The G20’s success in achieving a declaration is also its inherent weakness. A consensus formed by such a disparate group — with far-ranging aims, ambitions and ideologies — has to be couched in generalities, noncommitments and vague timelines.
That should not dampen the celebratory language the local media has effused across its headlines. In a global affairs world that lives in USPresident Donald Trump’s shadow, this weekend was invariably cast as a test of backbone. That South Africa not just found theirs but took their far wealthier partners along for the ride is a commendable feat.
Yet history won’t judge the document on the mere fact that it was written. The work begins now to ensure it becomes a living commitment instead of a relic in a file cabinet. Which, regrettably, is a fate endured by countless other pledges.
Even the staunchest defenders of multilateral co-operation would have trouble arguing otherwise. One need only look at the UN’s sustainable development goals: a list of targets of human progress set in 2015 by all member nations. According to reliable research, we are only on track to achieve 18% of their aims by the set finish line in 2030.
The G20 leaders’ declaration has no such specificity on its side. Ending conflict in Ukraine, Gaza, the Democratic Republic of Congo, Sudan and elsewhere is a broad stroke no one would disagree with. How precisely to do that is a matter on which everyone has their own opinion.
With those caveats noted, it is highly valuable to have the global conscience documented as it was this weekend. The development agenda set out by the hosts is a continuation of a narrative that has been slowly getting louder at multilateral gatherings in recent years. Each one of those occasions is a brick in building something new, in steadily changing social norms.
It wasn’t long ago that climate science was relegated to nothing more than a quack’s preoccupation. It took a relentless beating of the drum to reorientate the world to collectively giving a damn. This will be no different.
South Africa has an opportunity to lead that new dispensation.
President Cyril Ramaphosa is seen by many to have failed in his assignments of uplifting the economy and ushering in ethical leadership to a landscape sullied by his predecessor. But he has thrived as a diplomatic president. Under him, the country has resolutely defended its right to be nonaligned — a stance that many Western theorists tell us is verboten in our multipolar world.
The distinction is set to be increasingly important. With the prestige of the past weekend’s accomplishment behind it, South Africa can realistically stake its claim to be one of the developing world’s leading spokespeople and mediators.
That means retaining amicable, working relationships with the Global North. Including the US.
As much as it is right to applaud the nation for refusing to be bullied, an overtly antagonistic agenda would suit no one.
The good news is the fractious relations are only a deal away from being healed. Trump is well known for his transactional mentality. You need only look at his weekend White House meeting with Zohran Mamdani, in which he nonchalantly brushed aside the New York mayor’s past characterisation of him as a despot. His misplaced obstinacy against dealing with supposed South African genocidaires will invariably also fade away when the circumstances are right.
The battle for all the signees of the G20 leaders’ declaration is to ensure that those circumstances, when the dust settles, have not betrayed the ideals they have committed to. Once they pass that test, then we can unequivocally call this weekend a success.
Read all the latest G20 news, plus expert views on what South Africa’s leadership of this critical forum means when it comes to shaping global policies and advocating for Africa’s interests on the international stage, on our G20 page.
Would you like to comment on this article?
Sign up (it's quick and free) or sign in now.
Please read our Comment Policy before commenting.