-Analysis-
PARIS – In a world divided and torn apart by war, there remains one place where opposing powers can meet and talk. No, it’s not the United Nations, but the G20, which has been meeting since yesterday in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil.
Of course, the United Nations still exists, and is supposed to enable dialogue. But the abuse of veto power and the inability to reform the Security Council have undermined the legitimacy and effectiveness of this organization founded after World War II.
For the latest news & views from every corner of the world, Worldcrunch Today is the only truly international newsletter. Sign up here.
The G20 is more recent and has the merit of being globally more representative and egalitarian. All nations are theoretically equal, even if some are more equal than others. And all continents are represented, unlike the permanent members of the UN Security Council.
A cracking world order
At a time when the world order built in 1945 is cracking on all sides, due to wars, power rivalries and the demands of those excluded from the current system, it is in everyone’s interest to preserve the G20 — until something better comes along.
The UN is facing the same fate as the League of Nations, founded after World War I. The League of Nations was unable to prevent the rise of peril in the 1930s, and was swept away by World War II, giving way to the more powerful UN.
In turn, the UN suffers from its inability to prevent wars. In Ukraine, the Middle East, Sudan or the Democratic Republic of Congo, disasters are underway without the UN being able to prevent or even halt them. Only specialized organizations such as the UN Refugee Agency (UNHCR) and the World Food Programme (WFP) are fulfilling their roles, but the political heart is no longer beating.
What’s at stake
How can we change the world order and make it more equitable without resorting to war? That’s what’s at stake at this delicate moment.
The election of Donald Trump is obviously the new factor in this search for a renewed global balance — and it promises to be brutal. The nationalism of Trump’s discourse signals to a return to an all-powerful united States imposing its law; the president-elect does not believe in multilateralism, preferring transactional relations and power dynamics.
The G20 remains modestly useful.
The G20 summit in Rio is therefore the last diplomatic meeting before Trump’s disruptive second term as president; before the expected tightening of international relations on climate, trade, security issues or respect for international law.
By puffing up its chest, the United States risks driving the Global South into the arms of those who offer themselves as an alternative, starting with China and its BRICS club, which is building parallel institutions. Saving American power at the risk of further dividing the world would be a high price to pay.
That’s why the G20 remains modestly useful, as one of the last places where the world can avoid unravelling. But for how long?
