A G20 ‘Baraat’ Without Its ‘Dulha’: What Trump’s Absence Really Signals

It is doubtful if Modi’s ideas will find resonance with the Trump administration as it takes on the G20 presidency.

The Johannesburg G20 summit demonstrated that the major economies are uneasy with Trump’s changes.

(Photo: Kamran Akhter/The Quint)

The 'G20 South Africa Summit: Leaders’ Declaration' is thirty pages long and consists of 122 paragraphs. It covers all the significant economic, social, and environmental crises facing the world today. It places great importance on the difficulties of the Global South and the need for inclusivity as well as equitable and sustainable development.

These goals had the acceptance of the international community in the pre-Trump 2.0 era. However, with the non- participation of the US in the Johannesburg G20 summit, the validity of the Declaration becomes doubtful because the Trump administration has effectively moved away from these global objectives. Was this G20 summit therefore a ‘baraat’ without a ‘dulha’?

This question arises because of the still dominant global position of the US economy and Trump’s desire and moves to change the global economic and commercial global order.

Why the US Still Matters

According to the World Bank, the US GDP in nominal terms is currently US $29 trillion in a global economy of US $111 trillion. This means that US’s GDP is more than 26 percent of that of the world. The next is China’s with US $18.7 and then of Germany, Japan, and India at around US $4 billion each.

The inference from these GDP numbers is that the US GDP is only a little less than that of the next four economies. Hence, it follows that the current world economic and commercial order cannot be sustained without the participation of the US.

Trump’s chosen method to change the world economic and global order is to use tariffs on a bilateral basis. This goes against the premise of the global trading system that was put in place after the Second World War. Trump’s tariffs are under challenge in the US Supreme Court and its decision is awaited. It is possible that the Court may place some restrictions on Trump but he can find ways of getting his way by arm twisting US trading partners.

His greater difficulty may arise from tariffs leading to inflation. That may lead him to reduce bilateral tariffs, but he is unlikely to return to the old universal trading order.

China Pushes Back as the World Watches

Most countries have or are bending to Trump’s will on tariffs. However, China has shown a willingness to hit back by curtailing the supply of critical metals and rare earths, which are essential for Trump’s programme for making US a major manufacturing power again. Trump will reach an accommodation with China but the essential point is that he is changing the rules of the trading game. 

The Johannesburg G20 summit demonstrated that the major economies are uneasy with Trump’s changes. Hence, with the exception of Argentina, they stuck to the old playbook; the Leaders’ Declaration makes that clear. But the question is whether this play book is going to be relevant in a Trump determined global economic and trading terrain.

At this stage, it would be useful to briefly recall the emergence of the G20. The group was formed by the US in 2008 in the wake of the collapse of major US banks in 2008. That created fear of a deep world-wide depression akin to that which began in 1929. The US was compelled to form the group which represented 85 percent of the world’s GDP to prevent that. India became a member of the group and its leaders heard the views of then Prime Minister Manmohan Singh, himself an economist, with respect. 

The group decided that a depression was to avoided at all costs. That meant that no country would go in for protectionism and would also ensure adequate supply of funds despite the high inflation which would inevitably follow. Thus, the group was meant to pull the existing economic and commercial order out of its worst crisis in almost a century. It succeeded in doing so, though the developed countries reneged on their pledges to give countries like India a greater say in the management of the global economy.

Modi’s Pitch: Sustainability and Human-Centric Tech

Now, Trump is breaking the very order that the G20 was meant to sustain. Hence, its continuing relevance in its present state is questionable. In this context, it is noteworthy that the US will now assume the G20 presidency from South Africa. The next few months will therefore give clarity on the precise orientation that the US would wish to give to the group and the capacity of the other major economies to resist it.

Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s consistent effort during the Johannesburg summit was to focus on the issues of the Global South and on sustainable development. Speaking at the first session of the summit, Modi said “The parameters of growth on which the world has worked so far have left a large section of the population deprived of resources. They have also contributed to the over-exploitation of nature.”

Modi returned the theme of equity while speaking on the summit’s third session 23 November. Modi began this address by saying, “As technology continues to advance, both opportunities and resources are becoming increasingly concentrated in a few hands. Around the world, competition over critical technologies is intensifying. This is a matter of concern for humanity, and it also poses an obstacle to innovation. To address this, we must bring about a fundamental change in our approach”.

The changed approach he suggested was, “We must promote technology applications that are ‘human-centric’ rather than ‘finance-centric’, that are ‘global’ rather than merely ‘national’, and that follow ‘open-source’ models rather than ‘exclusive’ ones.”

Modi has approached these issues, which confront humanity, in universalist terms with an emphasis of justice for the deprived and poor. However, the US, under Trump, is only concerned with MAGA and with America First. Hence, it is doubtful if Modi’s ideas will find resonance with the Trump administration as it assumes and proceeds with its G20 presidency.

The Ambiguity Around ‘Traditional Knowledge’

In his address at the first session, Modi stressed, “Across the world, there are several communities that have preserved their traditional and eco-balanced ways of life. These traditions not only embody sustainability, but also reflect profound cultural wisdom, social cohesion, and deep reverence for nature. India proposes the creation of a Global Traditional Knowledge Repository under the G20 framework. India’s own Indian Knowledge Systems initiative can serve as its foundation. This global platform will help transmit the collective wisdom of humanity to future generations.”

It is not clear which communities is Modi referring too. It can be nobody’s case that isolated communities in remote areas continue to remain deprived of the advantages of modern science and technology. This is even as they are given every opportunity to preserve their traditional ways of life. It is always difficult to arrive at a balance between tradition and modernity.

This is also true of using traditional knowledge systems in areas such as medicine and health. This is not to decry traditional knowledge systems or sustainable growth in all areas of human development. However, greater clarity is needed in India’s articulation on these issues, including at the highest political level. This is especially so during the coming year, when Trump will have little patience with traditional knowledge systems or the interests of the Global South.

The Vishvaguru will be dealing with a different Vishva—one with little patience with ancient traditions.

(The writer is a former Secretary [West], Ministry of External Affairs. He can be reached @VivekKatju. This is an opinion piece, and the views expressed above are the author’s own. The Quint neither endorses nor is responsible for the same.)