G20 in summit communiqué calls for a multilateral solution to global problems

The main economic outcome of the G20 summit, which ended in Delhi, can be considered the declared importance of maintaining a “multilateral” approach to solving global problems – from food security to climate regulation, which proposes to widely take into account the peculiarities of the economic development of countries. The G20 leaders also called for reform of the WTO – the summit communiqué mentioned the need to maintain an open trading system and combat protectionism – while the main trend in global trade, on the contrary, is a more pronounced division into blocs of countries friendly to each other.

The G20 communiqué, unanimously supported by all countries, points to the risks of a slowdown in the global economy and regression in achieving the goals of “sustainable” development. Governments are concerned about the rising cost of living due to rising food and energy prices, as well as higher borrowing costs due to higher rates (which increases risks). The statement specifically said that although the G20 is not a forum for resolving geopolitical disputes, the latter can have a significant impact on the global economy and long-term growth prospects.

The agreement on a common statement can largely be considered the merit of the Indian side, which is actively negotiating with both developed and developing countries.

The agenda also clearly shows the influence of the Indian presidency: a significant part of it is concentrated around the problems of the Global South, which, according to the Indian side, faces higher losses from climate change, rising energy prices (India is one of their largest importers, including from the Russian Federation) and other global problems. The same logic also applies to solutions to food security problems (the export of Ukrainian grain and Russian fertilizers), which the G20 calls for, as well as the expansion of pharmaceutical production in developing countries, which should increase the latter’s resilience to possible future crises. At the same time, with regard to the green agenda, it is stated that “no country should be faced with a choice between poverty and saving the planet.”

The communiqué also contains an entire section devoted to the importance of “restoring the principle of multilateralism” (as opposed to the now more popular principle of development within regional blocs or blocs of countries friendly to each other). In this context, the reform of international financial institutions (to increase the influence of developing countries) and the need to reduce the debt burden are mentioned. The “technological transformation” block is devoted to the development of digital infrastructure as a way to reduce the gap in development levels.

Separately, the G20 noted the importance of an “open and transparent” trading system with the WTO “at its center,” as well as the need to combat protectionism and non-market practices. The document also contains a promise to “work towards progress” within the framework of the organization’s 13th ministerial conference – note, India and the United States in June Deal on the resolution of six disputes within the WTO, the last of the disagreements, concerning phytosanitary restrictions on the import of certain types of food from the United States, was also resolved at the summit. The possibilities for “forced” dispute resolution are now blocked – the WTO appellate body cannot make new decisions due to a shortage of judges (this is a consequence of the conflict between the USA and China within the organization) – this hinders the implementation of WTO court decisions. The G20 participants, however, called on each other to reform the organization, and climate requirements related to trade and investment should be “mutually supportive” and not violate WTO requirements and international climate agreements.

Let us note, like BRICS, the G20 expanded its membership following the summit – the African Union (uniting 55 African countries) will become the 21st member of the organization.

The association became the second regional organization after the European Union to receive G20 member status. Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, who represented the Russian side at the negotiations, said that in the future the same status could be considered for the EAEU as an “important regional association,” but such a scenario in the current conditions is unlikely to be supported by the participants.

Managing Director for International Multilateral Cooperation and Integration of the Russian Union of Industrialists and Entrepreneurs, coordinator of the participation of Russian business in the Business Twenty, Sergei Mikhnevich notes that perhaps the key feature of the final document of the Indian presidency was the multiple references to the need to take into account national specifics when implementing the decisions made. Another interesting point is the emphasis on restoring multilateralism in international interaction. The relevant sections could be further strengthened. But the agreed passages in the current conditions are a great achievement, Mr. Mikhnevich believes, adding that the more neutral nature of the document as a whole correlates with the position of business and the B20 recommendations.

As for climate regulation, previously the G20 was dominated by a “hyper-ambitious” approach, more consistent with the position of developed countries, including with regard to the European cross-border carbon tax. The declaration enshrines a more pragmatic view: the trajectories of the EU and the conventional Congo cannot be the same.

In practical terms, a broader interpretation of ensuring food security is also relevant for the Russian side: the supply of not only food and fertilizers, but also its other components, including, for example, means of delivery or processing/preparation of agricultural products, the expert concludes.

Tatiana Edovina