Policy Alert #193 | September 6, 2019

Heads of state from Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States convened in Biarritz, France, for the annual  Group of Seven (G7) summit August 24-26, 2019. Following last year’s tumultuous summit in Canada, in which US President Donald Trump refused to sign the summit’s joint communique, French President Emmanuel Macron appeared determined to restore order to the G7. In lieu of the traditional communique, a one-page Leaders’ Declaration briefly outlined the members’ shared positions on the state of global trade, crumbling relations with Iran over its nuclear program, ongoing tension between Russia and the Ukraine, conflict in Libya, and protests in Hong Kong. To these ends, Macron met with Russian President Vladimir Putin ahead of the G7 Summit and invited Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif to Biarritz in a failed attempt to facilitate talks with the US. Nevertheless, the summit wrestled with sideline drama that included President Trump’s off-the-cuff suggestion that Russia rejoin the group, as well as his grandstanding on US-China trade negotiations, and a tense exchange with Brazilian President Jair Bolsonaro over raging wildfires in the Amazon. In this RPI Policy Alert, we review the Rising Powers’ reactions to the 2019 G7 Summit.

 

CHINA
Chinese Foreign Ministry Spokesperson Geng Shuang faced numerous queries in his regular press conferences regarding claims by President Trump that “China called, last night, our top trade people, and said, ‘Let’s get back to the table.’ So, we’ll be getting back to the table.  And I think they want to do something,” and his suggestion that Chinese Vice Premier Liu Hua was party to this direct communication with the US. Spokesperson Geng denied being aware of any high-level dialogues. In response to the G7’s statement regarding the ongoing protests in Hong Kong, Geng said: “We deplore and firmly oppose such wanton comment in the G7 joint statement. As we’ve emphasized time and again, Hong Kong affairs are China’s internal affairs. No foreign governments, organizations or individuals have any right to interfere.” He further explained that China believes that the “ultimate purpose” of the 1984 Sino-British Joint Declaration was to “to affirm China’s recovering of Hong Kong and resumption of exercise of sovereignty over it.” Regarding the efforts to improve ties with Iran, Geng noted that Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif met with Chinese State Councilor and Foreign Minister Wang Yi shortly after his stop in France, and that “China understands Iran’s legitimate demands and believes that its continued fulfillment of the deal should be properly rewarded. China is committed to continue working with relevant parties to uphold and implement the JCPOA to facilitate the political and diplomatic settlement of the Iranian nuclear issue and play a constructive role in reducing tensions in the Gulf region.”

• The state-supported China Daily highlighted the “unity” of the G7’s support for “trade peace”: “Let us hope [Trump’s] talks with the European leaders have helped the US leader appreciate that the interconnectedness of the US and Chinese economies also benefits the US, and that a trade deal is in everyone’s best interests, the US included.” Regarding the tense exchange over the wildfires in the Amazon, the Daily acknowledged that while Brazilian President Jair Bolsanaro “has reason to argue that the fires are an ‘internal issue’ of Brazil and countries directly involved,” because “the consequences [of the fires] will be felt far beyond those countries[.., i]t is no exaggeration to address it as an ‘international crisis.’”
• The nationalist Global Times meanwhile argued that the apparent dysfunction of the G7 members to tackle issues of inequality, trade, and peace with Iran were evidence that “although the G7 remains an important intergovernmental economic organization, estrangement is more than apparent. With various internal contradictions and the rise of emerging powers, the global influence of G7 as a whole and all its members is declining fast.”
• The independent South China Morning Post criticized Trump for “add[ing] to trade war confusion” with his inaccurate claims and mercurial positions: “In the course of a day, he retreated from a threat to order US firms out of China, said he was having ‘second thoughts’ about a new round of tariffs on Chinese goods – interpreted as a softening – and then backflipped again, saying second thoughts meant he regretted not having raised tariffs any higher. It was typical Trump negotiating style, which still owes more to real estate salesmanship than statesmanship.”

 

RUSSIA
In response to French President Emmanuel Macron’s suggestion that “the resolution of this conflict [with the Ukraine]” is a magic wand that will open the door for Russia to return to the G7 club, and the G7 can turn into the G8,” Russian President Vladimir Putin quipped, “As for the G8, which you mentioned, it does not exist. How can I return to an organisation that does not exist? It is called the G7 today. Regarding a possible eight-country format, we do not reject anything. It was Russia’s turn to host a G8 summit, but our partners did not come. We look forward to seeing our partners anytime, but within the G7 framework.” Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov conveyed Russia’s disinterest to do so as well: “We are working actively and productively within the framework of other formats, such as BRICS, the SCO, the integration associations created in the post-Soviet space and the G20, not to mention the UN. Never during that time have we raised the idea of relaunching the G8 in our contacts with anyone.”

 

• In its regular press review in English, government-owned TASS focused on the Russian media’s responses to President Trump’s suggestion that Russia rejoin the G8.
• Igor Ogorodnev, a correspondent for state-supported RT, described the G7’s focus on the wildfires in the Amazon as an “info war to sink Bolsonaro”: “What we are witnessing this month is the culmination of a deliberate campaign – call it propaganda, information war or fake news – executed at the highest level. […] Rather than consulting with Brazil, the world’s fifth most populous country and eighth biggest economy, the G7 club unilaterally declared what they thought was best for it.” 
• Government-owned Sputnik featured interviews with Tehran University professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi and senior researcher at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences Irina Fedorova for their analyses of Macron’s effort to invite the Iranian Foreign Minister to the G7 Summit.
• The nationalist Pravda Report featured op-eds by Timothy Bancroft-Hinchey and Stephen Lendman that criticized Brazilian President Bolsonaro for his inaction on the wildfires in the Amazon, the former of which advocating a boycott of Brazilian products.
• In an op-eds for the independent Moscow Times regarding discussion of Russia’s return to the G8, Russian political analyst Vladimir Frolov argued that “For Russia […] what really counts is the discussion surrounding Russia’s returning to the G7, not the actual re-entry to the club. It increases Western pressure on Ukraine to accept Russia’s conditions and creates leverage for Moscow on a host of other issues.”

 

JAPAN
Japanese Prime Minister Shinzo Abe attended the G7 Summit and kept busy forging bilateral ties with G7 members and observer states such as Australia and Chile. Prime Minister Abe offered an optimistic update on trade negotiations with US President Donald Trump: “[W]e successfully reached consensus with regard to the core elements of both the agricultural and industrial products of our bilateral consultations.” Abe also expressed his interest to “set the goal of signing this Japan-US trade agreement” at an upcoming bilateral summit meeting planned on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly later this month. 

• In its Vox Populi op-ed, the progressive Asahi Shimbun lamented the lack of progress made at the G7 Summit on relations with Iran and North Korea, climate change, and international trade due to the threat of President Trump’s behavior as a “bull in a china shop”: “Nowadays, it appears that any summit is to be deemed a success so long as this unruly bull of a man-child is kept in line and not allowed to act up.”
• The centrist Japan Times commended Prime Minister Abe’s efforts to temper President Trump’s comments regarding the tentative Japan-US trade deal, but echoed the Asahi’s frustration with both Trump and the G7: “Last year’s post-summit fracas is a reminder that little things can set Trump off and declaring the meeting ‘a success’ — no matter how low the bar — is still premature. Issues that dominated the discussion, the need to shore up the global economy as headwinds mount in particular, remain daunting. The contributions that the G7 can make to that end appear to be shrinking.”
• The conservative Yomiuri Shimbun similarly voiced concern about the US president’s effect on the G7, especially given that Trump will host next year’s summit: “It is essential to bind Trump to a framework of international cooperation while also preventing a change in the nature of the G7 countries. Noting his relationship of trust built with the U.S. and European leaders, Prime Minister Shinzo Abe should grapple with this difficult task.” 

 

INDIA
Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi held bilateral meetings with G7 members as part of a diplomatic trip to France. In a press conference with US President Donald Trump, Prime Minister Modi dodged Trump’s suggestion that he would like to help mediate between India and Pakistan over ongoing tension in the disputed Kashmir region: “India and Pakistan have — all the issues are of bilateral nature.  And we do not want to give pains to any country in the world — to, in fact, try to do anything in this, because these issues are bilateral.  And I trust that before 1947, when we were one country, that even afterwards we can find solutions through discussions.”

• The liberal Hindustan Times commended Modi “for beating off yet another unwanted diplomatic advance” regarding Trump’s offer to mediate with Pakistan, but noted that Modi’s government has more diplomatic battles to fight over Kashmir: “Kashmir will become a unilateral concern of India’s, and if there will be anything to discuss, it will solely be the terrorism infrastructure Pakistan maintains. This new status quo will take time for the international community to accept and India’s large neighbours are already putting up as much interference as they can. Deep sixing Trump’s mediation effort may come to be seen as relatively minor accomplishment if the domestic Kashmir policy starts to go off the rails. New Delhi must brace for further unwanted attention regarding Kashmir, but recognise that its ultimate defence will lie in what it does on the home front.”
• C. Raja Mohan, Director of the Institute of South Asian Studies at the National University of Singapore and contributing editor on foreign affairs for the liberal Indian Express, noted in an op-ed that while Trump’s “breath-taking disruption of the current global economic and political order” is difficult to manage, it nevertheless provides opportunity: “[A]n India that quickly adapts to the new dynamic can easily elevate its place in the new global pecking order that is bound to emerge when the dust settles from the current world turmoil. If India gets its economic house in order and returns to a high growth path, Delhi might discover that there was no better time than now to change the rules of the game on Kashmir as well as on the two state parties to the problem — Pakistan and China.”

 

RPI acknowledges support from the MacArthur Foundation and the Carnegie Corporation of New York for its activities.