Adjustments in the Joint Statement of the G7 Summit 2023 reflect the bloc's views on new developments in the regional and world situation.
 |
| G7 and EU leaders at a meeting on Ukraine on May 21 in Hiroshima, Japan. (Source: Reuters) |
On May 21, the G7 Summit in Hiroshima, Japan concluded after two days of meetings with a Joint Statement.
It is not difficult to see that this year's Joint Statement has many differences compared to a similar document after the 2022 G7 Summit in Elmau, Germany.
Structural changes
In terms of length, the Joint Statement at the 2023 G7 Summit is 19,000 words long, 1.5 times longer than the 12,000 words of the document a year ago. The 2023 document includes many smaller topics, with concerns about the conflict in Ukraine, denuclearization, the Indo-Pacific, economics-finance and sustainable development being placed at the top of the document.
Meanwhile, the Joint Statement at the 2022 G7 Summit put sustainable development, climate change and the environment as the first issues to appear.
Immediately after the Elmau Summit, the G7 leaders also issued the Declaration on Climate Change, the Declaration on Global Food Security and the Declaration on the Resilience of Democracy. Meanwhile, the Hiroshima sessions concluded with the Declaration on Ukraine, the G7 Leaders' Statement on the Vision for Nuclear Disarmament, the Declaration on Economic Resilience and Economic Security, the Declaration on the Action Plan on the Energy Economy and the Hiroshima Action Plan on the Resilience of Global Food Security.
This fact reflects several points as follows.
Firstly , it shows that in the context of the world situation witnessing rapid, complex and unpredictable changes, the leaders of the G7 countries this time discussed more issues in depth and breadth than a year ago.
Second , the contents appearing at the beginning of the Joint Statement clearly reflect the priorities of the host country and G7 members. In 2022, for the ruling coalition in Germany, it is the story of climate change, green growth, sustainable development in the face of energy supply shortages, food security issues and a number of other serious consequences arising from the Russia-Ukraine conflict.
A year later, this conflict continues to be a top issue. However, the recovery and sustainable growth of the global economy and finance are also discussed in more depth, with the issue of denuclearization and security in the Indo-Pacific witnessing the clear mark of the host country, Japan.
| The G7 leaders' joint statement in Hiroshima had many smaller topics, with concerns about the conflict in Ukraine, denuclearization, the Indo-Pacific, economics and finance and sustainable development at the top of the document. |
Russia-Ukraine still "hot"
The Russia-Ukraine conflict was a recurring theme at both G7 Summits, in Hiroshima and Elmau a year ago. The surprise appearance of Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky at the security session was certainly a notable highlight this year, but not the only one. In addition, the Joint Statement of the G7 Hiroshima Summit devoted a section to “Ukraine” to highlight the conflict there.
At the same time, the keywords “Ukraine” and “Russia” both appear 23 times in the Hiroshima Joint Declaration; 19 and 32 times in the Elmau document. However, although the language, criticism of Moscow and affirmation of support for Kiev are somewhat similar, the frequency of their appearance in the two documents is not the same. In this year’s Joint Declaration, the words “Russia” and “Ukraine” appear mainly in the headings “Ukraine” and “Food Security”. In last year’s document, both were mentioned more frequently in the content of “Climate and Energy”.
The differences reflect how the G7, and to some extent the host country, view the fallout from the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Last year, it was about security and energy. Now, it is about concerns about the implications for global food security.
The G7 Hiroshima Joint Statement urged China to “press” Russia to “immediately and completely halt its military actions and unconditionally withdraw its troops.” However, the highlight was when the bloc “called on China to support a comprehensive, just and lasting peace, based on the territorial integrity and principles and purposes of the United Nations Charter, through direct dialogue with Ukraine.”
It shows two notable points: First , the G7 acknowledges China’s role and influence with both Russia and Ukraine. Second , the emphasis on a “just” peace and urging China to “talk directly to Ukraine” reflects concerns that Beijing might push the peace talks in a direction that benefits Moscow.
| The differences reflect how the G7, and to some extent the host country, view the fallout from the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Last year, it was about security and energy. Now, it is about concerns about the implications for global food security. |
“New” attitude towards China
The G7’s caution about China’s role in the Russia-Ukraine conflict is understandable, as how to properly deal with the Asian powerhouse continues to be a difficult question for its members. The keyword “China” appears 20 times in the Hiroshima Declaration, compared to 14 times in the text a year ago. However, the emphasis on China comes from the language used in the Joint Declaration.
On the one hand, instead of simply wishing to “cooperate” with China as a year ago, the Hiroshima Declaration emphasized that the G7 wishes to “build a stable and constructive relationship” with the Asian powerhouse. The bloc also called for increased cooperation with Beijing on the international stage, especially in the fight against climate change, addressing public debt, public health and maintaining macroeconomic stability. In particular, the G7 affirmed that the bloc’s approach “is not aimed at harming or hindering China’s economic growth and development.”
This reflects the attitude of the G7 and, more specifically, of Japan. In fact, Tokyo has recently made efforts to improve relations with Beijing, while calling on all parties to increase dialogue with the Asian power.
On the other hand, the G7 affirmed that it would still “frankly present its concerns” to China and be ready to deal with “misconduct” such as illegal data transfers, information disclosure or theft of advanced technologies. The Joint Statement’s use of the phrase “economic coercion” led to a negative reaction from China.
Regarding the Taiwan issue, in addition to emphasizing the “importance of peace and stability” in the strait of the same name, the G7 reiterated “the unchanged position of member countries on this issue, including the one-China policy”. This is different from the 2022 Joint Statement, but appeared in the previous Foreign Ministerial Joint Statement.
The East Sea and East China Sea issues continue to be mentioned, but remain unchanged from last year's document.
 |
| Chinese Foreign Ministry spokesman Wang Wenbin objected to the contents of the G7 Joint Statement related to China. (Source: Global Times) |
Homeowner's mark
It would be remiss not to mention the mark of host country Japan in this G7 Joint Statement, especially in the sections on denuclearization, the Indo-Pacific and North Korea.
The choice of Hiroshima, a city that suffered an atomic bomb in World War II, to host the G7 with a separate statement on nuclear disarmament shows Japan’s commitment to the issue. The keyword “nuclear” appears 21 times in the headings on “Disarmament and Non-Proliferation” and “Energy” also emphasizes the priority.
In addition, the host country reaffirmed its determination to build a free and open Indo-Pacific in this Joint Statement, which was not mentioned in a similar document in Elmau, Germany a year ago. The G7 continued to emphasize its support for ASEAN centrality and promote cooperation, in line with the ASEAN Outlook on the Indo-Pacific.
The G7 Hiroshima Declaration also saw the emergence of the North Korea issue, which was “forgotten” last year. Member countries called on Pyongyang to “refrain from actions that further destabilize and escalate tensions,” implement the process of “complete, verifiable and irreversible” denuclearization, engage in dialogue with the US-Japan-ROK trio, and make efforts to resolve related issues, including Japanese citizens believed to have been abducted by North Korea.
The G7 Hiroshima Joint Statement mentioned new hot spots such as Iran's nuclear program, the situation in Sudan, or tensions between Kosovo and Serbia.
In addition, in the context of the Covid-19 pandemic no longer being a top priority, the G7 Hiroshima Joint Statement continues to promote the fight against climate change, strengthen economic resilience and especially emphasize efforts to ensure global food security. In the current context, these issues will be "hot" and continue to appear in the upcoming G7 summits.
Thus, the G7 Hiroshima Summit in Japan has ended with many declarations and commitments. However, realizing that vision in the current complex context is not a simple task for this bloc.
Source
Comment (0)