A G-7 in decline tries to stand up to authoritarian regimes

When the Berlin Wall fell, the G-7 countries represented 67% of world GDP. Western theses prevailed, a phase of expansion of democracy and globalized and uncontrolled capitalism began that would later cause serious crises. Today, democracy and globalization are receding, and the group’s share of global GDP has been reduced to 43%. Its members generally suffer political turbulence that reduces their effectiveness. However, despite these vicissitudes, the group retains tools of power and a strategic coherence superior to that of its rivals. The Apulia summit showed the forum’s attempt to confront the challenge of authoritarian regimes in a coordinated manner.

“The G-7 has demonstrated unity of intentions. Contrary to what some expected, we have maintained and strengthened our support for Ukraine. We have been fully in tune regarding the war in the Middle East. With China we want to continue dialogue, but the competition must be fair,” summarized the Italian Prime Minister, Giorgia Meloni, current president of the group, at the press conference at the end of the summit.

The final declaration of the summit constitutes a kind of strategic compass with lines of action, warnings to adversaries and winks to potential partners in the heterodox conglomerate of non-aligned countries. To a large extent they are words whose translation into facts is not easy, but there are also substantial elements. And, furthermore, neither the BRICS nor any other alternative forum has the internal coherence to produce anything remotely close to this type of alignment — behind which lie formal military ties such as NATO or the US bilateral treaties with countries in the region. Pacific Asia-.

Faced with Russia’s brutal revisionism, the Seven have tried to guarantee the continuity over time of their support for Ukraine by agreeing at the political level on a scheme to inject another $50 billion in aid to kyiv, taking advantage of the interests generated by the frozen assets of Russia. This money will serve Ukraine for military, reconstruction or general fiscal balance purposes. The intention is to deliver it by the end of the year and it will constitute an important cushion for 2025, when uncertainty about the political future of the United States raises serious questions. It is also a signal to Putin that he cannot count on an early collapse of aid to kyiv. “It is an act of propaganda,” Meloni concluded about the negotiation proposals launched by the Russian leader on Friday.

In the face of China’s reformist revisionism, the G-7 has sent significant signals. To begin with, the willingness to hit with sanctions not only the companies that deliver dual-use materials to Russia that support its war machinery, but also the financial entities that facilitate this trade. China has a huge interest in remaining well connected to a global economic system on which its path to prosperity depends.

Warning to China

In addition, the Seven have issued a warning to Beijing about their intention to respond vigorously to an industrial policy that they consider disloyal. China is consolidating a dominant position in strategic sectors, such as the manufacturing of key products in the ecological transition, supported, according to Westerners, by abusive practices such as enormous undeclared subsidies to its companies. The US and EU are already taking retaliatory tariff measures, and are warning Beijing to continue on that path.

As for Iran, the G-7 demands that it “end its destabilizing actions,” that it “stop assisting Russia” and orders it not to deliver ballistic missiles to Moscow. The group warns Tehran that it is “prepared to respond quickly and in a coordinated manner, including with significant new measures.”

There is much more: regarding North Korea, its support for Russia is criticized and there is a warning against the prospect of Moscow returning favors by handing over nuclear technology; Venezuela is called upon to refrain from destabilizing actions in the Essequibo region of Guyana and to allow full international observation of its elections; warnings are issued to Belarus or the Houthi rebels in Yemen.

As is inherent to a forum of this type, joint declarations are devoid of executive force that will depend on the future political will of the members. There is no doubt that there are discrepancies between them, and even reasons for internal friction as was seen in the case of Biden’s protectionist program on green matters that caused unrest in Europe. Strategic harmony is by no means absolute, and the relationship with China, the main strategic challenge, does not attract total agreement between Europeans and Americans. But the signs of renewed convergence and relevance that the G-7 has emitted in recent years are tangible.

The coincidence of Biden’s arrival to power – after Trump’s rupture – and Russia’s brutal challenge in Ukraine with the direct support of Iran and North Korea – which provide it with weapons – or indirect support from China – which supplies it with products essentials—has revitalized a group that seemed almost moribund, in a similar phenomenon, in different circumstances, to which it has returned enormous prominence to NATO. The pact for the loan to Ukraine, which also involves distant Japan, is no small matter.

There are experts who in recent years have advocated expanding the group from seven to nine, including Australia and South Korea, two stable, industrialized democracies, which would increase the weight of the forum and reinforce its eastern leg, now represented only by Japan. This would add another $3.5 trillion of GDP to the group (3% of the world total), some 80 million inhabitants, and considerable technological and natural resources. However, this perspective has not yet taken substantial political steps.

What the group is doing instead is an effort to strengthen ties in the non-aligned sphere. The invitation to the summit in Italy of the leaders of India, Brazil or Argentina, among others, or the focus on food security issues should be interpreted in this key. “The G-7 does not want to be a closed fortress. He wants to open himself to the world. We have to dismantle the narrative of the West against the rest (West against the rest). With Africa, especially, we must develop new interaction mechanisms, with equal partnerships,” said Meloni, who stressed that this was the G-7 summit with the widest range of leaders invited to the group.

The path, however, is difficult, since the non-aligned emit clear signals of wanting to remain in that position, opting one way or another in each circumstance according to interests or principles, without this implying choosing a side. And that the recent past and the present expose Western countries to deep criticism of double standards.

On the other hand, countries like China, Russia, Iran or North Korea are undoubtedly strengthening cooperation. The first two, specifically, sign joint strategic declarations and increase bilateral trade. However, they do not have formal military alliances or structured forums with a coherent geopolitical and economic vision beyond the will to rebalance the distribution of power in a world dominated by the West in recent decades.

Follow all the international information on Facebook and xor in our weekly newsletter.

_