Understanding the shifts in G20 and beyond

In the intricate tapestry of international diplomacy, changes in its threads can reflect the shifting contours of global power dynamics. A recent development that has sparked lively discussions globally is Chinese President Xi Jinping’s decision to abstain from attending the G20 Summit that was recently held in India.

Commencing in 2008, the G20 has convened world leaders for dialogue about pressing global issues, representing a potent embodiment of international cooperation. Presiding over the world’s most populous nation, Xi’s absence warrants careful consideration — it is an indicator of evolving political dynamics and a possibly new diplomatic narrative. His absence, extending beyond health-related reasons, underlines a calculated recalibration in China’s diplomatic strategy. It could be read as a shrewd maneuver further taxing the already strained Sino-Indian relationship, amplified by longstanding border disputes. Another possible perspective points to China’s support for alternative multilateral forums, such as BRICS, in counterbalance to Western-oriented ones like the G20.

Simultaneously, India recently launched the India-Middle East-Europe corridor connecting Gujarat with the UAE, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel and Europe. Some perceive this as a move to counter China’s ambitious Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). However, such a viewpoint might overlook the intrinsic complexities of global politics.

Surely, this Indian venture as a counterstrategy against the BRI stands on shaky ground. The BRI, with a vision to connect Asia, Europe and Africa through a network of roads, railways, ports and industrial parks, is touted as a gamechanger in global trade. Conversely, the India-Middle East-Europe corridor, while a significant initiative, has a geographically narrower scope and may hardly neutralise the BRI’s far-reaching influence.

Furthermore, while various countries may aim to counterbalance China’s growing dominance, establishing India as a fulcrum, might not suffice. China, with its robust technological advancements and strong economy, continues to assert its influence in the region and globally, rendering it challenging for any single nation to rival its dominance effectively.

At the heart of these geopolitical maneuvers, Xi’s G20 absence serves as a critical marker. His non-attendance could symbolise a broader narrative of Eastern ascendance and the shifting axis of world supremacy. It signals China’s decisive voice in carving its path, reinforcing its vision for global order, even when met with dissent or questions.

Also noteworthy is Xi’s absence aligning with Russian President Vladimir Putin’s, hinting at a possible indication of solidarity. Amidst fluctuating Sino-US ties and dormant high-level interactions, Xi’s absence might affect the trajectory of this complex relation.

In the backdrop of the Indo-Pacific region evolving as a global supremacy hub, Xi’s decision regarding the upcoming Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) summit in San Francisco will be watched closely. If Beijing chooses not to participate, unlike G20, it might further shade perceptions about China’s international standing and influence over foreign investment.

Underneath these dynamics, however, it remains crucial not to isolate China’s absence from the G20 but perceive it as part of a larger narrative. While specifics are being deciphered, China, under the Communist Party, aims to navigate the tumultuous corridors of power politics, cement its role as a major global actor, and subtly restructure the international hierarchy.

Undoubtedly, the impact of these strategic undertakings will resonate far beyond the G20 meet, shaping the course of future diplomacy and potentially redefining the so-called East-West balance in international relations.

Published in The Express Tribune, September 16^th, 2023.

Like Opinion & Editorial on Facebook, follow @ETOpEd on Twitter to receive all updates on all our daily pieces.