India hands over G20 presidency to Brazil

President of Brazil Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi at the G20 summit held in New Delhi Sept. 9 and 10. Brazil took over the presidency from India. PHOTO: X @India’s Ministry of External Affairs

NEW DELHI (Reuters) – India on Sunday, Sept. 10, 2023, formally handed over the G20 presidency to Brazil at the closing ceremony of the annual summit of the grouping, that was held in New Delhi this weekend. India Prime Minister Narendra Modi completed the transition by handing over the ceremonial gavel of the presidency to Brazil President Luiz Inacio Lula da Silva. India has had the presidency of the G20 since Dec. 1, when it took over from Indonesia, and will continue to hold the position until Nov. 30. During the two-day summit, the bloc adopted a consensus declaration that made commitments on several issues, including that of food and energy security, climate change and global debt vulnerabilities. Modi, on Sunday, also proposed a “virtual summit” of the grouping at the end of November to assess the status of the suggestions and proposals put forth by members and determine “how their progress can be accelerated”.“In that session, we can review the topics decided during this summit,” Modi said, adding that details would be shared with members. Source: https://www.newsindiatimes.com/
Read More........

At G-20, Biden announces ambitious corridor connecting India, Europe

President Biden with PM Modi at Raj Ghat Sept. 10, 2023. PHOTO: X @narendramodi

NEW DELHI – President Biden and several other world leaders announced plans here Saturday afternoon for a new rail and shipping corridor that would connect India and Europe through the Middle East, an ambitious proposal aimed at further connecting a volatile region and countering China’s years-long backing of massive infrastructure projects around the world.

The announcement solidified a preliminary agreement among a range of participants – including the United States, India, Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Israel, the United Arab Emirates and the European Union – and came as leaders of the world’s largest economies tried to work through divisions on a range of thorny issues.

By midafternoon, the leaders here had reached consensus on a 37-page joint declaration on 83 points, several of which referred to Russia’s war in Ukraine. The debate over the war led some to predict that such a statement would prove elusive, particularly given that Russia is a member of the G-20. But they arrived at language that stated that “all states must refrain from the threat or use of force to seek territorial acquisition,” and also stated that “the use or threat of use of nuclear weapons is inadmissible.” The language was not as pointed as it was during last year’s conference and did not explicitly name Russia as the aggressor in the war.

The leaders did highlight the “suffering and negative added impacts of the war in Ukraine” on a range of issues, including global food supply and energy security. But in the dry language of diplomacy, the statement added, “There were different views and assessments of the situation.”

In a Facebook post, Ukraine’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Oleg Nikolenko said the G-20 has “nothing to be proud of” on the language over Russian aggression in Ukraine, and he offered his own edits of how the portions regarding Ukraine should have been written.

The declaration in another section also formalized that the United States would host the G-20 in 2026, overcoming some late opposition from China.

“This is a significant milestone for India’s chairmanship and vote of confidence that the G-20 can come together to address a pressing range of issues and also to deal with hard issues that actually very much [divided] some members from others – including, obviously, Russia’s brutal war against Ukraine,” Jake Sullivan, the national security adviser, said shortly after the deal was reached.

“I have got good news. From our team’s hard work, we have reached an agreement on the G-20 declaration,” Prime Minister Narendra Modi, the summit’s host, said in Hindi, prompting a long round of applause from the G-20 leaders.

Biden came to the conference determined to try to showcase that the G-20 can maintain its relevance even after Chinese President Xi Jinping and Russian President Vladimir Putin sent deputies instead of attending themselves, amid tensions over the war in Ukraine.

Asked whether Xi’s absence affected the summit, Biden said, “It would be nice to have him here but, no, the summit is going well.”

Shortly after the declaration was announced, Biden joined other leaders to announce the rail corridor.

“This is a big deal,” he said. “This is a real big deal.”

The cost of the project was unclear, but senior Biden administration officials view it as a way to link key areas of the world, India to Europe, opening up new trading partnerships and a flow of energy and digital information. Also significant is having Israel working with a historical adversary such as Saudi Arabia; Biden is separately hoping to broker a deal to normalize relations between the two countries.

Deputy national security adviser Jon Finer noted the significance of reaching an agreement in an area that “has, obviously often been a net exporter of turbulence and insecurity.”

“Linking these two regions, we think, is a huge opportunity, building on our broader efforts over the last couple of years to turn the temperature down across the region,” Finer said.

Officials in the countries involved are expected within 60 days to come up with a timeline for the projects – linking energy grids, laying undersea and overland cables, and providing more digital connections. Some of the tasks involve installing hydrogen pipelines from Israel to Europe, which administration officials hope will advance clean energy goals.

The summit took place against the backdrop of a city that largely has been shut down amid tight security, with police officers standing at nearly every intersection and shops and restaurants closed.

Most of the conference meetings were closed to the news media, but Biden entered the opening session planning to outline his opposition to Russia’s invasion of Ukraine.

American officials unsuccessfully lobbied to have Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky address the conference, something he did in person during a Group of Seven gathering in Hiroshima, Japan, and which he did virtually during last year’s G-20 in Bali.

“Our view is that it is fundamentally a good thing when President Zelensky is able to make his case and Ukraine’s case for, you know, how damaging this conflict has been to his people and to his country,” Finer said. “He is the most effective messenger for that. And it’s certainly in a format in which, you know, Russian representatives will be able to give their views about the conflict that is appropriate for Ukraine to be able to offer its perspective.”

Biden arrived at the summit on Saturday morning, walking down a long corridor to greet Modi. “How are you?” he asked as he approached, appearing to jog up a slight incline before the two leaders shook and held hands while examining a G-20 logo that had the motto, “One Earth. One Family. One Future.”

They later met in a large room with three rows of desks in an oval, a chandelier hanging above them and small flags denoting where each country’s leader was to sit.

During the first session, Biden was between British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak and Indonesian President Joko Widodo. Before Biden sat down, several others greeted him, among them leaders from Australia, the Netherlands, Germany and Nigeria.

“This period in the 21st century is a time to give the entire world a new direction. It is a time when age-old problems are demanding new solutions from us,” Modi said in an address to the global leaders as he sat behind a nameplate reading not India but Bharat – the Hindi name for the country – signaling a branding shift that has been the source of controversy for many in the nation.

The negotiations over a joint communiqué had been difficult, especially around language regarding the Ukraine war.

While it did note the harm of the war and the importance of territorial sovereignty, it did not name Russia as the perpetrator and was less direct in some of the language than was agreed to last year during the G-20 in Bali. At that meeting, while noting there were some disagreements, it referred to a U.N. resolution that “deplores in the strongest terms the aggression by the Russian Federation against Ukraine and demands its complete and unconditional withdrawal from the territory of Ukraine.”

When asked about the change in text over the course of a year, Indian Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar said that some conditions have changed in the war.

“Bali was Bali and New Delhi was New Delhi,” he said. “Bali was a year ago and the situation was different. Many things have happened since then.”

He went on to add, “One should not have a theological view of this. New Delhi declaration is responding to the situation of today just as the Bali declaration did to the situation a year ago.”

The language also was the result of a lengthy negotiation. India’s chief G-20 coordinator, Amitabh Kant, said that Brazil, South Africa and Indonesia were helpful in reaching consensus.

“It was a tough, ruthless negotiation that went on for several days nonstop,” he said.

Indian officials expressed frustration that the war has overshadowed other issues, such as successfully negotiating the African Union’s acceptance into the G-20. For the first time, a representative of the African Union joined the gathering, with the chairman of the 55-member bloc, Comoros President Azali Assoumani, being introduced by Modi.“For all our moral idealism in foreign policy, we accept things as they are and find a way around it,” said India expert Aparna Pande of the Hudson Institute. “At the end of the day, you work with what you got.”At G-20, Biden announces ambitious corridor connecting India, Europe
Read More........

​The UK's economic prospects continue to dwindle

In early February, about half a million people went on strike in the U.K. [Photo/cfp.cn]

"The United Kingdom lost more working days to strikes in 2022 than in any year since 1989, as employees walked out in large numbers over pay amid soaring living costs," reads an article on CNN. Last year was, to put it mildly, a miserable experience for the U.K. Despite having mostly recovered from COVID-19, the country's economy remains in a state of stagnation. Faced with shrinking incomes and crippling levels of inflation, its economic performance is worse than any country in the G7 and the only one expected to enter recession.

The grim economic prospects throughout the country have led to a tidal wave of economic discontent that has manifested in strikes across the board, drawing upon memories of the industrial unrest and upheavals faced in the 1970s and 1980s. In public opinion polls, the current government is deeply unpopular and trails the opposition Labour Party by over 20 points. Many decisions the government has made, including the decision to follow the U.S. blindly in escalating tensions with China, deliberately intensifying the war in Ukraine, and Brexit, among things, are responsible for the economic fallout. The product is a "broken Britain."

Since the late 1970s, the U.K.'s Conservative Party has premised its economic policy on Neoliberalism, which has religiously adhered to the fundamentals of free-market economics and privatization, even at the staggering expense of the British themselves. While this began with the reign of Margaret Thatcher, who destroyed Britain's industrial base and created large-scale regional inequalities, it was ultimately continued with the government of David Cameron, who pursued the largest program of austerity the country had seen in a century, gutting the public sector and only deepening the country's growing inequalities.

The combined long-term impact of these economic policies has been to effectively sacrifice the British working class, shrinking incomes, undermining consumption, and creating an economic model which has made British-led innovation and competitiveness untenable, leading to long-term economic stagnation from as far back as 2008. Politically, the end result of this trajectory has been to create social-economic conflict in the U.K. in the form of populist right-wing nationalism, promoted by the popular right-wing press, which ultimately resulted in Brexit.

The Conservative government has responded to these shifts by injecting nationalism into its foreign policy in order to make up for its domestic shortcomings. While the government of David Cameron was liberal in nature and pro-EU, he subsequently lost the internal partisan struggle over Brexit, as well as the referendum, leading to a new status quo led by Boris Johnson, which has sacrificed reason and economic logic for the sake of populism.

The result of this domestic-foreign policy dynamic, which seeks to mask domestic structural economic failures with imperial adventurism abroad, has become self-reinforcing and reflected in growing damage to Britain's economy. British foreign policy, with respect to Russia, China, and the European Union, as well as elsewhere, is being driven by ideology, not reason, making the primary drivers of the country's GDP stagnation and surging inflation. Thus, in 2022, the United Kingdom began to face industrial unrest as workers and unions felt their incomes were no longer sufficient to match rising prices. According to the Office for National Statistics, "843,000 working days were lost in December 2022 alone – the highest monthly number since November 2011," with "workers in health care, communications, and transportation among those who walked out."

The economic system that the U.K. adopted in the 1970s and 1980s no longer delivers for ordinary people. Instead, it is dividing the country, and such divisions have only been intensified by more aggressive policies by successive governments and have created economic stagnation. With Britain being a service-based economy, it is failing to grow because people's incomes are shrinking, and, worse still, the foreign policy environment that the British government is creating goes fundamentally against its own national interest. If the U.K. is to recover, a dramatic change is needed, and that should start with binning the "post-Boris Johnson" consensus of nationalism, populism, and geopolitical adventurism, all of which have dealt significant damage to the country's place in the world.

Tom Fowdy is a British political and international relations analyst and a graduate of Durham and Oxford universities. For more information please visit:

http://www.china.org.cn/opinion/TomFowdy.htm, Opinion articles reflect the views of their authors, not necessarily those of China.org.cn.If you would like to contribute, please contact us at opinion@china.org.cn. Source: China.org.cn
Read More........