Follow us on social

google cta
2022-11-16t093817z_1668591493_dpaf221116x99x540199_rtrfipp_4_summit-g20-bali

G20 hits sweet spot as all sides give ground and 'show maturity'

The Global South put its stamp on the joint statement, which reflected divergent perspectives on the Ukraine war and its impacts.

Analysis | Europe
google cta
google cta

The G20 leaders’ joint declaration lowers the temperature a little bit more in an international system that (though remaining fraught with major tensions) was heading toward escalating conflict and contestations through the spring and summer. 

Key Global South states, such as G20 host Indonesia, South Africa, and India, played an important role in achieving this outcome. And the Biden administration, to its credit, showed maturity in meeting different and dissenting views part of the way.

The G20 developments continue the streak of promising news in recent weeks. Talks between Washington and Moscow’s top intelligence officials were recently facilitated by Turkey, an important middle power. And, as urged by ASEAN states, Biden and Xi met and talked for three hours in Bali. There is a lesson in this. As laid out in my recent Quincy Institute Brief, if the United States is to remain influential in the coming decades, it will need to prioritize diplomacy and economic engagement over military strategies and take into account the Global South’s new nonalignment.

The joint statement in Bali firmly opposed the threat or use of nuclear weapons, an arena in which Washington and Beijing had already found common ground. It “reiterated…national positions as expressed in other fora, including the UN Security Council and the UN General Assembly, which, in Resolution No. ES-11/1 dated 2 March 2022, as adopted by majority vote (141 votes for, 5 against, 35 abstentions, 12 absent) 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.” 

The language addressed the sharp differences in positions on Ukraine within the G20 through artful workarounds. Apart from the previous reference to “national positions” it also stated that ­“most members strongly condemned the war in Ukraine…, [but …[t]here were other views and different assessments of the situation and sanctions.”

The G20 was created in 1999, in the wake of the Asian financial crisis, as an informal grouping primarily focused on global economic governance. Indonesia successfully resisted pressure by the United States and its European allies to not invite Russia to the summit, arguing that the G20 was not a security forum. The joint statement reiterated this core purpose of the grouping, and most of the statement’s text focused on issues such as food security and meeting sustainable development goals. But it also acknowledged that “security issues can have significant consequences for the global economy.”

In sum, the G20 agreed where it could, but also agreed to disagree where it couldn’t. This itself is a victory of sorts. Washington’s tone on Ukraine has long been overly moralistic, delegitimizing voices calling for a middle ground and a diplomatic pathway. But at Bali, all sides gave ground and showed a newfound maturity.

Washington’s more conciliatory attitude is consistent with recent revelations about secret U.S.-Russia talks on limiting nuclear escalation and Washington’s encouragement for Ukraine to show more flexibility on negotiations. A recent letter by progressive U.S. lawmakers, roundly criticized and ultimately withdrawn, in fact aided Biden’s efforts in that direction.

The reality is that the world, and particularly the Global South, is not in favor of an escalating rivalry between the three great powers, the United States, Russia, and China. “We should not divide the world into parts,” Indonesian President Joko Widodo told the gathered leaders. “We must not let the world fall into another cold war.”

When it comes to international security, a few positions are resonant across practically all states — opposition to the threat or use of nuclear weapons and defense of national sovereignty and territorial integrity. But there is also a deep aversion to a new cold war and little appetite for a grand struggle pitting democracies against autocracies. The message to Washington (and Beijing and Moscow) from the Global South is clear — seek diplomatic pathways, do all you can to avoid escalatory spirals, focus on global challenges and economic stability, and take our views into account much more than you have thus far.


Giorgia Meloni (l), Prime Minister of Italy, and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz (SPD) talk on the sidelines of the G20 summit at the Tahura Ngurah Rai mangrove forest. The "Group of 20" includes the most important economic powers from all continents, including the USA, China, Russia and Germany.
google cta
Analysis | Europe
Mbs-mbz-scaled
UAE President Sheikh Mohammed bin Zayed al-Nahyan receives Saudi Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman at the Presidential Airport in Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates November 27, 2019. WAM/Handout via REUTERS

Is the US goading Arab states to join war against Iran?

QiOSK

On Sunday, U.S. Ambassador to the U.N. Mike Waltz told ABC News that Arab Gulf states may soon step up their involvement in the U.S.-Israeli war on Iran. “I expect that you'll see additional diplomatic and possibly military action from them in the coming days and weeks,” Waltz said.

Then, on Monday morning, Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-S.C.) slammed Saudi Arabia for staying out of the war even as “Americans are dying and the U.S. is spending billions” of dollars to conduct regime change in Iran. “If you are not willing to use your military now, when are you willing to use it?” Graham asked. “Hopefully this changes soon. If not, consequences will follow.”

keep readingShow less
Why Tehran may have time on its side
Top image credit: Iranian army military personnel stand at attention under a banner featuring an image of an Iranian-made unmanned aerial vehicle (UAV) during a military parade commemorating the anniversary of Army Day outside the Shrine of Iran's late leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini in the south of Tehran, Iran, on April 18, 2025. (Photo by Morteza Nikoubazl/NurPhoto)

Why Tehran may have time on its side

QiOSK

A provocative calculus by Anusar Farrouqui (“policytensor”) has been circulating on X and in more exhaustive form on the author’s Substack. It purports to demonstrate a sobering reality: in a high-intensity U.S.-Iran conflict, the United States may be unable to suppress Iranian drone production quickly enough to prevent a strategically consequential period of regional devastation.

The argument is framed through a quantitative lens, carrying the seductive appeal of mathematical precision. It arranges variables—such as U.S. sortie rates and degradation efficiency against Iranian repair cycles and rebuild speeds—to suggest a "sustainable firing rate." The implication is that Iran could maintain a persistent strike capability long enough to exhaust American political patience, forcing Washington toward a premature declaration of success or an unfavorable ceasefire.

keep readingShow less
Witkoff Kushner Ukraine
Top photo credit: U.S. Special Envoy Steve Witkoff and U.S. businessman Jared Kushner deliver a press conference upon the signing of the declaration on deploying post-ceasefire force in Ukraine during the so-called 'Coalition of the Willing' summit, at the Elysee Palace in Paris, France, January 6, 2026. Ludovic Marin/Pool via REUTERS

Is Ukraine peace toast, now that the Middle East is on fire?

Europe

President Donald Trump came into office promising to end wars, but last week, he instead started a new one, when he ordered what the White House is calling a “proactive defensive” operation in response to Iran’s “imminent threat.”

The onset of yet another U.S.-initiated conflict in the Middle East deals a double blow to Trump’s ambitions as a peacemaker. It has obviously derailed, perhaps permanently, the on-and-off talks between Tehran and Washington over the future of Iran’s nuclear program. But it is also likely to interfere with another Trump priority: ending the four-year-long war between Russia and Ukraine.

keep readingShow less
google cta
Want more of our stories on Google?
Click here to make us a Preferred Source.

LATEST

QIOSK

Newsletter

Subscribe now to our weekly round-up and don't miss a beat with your favorite RS contributors and reporters, as well as staff analysis, opinion, and news promoting a positive, non-partisan vision of U.S. foreign policy.