Prime Minister Narendra Modi speaking at the “Future Summit” on the sidelines of the UN General Assembly on September 23, 2024. Photo: PMO via PTI
The Summit of the Future raises a set of fundamental questions about global governance: should it focus on great power competition or imbalances in institutions, agenda setting, and global inequality? The former sees a means and not an end with an ongoing debate about the meaning of justice.
Global goals do not solve challenges; they support new forms of cooperation. The Summit produced the Global Digital Impact initiative and the Future Generations Declaration, an inspiring call to national action. The concrete impact is the International Scientific Panel and the Global Dialogue on AI. Implementation maps and intergovernmental consultations illustrate how climate change has become a global agenda over the past 30 years. Climate change is now brought down to expand adaptation finance, and GDP will include sustainability. Developed countries continue to have the capacity to shape the global agenda.
The summit did not agree on a clear path to reform the Security Council and asked for categories of members. Global financial institution governance reforms are limited to promises to give developing countries more say in decision-making and the review of sovereign debt has been repeated. Developing countries’ concerns are getting short shrift.î ˆ
The problem here is one of definition. Is the G-7, which continues to set the global agenda, portrayed as a club that won World War II or an ex-colonial group? The US established the G-7 in 1973 to set a global agenda in the United Nations as an anti-developed country body. The clash between Western capitalism and Soviet communism gave former colonies a poorer place and a voice in the world. As the political geography of the world is reshaped, the ‘poor’ remain trapped at the bottom of economic and geopolitical hierarchies. The imbalance in the wider world is reflected in the United Nations.
For example, recent figures from the UN show that only 17% of the Sustainable Development Goals are on track. Developing countries have a public debt of $29 trillion, with net interest payments of $847 billion, and will experience a negative net resource transfer in 2022. In July, the first joint declaration by G-20 financial leaders on international tax cooperation ended in disagreement whether the UN or the OECD is the right forum to advance the agenda.
Real change started with the re-emergence of China and India and the BRICS group, in 2009, but still waiting for the reversal of the colonial imbalance in the main region. In 1950, the US used 40% of the world’s natural resources with hegemonic power to set up multilateralism unilaterally. With the reconstruction of Europe in 1970, that share dropped to 26%. Multilateralism evolved into treaties, having the authority to implement national policies. The G-7’s share fell to a fifth in 2010, when Asia consumed half of global resource use. In a more equal world, the interests of the Global South get a voice but cannot set the agenda. South Africa in 2023 will have to present a case to determine its obligations under the climate regime and this is a serious indictment of conference diplomacy.
The foundation of power
The foundation of power will remain in the West for several decades even if global trends favor the Global South. In 1800, Asia consumed more energy than the rest of the world. In 1850, energy consumption was like the West. In 1950, the West consumed three times more than the rest of the world. In 2000, the West consumed more energy than any other country. The imbalance in the field of technology and endogenous capacity is more severe with China and India because they are global leaders only in certain areas. The trend is towards a more equal world in all dimensions. In 2000, 4.6 billion people lived in countries whose combined GDP was only 20% of the 755 million people living in the G-7. In 2016, the GDP share of the 17 developing countries as a percentage of the G-7 countries tripled to 63%.
The Summit recognizes that GDP focuses on the economic performance of a society but seeks to link it to sustainability. A broader understanding of prosperity considers non-monetary factors such as infrastructure, municipal services, affordable energy, educational opportunities, health care, and access to drinking water that better reflect the standard of urban living in a country. The focus on equal welfare levels is overdue.
The big lesson from the summit is that developing countries have not exploited the opportunities provided by the UN system. While the international political process unfolds in procedural terms, it has been informed by consensual science developed by ‘official experts’, and this will be the case for AI global governance and GDP modification. Experts frame problems in a way that defines the “problem” and how it should be “solved”.
As global power returns to Asia, the two giants realize that their ideas differ from the dominant Western-held view of how societies can, change, and be influenced. In terms of geopolitics, Asia should participate more deeply from the beginning in AI and GDP expert bodies to shape global governance by defining global priorities, cooperation, and justice.
Mukul Sanwal served as a policy advisor to the Executive Director of UNEP and later as the Executive Secretary of the UNFCCC and was associated with Inter-Agency Relations at the Head of the UN Executive Board.
Published – 30 September 2024 01:15 IST
