President of the United States Joe Biden is in Italy for a meeting with leaders of the other G7 industrialized nations, amid a plethora of conflicts and unsettling circumstances in the global economy.
Canada, France, Germany, Italy, Japan, the United Kingdom, and the United States get together annually in the Puglia region of the host country. But there will also be attendees from a wide range of other nations and international organizations, including Pope Francis.
As per Amanews21, who holds the position of senior vice president for Asia and the Korea chair at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, a nonprofit research organization based in Washington, the summit holds significance and the behavior of the leaders of these seven countries during it is crucial.
For instance, before to the meeting, the Biden administration placed further sanctions on Russia as a result of its conflict with Ukraine. Furthermore, it is expected that the G7 will focus on using the funds from Russia’s sanctioned assets to assist its occupied neighbor, and Biden will sign a new security agreement with Ukraine.
Georgetown University professor of government and former appointee of the Biden administration, directs Asian affairs for President George W. Bush’s National Security Council.
This week, Cha spoke with U.S. News on the significance of the G7, as well as Biden’s private worries and the summit. For the sake of clarity and length, the questions and answers that follow have been shortened.
What is the G7 and why is it important?
The highly industrialized democracies that comprise the G7 get together once a year. And they basically discuss whatever subject the host country thinks is most important. For instance, supply chains and economic security were among the main subjects of conversation at the G7 summit held in Hiroshima, Japan, last year. Italy is hosting the G7 conference, and they have stated that migration—particularly migration from North Africa, which is important for Italy—will be one of the topics of discussion.
The two current wars in the Middle East and Europe will be discussed, along with a wide range of other global issues, such as environmental protection, energy transition, development, and climate change. After debating the major international concerns, the leaders convene and release a statement in which they sometimes set norms and regulations for new fields (such as the use of artificial intelligence) or promise to aid in the development of Africa and other developing and emerging economies across the globe.
It stands out because to its extremely slack structure. The United Nations Security Council is not this. No trace of its formal secretariat remains. Because of the dominance of the continent, only three of the seats—the United States, Canada, and Japan—are held by non-Europeans. The European Union is represented by the European Commission and the European Council, which both hold two seats.
The priorities on the agenda were mentioned multiple times by you. Out of those, one do you think is the most important?
As a result, discussions about migration, Africa, the Middle East, and Ukraine have been held. There will also be a session on the Indo-Pacific, which is a little strange considering that the only country in the region represented is Japan. Invitations to South Korea and Australia have been sent out before. They got an invitation last year. But all those choices are made by the host. Despite strong American pressure, this year’s host chose to invite a diverse group of countries rather than just South Korea and Australia.
The Indo-Pacific area is important since it contains the majority of the world’s economies. In addition, supply chains, technology, and security are all hotspots there.
What might President Biden be facing at this year’s meeting?
There will definitely be a lot of inquiries about his prospects of winning in November. Remember the well-known comments made by (former German Chancellor) Angela Merkel at the first G7 summit that Trump attended?
She said that Europe had to stop depending on the US and start taking care of itself. There will be no such tone at this summit. I think most of the G7 leaders will support Biden and his globalist commitment to advancing democracy and freedom.
Therefore, it will be a great opportunity for Biden to emphasize his domestic political programs and how the world supports an America that prioritizes its global obligations and interests over its own. I think it will provide him an opportunity to reiterate the remarks he made on D-Day remembrance.
There have been rumors circulating about another summit action including Russia. Have you heard anything about that?
That’s definitely been the conversation. If a single action is to be done, it might be to try to use Russia’s assets that have been frozen to aid Ukraine.
The G7 leaders have a few options for what they can do. It is clear that their words and actions lack the authority of the resolutions of the U.N. Security Council since they are not bound by them. On the other hand, when the major industrialized democracies declare that they would coordinate policies on a given subject, it can have a big impact.
In that sense, these G7 meetings are important because, at the moment, the dysfunction of the UN Security Council is primarily due to China and Russia. The G20 was created in the wake of the financial crisis at the beginning of the Obama administration, making it far too big.
It doesn’t work. The World Trade Organization has 160 members, but that doesn’t mean anything. The G7, an informal grouping, is suddenly gaining recognition as a very major institution that is making a very informal effort to address these global challenges in light of two wars and minimal global governance.
You brought up subjects on which they could collaborate and which could have a significant impact. Do you have a summit from the past in mind as an example?
The G7 phenomenon is, in fact, quite recent. They first came together as the G4 or 5 in an effort to coordinate monetary policy after the oil shock of the 1970s. As a result, the group was somewhat disorganized and focused mostly on macroeconomics.
Supply chains, financial stability, and the abolition of economic coercion were last year’s top concerns. Although they didn’t say to whom, it’s obvious that they meant China. It matters when the seven industrialized, developed democracies declare that they would cooperate to create supply networks that are resistant to Chinese disruption and to devise a strategy that will stop China from regularly employing economic pressure as a diplomatic ploy.
The nations have never before made such a declaration of intent. As a result, at their meeting following the G7, the leaders of NATO announced that “we’re going to do the same thing too.”
Going back to Biden, what more comes to mind that he likely wants accomplished for the US?
I think there’s a good chance they’ll try to proceed with financial sanctions against Russia. That would be Gaza and its backing of the truce. Though I’m sure there are different perspectives on Gaza inside the group.
The other, I believe, would also be related to China. Strangely, not a single significant Asian player was invited, but the U.S. foreign policy under Biden has revolved around this protracted strategic conflict with China.
As a result, he will definitely try to push for a statement on Taiwan’s defense or the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, not only for the benefit of Taiwan and the United States but also for the benefit of the other seven G7 members.
It is likely that he would like the other members of the G7 to discuss the growing relationship between China and Russia. China does not equip Russia, in contrast to North Korea, but it does help Russia’s industrial capability. I’m sure they’ll want to take that up with China.
Are there any other facets of the G7 that you think need special consideration?
In my opinion, the G7 must undergo a number of modifications, including membership reform, in order to carry out its new role as the institution of global governance.
The G7 currently represents fewer than 10% of the global population and less than half of the global GDP. That was not the situation in the 1970s. It contributed significantly to the global economy.
Numerous individuals have argued in favor of adding non-European members; the most commonly named countries are Australia and South Korea. Memory chips, growing technologies, supply chains, and important minerals are all discussed.
One of the first things Biden’s first chief of staff, Ron Klain, wrote after leaving the White House was on the need for new G7 members.
