South Africa’s presidency of the G20 brings to an end the first cycle of G20 summits since the first one in Washington DC in November 2008. Spawned by the global financial crisis, the global environment today is very different from that of 2008. Even before then, growing discontent because of rising inequality and a deepening disillusionment with the ability of democratic systems to deliver spurred the rise of populism and a turn of countries inward away from what many considered to have exacerbated inequalities such as open markets and globalisation.
The second Trump administration’s dismantling of accepted practices of international relations, its withdrawal from – or downplaying of – global institutions and the rejection of values like “solidarity, equality, and sustainability” (at the core of South Africa’s focus for the 2025 G20) represent the peak of a two-decade-long shift.
Emerging out of the need for systemically important countries to cooperate on global economic challenges, regardless of their economic or political systems, the G20 today is at a critical juncture. Consensus lies at the heart of the G20’s working methods. But that requires an acceptance by all of the necessity of international cooperation, of the multilateral institutions and of the agreements and frameworks that states have adopted. Today, these are all being questioned – and not only by the US.
South Africa is a committed multilateralist
Since 1994, South Africa has been a committed multilateralist and an advocate of African and Global South positions. While recognising the UN as the apex body of the global governance system, South Africa has long argued for reforms of the UN and other institutions such as the IMF and the World Bank to give Africa in particular a greater voice and representation.
It has also keenly engaged in informal groupings such as the G20 and BRICS, considering those as important vehicles for bringing about change at the global level. The G20’s varied composition enables developing countries that are members of the grouping to engage in a smaller group with the dominant Northern powers to push for change, especially to articulate a stronger developmental agenda. The BRICS bloc serves a different purpose. As a platform for South-South cooperation it is increasingly exploring ways to reduce its dependence on the US-dominated financial system. This serves as a risk mitigation strategy, especially given the US’s more assertive unilateralism. The BRICS group pursues a dual strategy, of advocating for reforms within the existing multilateral bodies, while also pursuing parallel institutions and mechanisms.
Solidarity, equality and sustainability: South Africa’s presidency
Ten years ago, South Africa’s three overarching themes for its G20 presidency would have hardly raised an eyebrow. After all, 2015 was the year of the adoption of the Paris Agreement and the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs). A decade later the US is leaving the Paris Agreement, it has rejected and denounced the SDGs, as has Argentina, and sees international cooperation only through the lens of “America First”, even when it comes to global challenges such as climate and pandemics. The US Secretary of State, Marco Rubio, stated early in SA’s presidency that he regarded SA’s G20 priorities as promoting DEI (that stands for the framework of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion) and climate change, both of which the current US administration has rejected.
However, SA’s G20 priorities build on those of the previous three developing country presidencies, viz., Brazil, India and Indonesia, which focused on issues that were important for the Global South. This year South Africa highlighted four areas:
Disaster resilience and response: Climate-induced natural disasters have grown in frequency and impact, with developing countries bearing significantly greater costs because of their heightened vulnerability. South Africa’s aim is to push for the scaling up of post-disaster reconstruction.
Debt sustainability for low-income countries: South Africa’s aim here is to improve the G20 Common Framework on Debt Sustainability while also dealing with high structural deficits and liquidity challenges. The risk premium that many developing countries face (the high cost of capital) has also received much attention under the South African presidency. In this regard, the SA Treasury has established an Africa Experts Panel, chaired by a former finance minister, Trevor Manuel, to offer strategic advice by exploring and defining strategies that advance Africa’s collective interests. While not an explicitly G20 panel, its key recommendations will inform G20 finance track discussions. This priority is also part of the broader commitment by South Africa to reform the international financial architecture.
Finance for a just energy transition: South Africa has argued that both the quality and quantity of climate finance to developing countries has to increase. Scaling up the financing from multilateral development banks, building support for country platforms, and being able to leverage private capital are seen as crucial aspects to achieve just energy transitions.
Harnessing critical minerals for inclusive growth and sustainable development: Critical minerals have risen in importance on the geopolitical scale. Africa holds many critical minerals both for the energy transition as well as for computing and AI. However, this demand could lead to another cycle of minerals extraction like that of the colonial era. For Africa ensuring that extraction benefits the local communities, as well as the source country is essential for development and moving up the production value chain. South Africa regards critical minerals as contributing significantly to growth and development in Africa.
In addition, South Africa established three high level task forces on Inclusive Economic Growth, Industrialisation, Employment and Reduced Inequality; Food Security; and Artificial Intelligence, Data Governance and Innovation for Sustainable Development.
The presidency is also undertaking a review of the G20@20, since this presidency is the last in the first cycle. This review comprises a detailed survey questionnaire completed by member countries examining the G20’s effectiveness and impact across the finance and sherpa tracks, and an assessment of progress on key initiatives. The review is intended to make recommendations for the future and will include inputs by former policy makers involved in the G20 as well.
While these are all essential themes geared towards addressing developmental deficits in Africa and elsewhere and achieving the SDGs and the Paris Agreement, the questioning of many of these frameworks by the US and other countries, underscores not only the challenges that the G20 faces in the future but also the broader multilateral system.
Informal groupings beyond the age of consensus
The G20 was built on the same premise as the G7 – a recognition of the need to bring the world’s most important economies together in an informal setting to coordinate especially on global economic issues. The G7 was a more homogeneous grouping, but by the end of the 1990s had lost its overwhelming economic heft as other developing economies began to grow. Notwithstanding their political and economic differences – over more than two decades, the G20 members were able to find consensus on many issues, not least during the global financial crisis and the pandemic. There are new blocs rising but the global challenges require cooperation across divides. This is something that should not be abandoned, but the modus operandi of such groupings as the G20, may need to be reconsidered to ensure that the search for consensus does not result in meaningless declarations devoid of commitments to even the most fundamental elements of the international system built up over the last century.
For South Africa and the other developing economies in the G20, it will be important to ensure that the developmental commitments made over the first cycle of the G20 presidencies are not eroded, but carried forward beyond 2026. Evolving the G20’s modus operandi to collaborative work in a divided world will be essential in order to avoid a drift that would render its decisions irrelevant.
This article was first published by the Italian Institute for International Political Studies.
