over the Ukrainian Conflict. Delhi wants its chairmanship this year to result in dividends that deliver tangible benefits to the Global South, ergo Kant’s prior suggestions of what they should focus on going forward.
He of course didn’t say so directly in keeping with his country’s political traditions, but this suggestion is being conveyed to the Golden Billion since it’s these countries that are responsible for demanding that Ukraine be discussed in their meetings and language pertaining to it be included in joint statements. Russia’s related remarks about these issues were only shared in response since this self-respecting country has the right to defend its integrity in the face of the West’s onslaught of attacks against it.
For as well-intended as the advice shared by India’s G20 Sherpa is, there’s no guarantee that his country’s Western partners will heed it. Their objective interests would be served by doing so, but powerful groups within those branches of their permanent bureaucracies that formulate foreign policy will do their utmost to continue hijacking this platform in pursuit of their ideologically driven interests. It remains to be seen how the next meetings will go, but hopefully they’ll get more done than the last two.