G-7 Summit 2021 | By Imtiaz Rafi Butt

129

G-7 Summit 2021


LEADERS of the United States of America, UK, Germany, France, Japan, Italy and Canada gathered in Cornwall, a county in South West England to embark on an adversarial vision of the future.

The loud message of this year’s G-7 summit was to counter the influence of China around the world.

Promises have been made, projects have been envisioned and billions of Dollars have been set in motion, all to counter China in all regions across the world. But the approach of the G-7 summit seems hollow at best and the objectives have been termed faulty by analysts and geo-strategic experts.

It is ironic to notice that the most powerful nations of the globe are unable to conceptualize the world today, let alone act to improve it.

The G-7 summit has some odd numbers attached with it, and these numbers speaks volumes about its effectiveness and relevance to world issues.

No doubt the G-7 countries possess 40 percent of the global GDP and have only 1/10th of the world’s population. That alone, stands testimony to the fact that the G-7 summit does not represent the greatest nations of the world but only wealthy ones.

These are nations that make up the Western bloc and opposes any development and sharing of power across different cultures and continents. Strangely, Russia was part of the G8 summit but was suspended from the G group after the annexation of Crimea in 2014.

The G-7 is then, an ideal of common goals, mutual interests and shared values. Many have even criticized the G-7 for being a representative body of White Christian ethnicities excluding Japan.

The G-7 is not popular nor representative of the world or nationalities across continents. It is simply a gathering of rich nations who want to protect their interests by all means possible.

The primary agenda, as spoken out clearly and vividly by Boris Johnson, Joe Biden and Angela Merkel is particular is the countering of Chinese influence.

The G-7 summit criticized the Chinese Government for human rights violations against Uighur population. The actions of the Chinese Government against the ethnic Muslim populations in Xinjiang province, which allegedly includes, forced migrations, conversions, concentration camps and imprisonments.

The G-7 also accused China of meddling in the state affairs of Hong Kong and demanded the Beijing to suspend all security laws and enforcement procedures hampering Hong Kong’s independence.

Thirdly, the G-7 termed the growing Chinese influence in developing countries as a debt trap. According to the G-7 leaders, China must be countered by offering alternate solutions to infrastructure and economic uplift without debt conditions.

Joe Biden stated that China does not share values of the Western world and so, all its actions must be countered and balanced out. The intention of the summit is clear but the methodology is feeble and obtuse.

Joe Biden opened the G-7 summit with the B3W approach, meaning “Build Back Better World”.

Earlier, this was being referred to as the Green Belt and Road Project, which was too blatant an idea to counter the Chinese One Belt One Road Project. During the summit, it was substituted with B3W.

The G-7 leaders spelled out three main areas of focus for the G-7 , that is, Climate Change, Labor Protection and Anti-Corruption assistance.

To nullify the effect of Chinese expansion, the G-7 announced that it would spare around 40 Billion Dollars to support Green technologies across developing nations and assisting them in reducing carbon emissions.

Secondly, the G-7 would fund and assist labor standardization and work under the ambit of the World Labor Organization to support labor protections laws and standards.

Third, the greatest threat to modern economies is corruption, the G-7 would spend huge amounts of funds to bolster anti-corruption agencies in middle-income countries.

All these are no doubt exceptionally idealistic approaches but near the end of the summit, only Germany and France were willing to accept binding budgets.

On the other hand, no timelines, targets or implementation models have been developed as yet. The richest nations of the world have decided a directionbut are still figuring out the path to take.

The Chinese Government was not intimidated by the press releases and agenda meetings of the G-7 countries summit.

Beijing responded in a swift and contained manner. The most significant statement was, “Long gone are the days when a small group of countries decided the fate of the world” from the Chinese Foreign Affairs office.

In the next round, the Chinese Government responded by saying that the G-7 summit is a practice of bloc politics which achieves nothing but wastage and ideas of conflict. Lastly, the Chinese Government demanded the G-7 countries to stop making rash comments on the internal affairs and security matters of China.

Beijing termed the stance of the G-7 countries as one of aggression and violation of internal sovereignty of China.

The accusations of probing the origins of Covid-19 virus in China was also termed frivolous and baseless. There was no informal exchange of offensive insults, this was very direct.

From an analytical perspective, a comparison can be drawn between the G-7 B3W project and the Chinese OBOR project.

The B3W project mainly focuses on Climate Change with added boons of anti-corruption and labor funds while OBOR much more realistic, grounded and integral part of development.

In terms of Climate Change, it must be pointed out that it was the United States that backed out of the Kyoto Convention and decided not to abide by Carbon Emission targets.

Now, Joe Biden has come up with this grand idea of a Green Climate Change fund for developing nations but his republican predecessor did not believe in Climate Change as a whole.

It is a matter of general understanding that climate change is not on the agenda for countries in regions like Africa and the Middle East.

It is an ambiguous proposition how low and middle-income countries could accept funds for Green technologies when they actually need job creation, market stability, infrastructure of basic necessities.

OBOR on the other hand, supplements growth, co-operation, bi-lateral and multi-lateral ties with tangible on-ground infrastructural uplift. Developing nations don’t need Green power and labor standards as much as they need electricity, drinking water, jobs and hospitals.

China’s OBOR project connects on a physical level whereas the G-7 idea of connectivity is vague and superficial.

The most frequently used argument against China is the debt trap trick. The G-7 countries are of the view that China is engulfing poorer countries into loans and substituting those loans with Governmental influence and on-ground presence.

But alternatively, China is providing uplift projects to give an opportunity to join the developed world. Most of the nations are already under massive loans and bailouts by the World Bank and IMF which are directly controlled by G-7 or Washington.

Instead, China is offering a chance to build and grow together. Even India is not a part of the G-7 even with a massive population. Also, Italy even being a G-7 country has signed up to be a part of the Chinese OBOR project.

Pakistan and Gwadarare a glaring example of bi-lateral ties, co-operation and regional integrity which was never possible under the brutal economic sanctions of the IMF and World Bank.

China is an expanding Superpower which is rising with a new approach towards development, the old world with its hegemonic Western controls is fading and new world is coming to light, it can be expected that the modern World will give way to a Superpower that speaks for all and stands for equality, similar to the socialist foundations of its founding fathers, an ode to Mao Zedong.

—The writer is Chairman, Jinnah Rafi Foundation, based in Lahore.

Previous articleFO’s prompt rejoinder
Next articleNuclear deterrent, unexceptionable plank of national security | By Muhammad Usman