A day after G-20 leaders adopted the Delhi declaration with significantly watered down language on Russia which the Western media called a “sellout” by the G7 and “eye opening departure” from Bali while Ukraine slammed the outcome, G7 countries mounted a defence that the language against Russia was not weakened but was something needed to obtain consensus for G-20.
“We believed that it is a declaration to be proud of and so we put our signatures,” said Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan at a press conference responding to a question on the Ukrainian Foreign Ministry stating that the Delhi declaration has “nothing to be proud of’.
Durable peace
Referring to the “war in Ukraine”, the Delhi Declaration adopted on Saturday called for a “just and durable peace in Ukraine” and said “there were different views and assessments of the situation.” “We highlighted the human suffering and negative added impacts of the war in Ukraine with regard to global food and energy security, supply chains, macro-financial stability, inflation and growth.”
Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau said if it was just upto him, the statement would have been much stronger particularly on Ukraine while if it had been just up to other countries around the table it would have been much weaker particularly on Ukraine. “The G-20 is an extremely disparate group and we worked very hard to get as strong language as we possibly could (into the statement),” he said.
On accusations of letting down Ukraine, Mr. Trudeau, said “These summits are always extraordinarily important and we all come together to deal with big global issues, and we all rolled up our sleeves to tackle the challenges of food and energy security, disrupted supply chains, particularly caused by the war in Ukraine that Russia chose to launch illegally.” This was a time to come together here and put pressure on countries that do not align with our values. Global problems have global solutions and that’s why we chose to come, he added.
The Bali declaration last year had mentioned “aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine” which was staunchly opposed leading to speculation that there may be no declaration at this summit. However compromise language by host country India and its acceptance by the West saw consensus emerge among the grouping.
On the issue of Ukraine External Affairs Minister S. Jaishankar said: “It is a fact that this is today a very polarising issue and there are multiple views on this. There are a spectrum of views on this, so I think in all fairness it was only right to record what was the reality in the meeting rooms.”
Building global consensus
Acknowledging that the text would be looking very different had they written it, a European Union (EU) official familiar with negotiations said the point here is to build consensus around an international and a global issue that has “effects and spillover effects in countries far away from Europe.”
“We’ve been looking at these negotiations for a while now. This is not the first time we’re negotiating that text with emerging economies. So I think if you see the change over time, and the tone and tonality underlying the principles is a lot of what has been achieved in the last year... Now, If you believe it’s not just a European issue, you will have to build international consensus. And the best way to build international consensus is bring people together,” the senior EU official said in response to a question from The Hindu.
The official added that they will continue to emphasize international law to emphasize territorial integrity and enduring peace. “And we’ll do our utmost to get there. I think that is our position. We will not get rid of it.”
The fact that all G-20 members concurred on the importance of a just and durable peace in Ukraine, and principles of the UN Charter including territorial integrity and sovereignty, as reflected in the G-20 declaration, is truly a significant achievement, Japanese PM Fumio Kishida said while stressing that Russia’s “aggression in Ukraine is shaking the very foundation of cooperation at G-20.”
Further, referring to comments on this being a weak declaration without explicit condemnation, Mr. Kishida said even in comparison to the Bali Declaration, we are recalling the outcomes of last year’s declaration and have also applied new expressions and items into this year’s declaration. “For example, the call for refraining from use or threat of use of force to seek territorial acquisition, pursuit of comprehensive just and durable peace in Ukraine, call for cessation of destruction of military infrastructure… That this was adopted along with support of Russia is very meaningful,” he added.
