For those who think that global politics is going through one of its periodic realignments, from which a new global order will emerge, the coming G20 summit in Delhi – set for this Saturday and Sunday – is quite important, not least because of president Xi’s last-minute cancellation and the substitution of premier Li Qiang to represent China.
This, according to the Guardian – alongside Modi’s efforts to project India as a superpower – has so dominated the run-up to the summit that the substance of what world leaders will discuss during their two days together has struggled to surface. We, of course, know different, and confidently expect net-zero to play a significant part in the talks.
Forbes India lists four “discussion areas: increasing loans to developing nations from multilateral institutions; reforming international debt structures; regulating cryptocurrencies; and addressing the impact of geopolitical uncertainties on food and energy security.
In three of those items, issues related to net-zero may take centre stage but, in addition, India – which currently hold the G20 presidency – has set out a number of priorities which include: green development; climate finance; and “equitable energy transitions in developing nations”.
But also tucked into that list is an item headed “Multilateral Institutions for the 21st century”, which centres on “efforts to reform multilateralism and create a more accountable, inclusive, and representative international system that is fit for addressing 21st century challenges”.
This is something which, had he attended, might have particularly interested president Xi, although he may have pre-empted the discussion which has as its undeclared focus the continued existence of the G20 grouping.
With Xi having taken a personal role in the expansion of BRICS, his decision to shun the G20 summit may be a message that he has lost interest in that grouping and intends to concentrate his efforts on BRICS.
The Indian Express is not so sure about this, offering as one “plausible explanation” a suggestion that Xi is deliberately “snubbing” India, being “unwilling to confer influence on its southern neighbour that boasts one of the fastest growing one of the major economies while China slows”.
New Delhi, we are told, is diplomatically trying to play down such talk. India’s external affairs minister, Subrahmanyam Jaishankar, has responded by saying, “At the end of the day, countries are represented by whoever they have chosen to represent them. The levels of representation do not become the final determinant of the position of a country”.
Such diplomacy may be in India’s best interest over the short term because, if Xi’s real intent is to undermine G20, this could leave India in an awkward position. The major Western powers, plus Japan, have the G7 to fall back on but India is not a member of that grouping.
Some are suggesting that, with escalating military tensions along the border with India – as well as the publication of provocative maps showing disputed territories within China’s border – Xi might be pushing Modi away from BRICS, despite one possible result being closer ties between India and the US.
One other reason being given for Xi’s absence, not unrelated to the first, is that he is seeking to avoiding one-to-one meetings with the “insincere” Joe Biden. Commentators recall that, although Xi agreed to meet with Biden on the side-lines of the G20 Bali summit last November, it was after a great deal of initial reluctance.
The Indian Express quotes a Chinese proverb which tells us “Hesitation only brings disaster”, observing that this is precisely what happened to the US-China worsening relations after the Bali summit.
Then, we are told, mutual acrimony and bitterness between the world’s two economic superpowers took a further ugly turn when Biden called Xi a dictator. Biden’s remark was made a day after the US secretary of state Blinken had concluded a much-hyped China visit on 18 June – giving Biden nul points for timing.
However, even if foreign affairs are to the fore, domestic political pressures may have forced Xi to sit out of the G20 summit – the economic situation having been widely explored in the Western media and elsewhere. That said, though, there is no obvious crisis of such urgency that Xi needs to attend to it in person.
Nevertheless, Gordon Chang, writing for the Telegraph, suggests that this is the real reason, Under the headline “Xi Jinping isn’t missing G20 to snub Modi. He’s battling plots at home”, the sub-heading explaining that “Many of his key supporters have mysteriously disappeared in recent months”.
Chang advances the thesis that there is turbulence at the top reaches of the Communist Party. Most notably, he writes, there are rumours that Qin Gang, the former foreign minister, has been executed. Although, in his view, the rumours are almost certainly false, the existence of the rumours – and the fact that they have been allowed to spread – suggest something is terribly wrong in Beijing.
Nonetheless, he doesn’t make the case that there is a particularly urgent crisis, which has the Washington Post putting its money on a snub. Xi, it says, has never missed a G-20 summit since he became president in 2013, so it is likely that his absence will be seen as a snub to India.
In focusing attention on the Chinese president, it has taken the gloss off Indian efforts to promote the event, to showcase India’s rising clout and to frame Modi as an influential international broker who can straddle both the US-led Western alliance and other blocs.
It was that which possibly led to a certain amount of friction at the August BRICS meeting, where it is said that India was anxious to demonstrate a leadership role in that grouping, cementing its image as the dominant regional power.
Thus, the G20’s future might be the thing to watch. If this folds, it strips India of a valuable international platform and, without being a member of G7, it would be deprived of a major platform for informal contact with the Western powers and Japan.
Thus, the demise of the G20 might see a consequential realignment of the G7, bringing in India and even some other countries, while China promotes its interests though “BRCS”, India having left the group.
Whatever the speculation, Reuters is indicating that Biden will arrive in New Delhi tooled up for a fight. Armed with cash for the World Bank and promises of sustained US engagement, Biden – the Agency says – hopes to persuade fast-growing economies in Africa, Latin America and Asia that there is an alternative to China’s Belt and Road project (to say nothing of BRICS), which has funnelled billions of dollars to developing countries but left many deeply in debt.
Biden says he is “disappointed” by Xi’s absence but sees China’s economic woes as creating a narrow opening for Washington to reshape the agenda of a political club it has previously struggled to influence.
At the heart of Biden’s pitch, we are told, are World Bank reform proposals and stepped-up funding for the Bank’s climate and infrastructure aid in the developing world. This supposedly would free up hundreds of billions of dollars in new funding for grants and loans – but mostly loans.
Whether the debt-ridden developing world will be particularly attracted by the prospect of acquiring still more debt remains to be seen, as does whether Xi can make them a better offer. But since India has put “climate finance” on the agenda at the summit, it is clear that battle has been joined.
In all probability, though, there may be no clear outcome from the summit – such gatherings are rarely decisive. But we may be able to read the mood music, which could signal the direction of travel.
This reminds one not of a Chinese proverb, but of its famous curse about living in interesting times. We do indeed live in such times, and they may well get much more interesting.