The G-7 Summit, held this weekend in Hiroshima, Japan, was a highly relevant political event. The group of major advanced democracies has directed its messages particularly to China, Russia and the Global South. In the most important elements, the consensus position is much closer to the EU’s approaches than to those that prevailed in Washington until recently.
As for China, the conclusions sent a strong message to Beijing, much tougher than other summits, but firmly rooted in the conceptual area of risk reduction, an idea promoted by the EU and a far cry from the decoupling that was fashionable at the United States until recently.
As for Russia, the final statement points to a new twist on Vladimir Putin-led export restrictions to the country, but it has nothing to do with the blanket ban with some exceptions that Washington advocated in April, according to Bloomberg agency. European partners – including Japan – opposed it, and the deal ended with an extension of restrictions, but far from a dry cut with sectoral exemptions. On the other hand, Washington’s crackdown on Ukraine’s F-16 fighter jets is also a response to pressure from European countries.
Regarding the Global South, European sources indicated that a consensus has formed that in relations with this heterogeneous group of countries it is better to seek harmony within the framework of respect for United Nations principles such as sovereignty and territorial integrity, instead of stepping on the gas pedal in the rhetoric of the democratic front against territorial regimes, which is also widespread on the other side of the Atlantic.
These elements do not prevent Washington from continuing to push to rebalance the various chapters in the directions it has chosen, nor from continuing to leave areas of serious tension between the United States and the EU, such as those left in the green by industrial protectionism sector of the White House are motivated .
On the other hand, there are different sensitivities within the EU itself, and some countries, particularly on the eastern flank, are more in agreement with many of Washington’s positions than with the approaches of the majority in the Union.
Join EL PAÍS to follow all the news and read without restrictions.
subscribe to
But the Hiroshima Summit demonstrated the clear will of the Seven to show cohesion before the world, and this consensus has reached a point that closely approximates the EU’s main lines on the most important issues.
Chinese economic compulsion
The case of China is perhaps the most obvious. The conclusions sharply criticize Beijing for its practices of economic coercion, which the partners say it seeks to encroach on the sovereignty of others, or for militarizing disputed waters. The group has activated mechanisms to counteract these coercive practices or better control exports and investments to that country. There is enough to make China angry at the G-7 moves.
But the document has crystallized the very European idea that this must be a surgical process, even if there is no room for naivety before Beijing. A pragmatic and thoughtful measure to reduce the risks, both those associated with over-reliance on Chinese production, which can make it vulnerable to blackmail, and those associated with the possibility that China will use Western technologies for hostile or threatening purposes uses progress. But no retreat, a word that until recently was on its way to becoming a mantra in a US Congress where firmness on China seems to have become the only bipartisan consensus.
As for Russia’s war in Ukraine, the opening of the route for delivery of the F-16s to Kiev comes in response to prolonged pressure from several European countries, including some from the EU, which have the equipment and seem ready to use it to deliver – such as in the Netherlands, Denmark and Belgium, in other countries where these do not exist, such as France, and in other countries outside the EU, such as the UK.
The G-7 was a blur for a while. The relative weight loss due to the rise of powerful emerging economies diminished its relevance. The 2008 crisis gave way to the growing importance of the G-20.
Now, the challenge to the international order posed by the invasion of Ukraine and rising tensions between advanced democracies and China have given it a clear raison d’être. This year, the partners’ conclusions have revealed a consensus that comes very close to the European starting positions. Time will tell whether this roadmap will be maintained and whether the attempt to establish contacts with emerging countries will be successful on this basis.
Follow all international information on Facebook and Twitteror in our weekly newsletter.
Subscribe to continue reading
Read without limits