Less than a week ago, around 4000 delegates from the G20 nations and beyond descended upon Brisbane, Australia. The event saw leaders coming from far and wide, ranging from Narendra Modi, the Indian prime minister, to Vladimir Putin, the de facto head of state and president of Russia. All in all, 27 leaders made the trip to the 2 day conference, which cost the member states upwards of $800 million to host. G20 is normally a plaid, and dull affair, offering little in ways of excitement or intrigue – but was this year different?
The 2014 summit has been portrayed as the year of the heroes and villains, of politicians fighting the good fight against the authoritarian forces of evil. Alas, this simple image of black and white, of good and evil, is nearly as useless as the G20 summit itself. At events such as these you have winners and losers: morality, or at least clear cut morality, does not come into it.
Brisbane saw the world’s leaders focusing on the economy, terrorism, Ebola and, much to the chagrin of Tony Abbott (Australia’s prime minister), the climate. The summit brought nothing but good news: the world economy teeters on the edge of a second economic crisis, China’s property market resembles that of the US prior to the 2008 crash, and yet there’s nothing to worry about; we’ll swallow these waves of austerity and see a 2% overall GDP growth bringing around $2 trillion to global economic output, hauling hundreds of thousands out of poverty. The conference was aspirational at best.
On his return, David Cameron adopted the summit’s rhetoric on the economy, in case it does have an effect on our phenomenal growth, while he was also forced to step in and defend the shady Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (but more on that later).
This year’s winners could be considered to be Barack Obama, Stephen Harper and Angela Merkel. Obama, fresh from the success of an (albeit limited) climate agreement with China, challenged the official course of the conference with his semi-passionate speech on climate. Stephen Harper did what Tony Abbott failed to, by giving the hard word to Putin over Ukraine and the movement of troops between the two countries. Harper, however did not have multiple Russian ships with nuclear capabilities in his nation’s waters. A situation Abbott was grateful for, I’m sure. But don’t worry – this is typical fair for Russian foreign engagements!
Merkel remains in a bubble of popularity; her centre right stance and liberal abolition of tuition fees is gaining her admiring glances across the political spectrum, and her victory was crowned with an amicable selfie with her adoring, Australian fans. At a contrast, Putin remains in a bubble of unpopularity. Widely disliked by much of the West, his position would surely be untenable if he didn’t hold such an iron grip in Russia. His pursuit of Ukraine, and the plummeting value of the Russian economy, meant he was not a popular man at the summit.
The summit ended with a vow to close international tax loopholes, improve trade and growth, and to prevent a slide back into global recession via 800 firm economic changes. These were the firmest commitments and even they appeared to be more aspirational than achievable. With regards to Ebola, there seemed to be a general want for helping those countries suffering, but no financial commitments were made.
Again, there was a hugely positive attitude towards climate change and fighting it, but this was not capitalised upon. Mainly due to the inability of Abbott to see it as an issue; he spent a portion of the summit ‘backing coal’. If we had seen even half the number of environmental policy changes as we did with their economic counterparts, the summit would currently be much more widely celebrated. Instead, everyone seems content to high five over giving Putin a good, stern talking-to.
This year’s G20 had flashes of fire in the pan, but was largely a bland affair. Putin, and to an extent, Tony Abbott, remain unlikeable and idiotic with their policy pursuits, while Obama and Merkel are still well liked by the international community. Surprise, surprise. But did we need to spend $800 million for greater economic action, and shaky agreements on Ebola and the environment? I doubt it. This year there was no place for a black and white perspective. Instead, everything seemed to be cast in varying shades of beige – nothing much was being done, and, it’s very hard to care about nothing much.
Words by Harry