G7 meeting: Unity or Division on Ukraine issue?

Global Lenses

What can the G7 do to stop the war in Ukraine? Leaders of the world's major economies are imposing more sanctions on Moscow, but is that enough? Could the group remain united against Vladimir Putin? The four-month war in Ukraine has exposed deep divisions in the global order, but it is also highlighting some of the oldest and strongest alliances. The G7 group of the world's seven largest economies recently met in Germany. They provoked Russia to impose retaliatory sanctions following the sanctions on it by the west, which has disrupted everything from oil prices to the supply chain, to the price of bread. Presided over by Germany, the G7 is pushing for a solution to mitigate the effects of the war on the global economy.

The G7 leaders issued a statement dispelling any doubts about their commitment to support Kyiv, saying they would continue to provide financial, humanitarian, military, and diplomatic assistance and stand by Ukraine. They also announced targeted sanctions on those responsible for war crimes or abuse of power in Ukraine. The statement added that Russia is heavily responsible for the threats to global food security posed by the conflict. China is also on the agenda of the G7 summit. It has pledged $600 billion to counter Beijing's Belt and Road initiative. Beijing responded immediately in the following words:

"China welcomes all initiatives that promote global infrastructure. We believe that there is not any initiative aimed at replacing each other. What we oppose is to advance geopolitical calculations and smear the belt and road initiative in the name of promoting global infrastructure development." 

Varying impacts of the Ukraine war:

Perspectives differ in the different capitals. Countries are affected variably as they have different past relations with Russia. They have a varying degree of toleration given the costs of war. Everyone would like to see Russia lose but that doesn't necessarily mean a victory for Ukraine. 

Watch full video, click: Why the US will lose to China?

Ukraine claimed victory?

What does it mean when we talk about the victory of Ukraine because sometimes it has shown interest in regaining all of the Donbas and even Crimea which may lead to a war with Russia. However, the Russian motivation behind this invasion is obviously NATO's expansionism and the need to curb the growing stocks of the US weapons system near its borders. If Russia pulls out, obviously these weapons will just keep pouring. So, it's not certain how this victory will be possible. Russia will definitely fight it to the end. It is also unclear how the stalemate will result in any kind of diplomatic solution, as Moscow will continue to fear that the West will take advantage of a temporary agreement to re-arm Ukraine and advance NATO. Therefore, statements as to victory are very tall claims without any clear operationalization and purpose.

Read more: Evaluating BRICS summit

Varying impacts may disrupt the EU's unity:

There are different balances that need to be considered. The motives behind the invasion of Ukraine are obscured given the ambiguity about Putin's intentions. One calculation was that the West was not ready to fight and feigns to be heroic. And that Russia does not believe in anything. It will be easier to enter and achieve goals. Hence, what we have now is a united West, a much stronger NATO, and even an expanded NATO– basically the opposite of what Putin tried to achieve. But we also have a situation in which all the different leaders of G7 are facing different domestic pressures. Some struggle with inflation; some rely heavily on imports, and some are weaker than others. 

Chancellor Schultz hosted the meeting.

 Who is the driver of the G7?

The U.S. has contributed significantly in terms of money and weapons. It has the advantage of having a strong army that dominates NATO and there is an element of America having a natural role. But it is not alone, other countries are important as well. Other European countries indicate that they can do more. For example, a country like Turkey can put a stalemate in the process of bringing Finland and Sweden into the ambit of NATO. So, there is leadership but there is no dominance which we may see going forward that Macron has its own domestic issues. And certainly, Germany, with a complex political situation, a three-party government, is bearing the brunt of the energy costs. Even in the US, politics will not be easy. Washington's support for a deeper engagement with Ukraine is not necessarily so strong. Why did $40 billion sink when Americans have a trillion-dollar deficit? We see that the Republican Party is increasingly willing to ask questions about it. Hence, going ahead will be a very difficult process. 

Divide in European Union:

Europe is divided in many ways. Western European countries are more cautious, while countries such as Poland and the Baltic states are more eagle and more attached to the United States. Initially, they were united because of the innovation that Russia took everyone by surprise and shock and because of their common interest in balancing the common enemy. But such an alliance was based on the premise that NATO would have a victory over Russia or extend unanimous support to Ukraine. But what you see is not an only division between the US and Europe but also within Europe. You will see more of these divisions emerging in the future. Now that the conflict is not going Western side because once again Russia is winning the battlefield and sanctions have backfired terribly, it raises the prospects of having more divisions within the member states.

Read more: Changing geopolitics of Europe: Ukraine-war-driven changes

US wants the war to be continued?

The US and Britain may want to see this war continued for a while because it has many intentions. For the US, it imposes block discipline within the West that it has not been able to achieve before. The United States has managed to decouple Europeans' energy and economic dependence on Russia, which it has not done in the past. We also see that the United States can now extend European divorce to China. Therefore, Ukraine will be a strong weapon against Russia in the near future. There are many opportunities for the US in war. But there is a division in supporting the sanctions regime because there are so many costs and incentives for Europeans. Pushing them towards war means forcing them to pay a higher price. Sanctions are hurting Europeans more, not only because of the temporary energy crisis and high inflation but also because we see that European industries will no longer be competitive in international markets because all cheap Russian energy and metals are now going to Asia. Therefore, the cost of production in Europe will increase dramatically and Europeans as a whole will become more and more dependent on the United States, as a result. All European goals of strategic autonomy will collapse. You will now observe more cleavages. For example, the Germans, Italians, and French have to resort to diplomacy to sit with the Russians which has already been seen. The three leaders– Italy, Germany, and France– will continue to demand talks with Russia. Meanwhile, Johnson is coming from Britain saying that this is not the right time for peace and the Americans are also supplying huge weapons to Ukraine. This division within the West is just going to be more and more obvious as the conflict persists.

Will people ask their governments to ease the sanctions and pull back on this war as they may not be prepared to endure a winter of power cuts or sanctioned energy supplies?

Europe is part of this war, not a party to the war. It has been affected far more than the United States. But it is very difficult to predict because each member state has different situations and more or less popular leaders have different communication techniques that also play a role. Within the EU member states, at the moment, German politicians would certainly like to see a diplomatic solution, but public opinion is still very strong in support of solidarity measures against Ukraine. Hence, Olaf Schultz or Immanuel have little to fear at this time.

Give us your feedback in a comment.

Did you enjoy the article?

Minimum Support for the sanctions regime?

The More you drag, the less support you will have. Only the United States, one of the top 10 most populous countries in the world, holds the position of supporting sanctions. Indian purchases of Russian oil are skyrocketing. Going beyond, Brazil, South Africa, and Indonesia have not jumped on the sanctions bandwagon and there are many reasons for it. The global south is very much obsessed with European and American hypocrisy. The United States believes in the principled world order, except when it does not, then it invades and occupies countries, even if it is against international law. President Biden is talking about human rights and is going to visit Saudi Arabia to beg the Saudis who have killed millions of people in Yemen to provide more oil so that the US can offer an alternative. Though countries do not like aggression as Russia is certainly wrong, they are skeptical of the US leadership's pursuit that they are clearly unhappy with, and Indonesia's move to invite Russia to the G20 summit is complex. 

Read more: Russia-Ukraine war: A new phase and Implications

The g7 sees the war in Ukraine as critical to global security.

Why the world seems reluctant to support the sanctions regime? 

The rest of the world has not really joined any of these sanctions, but that does not mean they support the Russian invasion of Ukraine. However, although there seems to be some consensus around condemning Russia, there is little interest in punishing it. This is because many consider it the moral authority of the West and seek more dubious interests behind it. It is widely acknowledged around the world that although it was Russia's fault for carrying out the invasion, it is also clear that NATO provoked it. You hear it all over the world and sometimes even within NATO as Turkey is now saying the same thing. Even the pope has said it. Hence, It seems to be a wide consensus that NATO incited it. However, Russia should not have attacked for that reason. 

Full up-to-date current affairs analysis list: Click here

The world is not supporting the sanctions regime because there is also economic interest behind it. Europeans, for example, ordering Indians not to purchase any Russian oil or gas seem very provocative, especially when the West continues to purchase Russian oil and gas. One has to look into great opportunities for Asia because European economies have been very competitive and had access to all these cheap Russian energy metals, and now Russia is turning its back and Asian states are diversifying their economies eastward and preparing themselves for a permanent divorce from Europe. Asian countries will become more competitive as Russia offers concessions on its oil and gas. So, they will look after their own interests and not get involved in what is effectively the European conflict, the 30-year proxy war between NATO and Russia.

Russian motives behind the attack?

The Russian myth of the NATO threat does not seem more credible. NATO has no appetite for a military conflict with the world's second-largest nuclear arsenal. What threatened Russia was the economic prosperity of the Russian West. If we compare Ukraine and Poland, Poland has become four times richer by joining the European Union, and if Ukraine does the same, the reputation of the dictatorial government in Moscow will discourage. 

There is no military solution to this conflict.

To solve this, other powers like China

go ahead and play their role.

Global inflation reached sky-high. Given that the G7 statement held that the group will foster coordinated initiatives that promote global food security. 

What G7 can do? 

There are clear humanitarian objectives for putting war aside. The decline in exports from Ukraine, especially in the case of food grains, is causing extraordinary difficulties for poor countries that cannot cope with the domestic crises. What can the West do? It is proposed to try to forcibly open Ukrainian ports in the Black Sea to ensure grain supply. But it would require cooperation from Turkey, which is unlikely. What we need to recognize is danger. The longer it lasts, the more dangerous it becomes. Along the way, Ukraine is the main victim. According to World Bank figures, the economy has been cut in half, millions have fled the country, and cities are being destroyed. So the more we go deeper, the more dangerous it can become, and the greater the risk of Russia using nuclear weapons.

Russia has been pushed into a corner.

Yet sanctions seem less effective.

Did the sanctions have the desired effect?

The West's main goal was to destroy the Russian economy's financial system and the Ruble. So far, we have seen the economy and the financial system stabilize, and the ruble became stronger than before the war. However, the pain of this punishment or sanctions will probably come later and the worst for Russia is yet to come. But it is being said that sanctions are aimed at changing political behavior and Russia does not seem to be changing its policies because NATO is considered an existential threat to Russia. Its expansion to the Russian border has been an existential threat for more than 20 years. It will not give up because of some economic problems and will probably fight to the end and only escalate the conflict.

Subscribe to our website and allow notifications for more in-depth articles. 

We publish articles weekly, keep visiting Global Lenses.