After Johannesburg, The G20 is at an Inflection Point

Image Source: Office of the Prime Minister of India

Rajiv Bhatia

On 23 November, the G20 Summit in Johannesburg concluded on a high note of satisfaction and success under South Africa’s presidency, marking the end of a historic conference held on the African continent for the first time. On 27 November, the US, the next G20 president and the only absentee from Johannesburg, announced that it would not invite the President of South Africa to its Miami Summit in 2026. The South African government reacted with a mixture of hurt and indignation. Therein hangs a tale about the immediate fate of G20.

The G20 began functioning as a grouping of finance ministers in 1999 to coordinate policy for ensuring global macroeconomic stability. It comprised 19 countries from the North and the South, as well as the European Union. In 2008, it was elevated to the level of head of state/government at the initiative of the US President. It then played a valuable role in tackling the global financial crisis of 2007–09. Since then, its role has expanded beyond financial issues to developmental questions and larger global challenges, such as the COVID pandemic and the conflicts in Ukraine and Gaza.

Tilt to the South

Against the backdrop of emerging economies playing an increasingly enhanced role, the coincidence of the past four presidencies provided by developing countries – Indonesia, India, Brazil, and South Africa – demonstrated that the G20 was becoming a more inclusive and balanced body in its agenda and priorities. The inclusion of the African Union as a full member during India’s 2022–23 presidency, and the series of Voice of Global South Summits hosted by India, confirmed the G20’s tilt towards the South. This trend reached its zenith under the South African leadership.

In his inaugural address at the summit, President Cyril Ramaphosa urged the participants to promote equality and break down “the divisions of economic status, gender, race, and geography.” While highlighting his presidency’s four key priorities – disaster resilience, debt, sustainability, finance for just energy transition, and critical minerals for inclusive growth, he asserted that his country followed a comprehensive approach that included the concerns of other developing and developed countries. He also expressed the hope that the G20@t 20 Review, ordered by the previous summit, would serve to keep the forum relevant in today’s world. But the Review’s conclusions were not presented or finalised.

Johannesburg Declaration

The summit produced the longest declaration – 122 paragraphs – in the past four years, reflecting participants’ collective views, backed by consensus, under 20 sections. The document captures the essence of the work conducted in the Finance and Sherpa tracks, along with inputs from the non-governmental sector.

It is an inclusive statement on the need for multilateral cooperation, reform of global governance, food security, climate change, global development goals, and much more. It also marks the launch of the second phase of the G20 Compact with Africa for 2025–33, based on developed nations’ promise of more investment in African economies that embrace reform. Ramaphosa underlined the Declaration’s significance by saying that it was “more than words – it is a commitment to concrete actions.”

India’s role

As the country that handled its G20 presidency effectively, and the nation whose leader has participated in every G20 summit since 2014, India and Prime Minister Narendra Modi drew considerable diplomatic and media attention in Johannesburg. This was accentuated by the absence of the highest-level political leaders of China, Russia, Argentina, Mexico, Saudi Arabia, and Indonesia, as well as by the US boycott of the South African presidency and the summit.

In his several interventions at the summit, PM Modi highlighted the inherent shortcomings of global economic development and made a strong plea to redefine “the parameters of development.” This was possible through the adoption of “the pathway of Integral Humanism.” Modi presented six specific proposals for fellow leaders’ consideration and acceptance. These are:

· The creation of a global traditional knowledge repository
· A G20 Africa skills multiplier initiative
· A G20 health response team
· A G20 initiative to combat the drug-terror nexus
· A G20 critical minerals circularity initiative, and
· A G20 open satellite data partnership

As usual, he also called for a greater voice for the Global South in global governance. His three-fold message for G20 was to aim for sustainable development, trusted trade, and inclusive prosperity.

The brewing crisis

Now, let us turn to the tale in the opening paragraph. What lies behind the US–South Africa spat over G20?

In his post on X on 27 November, President Donald Trump cited two grievances: one, the South African government refused to acknowledge or address “the horrific Human Rights Abuses, endured by Afrikaners and other descendants of Dutch, French and German settlers”; and two, it refused to hand off the G20 Presidency to a US Embassy representative. Hence, he said, “South Africa will NOT be receiving an invitation” to the 2026 summit.

The South African response was to reject the charges of human rights violations and genocide against the whites as false and unfounded. It also said that the South African president handing over the summit gavel to a junior US diplomat was unacceptable.

Observers also noted that Pretoria rejected a US suggestion that the summit should have been satisfied with issuing the Chair’s Summary rather than a full formal Declaration, in the absence of US representation. They also pointed to a fundamental divergence between the two governments over their Israel policy.

In his forthright response to the US, President Ramaphosa asserted that South Africa would continue to participate “as a full, active and constructive member of the G20.” Significantly, he added: “We call on members of the G20 to reaffirm its continued operation in the spirit of multilateralism, based on consensus, with all members participating on an equal footing in all of its structures.”

Clearly, as the G20 completed the first cycle of 20 summits, it faces a crisis and an uncertain future. This is truly an inflection point for the forum.

It is time for potential mediators, such as Brazil, India, Saudi Arabia, the UK, and South Korea (the last two being future G20 presidents after the US), to initiate and secure reconciliation between Washington and Pretoria. If they fail to do so, a rift within the G20 roughly along the North-South divide may become inevitable. That will be the undoing of its excellent work since 2008, deepening geopolitical turbulence and harming the well-being of the global community.

*****

Rajiv Bhatia is a Distinguished Fellow at Gateway House and a former Ambassador who served in Myanmar, Mexico, Kenya, and South Africa. He is also a former Director General of the Indian Council of World Affairs (ICWA). A regular columnist and media commentator, he is the author of three books on Indian foreign policy, which have drawn critical acclaim, especially those dealing with India-Myanmar relations and India-Africa relations.