Effective solutions, from achieving a nuclear-free world to peaceful negotiations to resolve the Ukrainian conflict, still appear to be distant goals. Despite the expectations of the "masters of the world”, the international situation is becoming increasingly tense, while NATO expands its presence in Asia.
According to Prof. Dmitry Mosyakov, head of the Center for Southeast Asia, Australia, and Oceania at the Institute of Oriental Studies of the Russian Academy of Sciences, the outcome of the summit is highly disappointing:
“The impact of the G7 summit is close to zero, with no breakthroughs. In the past, these summits were associated with the ‘masters of the world’, where important international decisions were made, especially during economic crises. Today, however, the scope of the G7 leaders' decisions has expanded to include virtually everything, while their influence on the world and the implementation of their agreements has diminished significantly,” Mosyakov notes.
“Over time, the G7 summit has deflated like a balloon, becoming a mere formality. At present, the G20 is successfully fulfilling the role that the G7 once played. It includes different voices and discussions that are relevant to other countries, including India, Russia, China, and Brazil”.
This fact is confirmed by the invitation of representatives of these countries to the G7 summit in Hiroshima. Most often, this happens because the threat of secondary sanctions against these countries for non-compliance with certain G7 decisions is often ignored. This is particularly obvious in the case of Russia, as they do not show the same eagerness to “punish” Moscow.
G7 Tries to Foist Its Policies on Nations With Different Perspectives
According to Mosyakov, “the G7 countries do not invite them as full-fledged participants in the summit, but only to 'sit in the chair' alongside those who rule the world, to listen to their ‘correct view of the world’, and to adhere to it. However, representatives of these countries can discuss their pressing issues and personally influence their resolution within the G20 platform.
Meanwhile, G7 countries are relegated to the role of mere executors, which is a significant difference. Therefore, the situation is unlikely to change because other countries have their own objective interests in this world. Aligning the national priorities of China or India with Western interests has little chance of success.
Timing of Hiroshima Summit Was ‘No Coincidence’
The timing of the G7 Summit in Hiroshima coincided with the extensive transfer of NATO's military infrastructure to East and Southeast Asia, a decision that was actually made at the NATO summit in Madrid in 2022, the expert noted.
“Beyond advancing NATO's presence in the East, the G7 Summit does not tell the world much. Whatever decisions the G7 leaders may take at the summit, they are mere hot air that lacks the potential to significantly change the current geopolitical and geo-economic landscape,” Mosyakov pointed out.
G7 Leaders Up the Ante in Ukraine Conflict
The personal invitation extended to Zelensky to attend the Hiroshima Summit can be seen as the most paradoxical outcome of this event on the home soil of the Prime Minister, who had previously suffered from the American atomic bombings.
The central theme of the G7 summit in the home country of the Japanese Prime Minister was not a concrete plan for the peaceful resolution of the conflict in Ukraine, but rather its guaranteed escalation. In particular, the promises made by the G7 to extend military support to Kiev could lead to the most unpredictable military scenario.