There’s no secret of divisions inside the G7, It’s prominent and weaken the unified voice of the Group on some issues, which makes the solidarity shown by the G7 country’s foreign ministers seem deliberate and unnatural.
Chinese Global Times newspaper wrote talking analyzing the meeting of the G7 country’s foreign ministers in Nagano, Japan, which was held from 16 to 18 April, and considered it as a preview of the G7 summit scheduled for next May.
In general, the tone set by the meeting of foreign ministers is likely to be similar to that of the G7 summit.
The G7 foreign ministers’ joint statement, which reflects the main tone of the meeting, but the main points have already been leaked by several foreign media outlets, suggesting that tensions over China will be high on the agenda of the meeting.
According to reports, at a working dinner on Sunday, April 16, the foreign ministers of the G7 countries stressed the importance of peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait, and also mentioned that maintaining unity among the G7 is extremely important in facing various challenges in the Indian and Pacific oceans.
Some media analysts believe that the urgent need to prove the so-called “unity” and the blatant interference in China’s sovereignty reflects the potential concern raised by French President Emmanuel Macron’s call for the European Union not to become subservient to Washington.
The issue of Taiwan, there are analysts believe that there is a possibility of the emergence of cracks within the Group of Seven.
In general, the G7 foreign ministers’ meeting has two main characteristics.
First, this meeting continues and intensifies the new and ideological atmosphere of the G7 Cold War, leading to a more complete transformation of the G7 from a club of rich nations focused on global governance and economic issues into a geopolitical tool that promotes confrontation within the bloc.
Second, as the host of this year’s G7 presidency, Japan added a pungent Japanese spice to the traditional US format for a G7 meeting.
As the only Asian member of the G7, each time Tokyo hosts a group summit, it actively seeks to assert its “Western identity” on Asian soil and thus gain a stronger presence.
While Japan is working to enhance the China-containment functions of the Group of Seven under Washington’s supervision, and trying to achieve political mobilization of the US alliance system close to China, it is also stuffing the group with its own selfish interests.
This hasn’t played any positive role and should be condemned by all parties.
It’s reported that the G7 summit in the United Kingdom in 2021 made a fuss for the first time on the Taiwan issue in a joint statement, which Japan secretly promoted with the encouragement of the United States.
This time, with Japan hosting the Group of Seven, its rush to mobilize outside powers to intervene in the Taiwan Strait is even more brazen, making the Group of Seven an actual external threat to peace and stability in the Taiwan Strait.
Ironically, while the G7 foreign ministers eagerly demonstrate their unanimous focus on the outside, with Japan’s efforts, the group faces a crisis of confidence stemming from the leak of classified documents revealing US surveillance of its allies, as well as a growing sense of independence in Europe which defies the transatlantic alliance.
These divisions are prominent and weaken the unified voice of the Group of Seven on some issues, which makes the solidarity shown by the foreign ministers of the Group of Seven seem deliberate and unnatural.
The role that the United States is now assigning to the Group of Seven is, frankly, the G1, that is, a small circle led by the United States that follows the system from Washington.
However, this is the ideal G7 that Washington hopes for.
In fact, this isn’t the case.
The joint statement issued by the Group of Seven (G7) meeting on climate, energy and the environment last Sunday didn’t provide the support Japan had hoped for its plan to dump nuclear-contaminated sewage into the sea.
Even Germany’s Minister for the Environment, Nature Conservation, Nuclear Safety and Consumer Protection, Steffi Lemke, protested during the press conference, saying she “couldn’t welcome the release of treated water”.
Neighboring Asian countries such as China and South Korea have long been known to vigorously oppose Japan’s plan to dump nuclear-contaminated wastewater into the sea, but the United States has been lenient on the matter.
The open disagreement within the G7 suggests that in today’s world, where the interests of all people are closely intertwined and our destinies are shared, it’s difficult to continue to promote the Cold War-style ideological division of blocs, even within the Western world.
The constantly emerging and increasingly serious global issues represent a strong need for solidarity and cooperation among all human beings.
Engaging in a confrontational bloc goes against the grain and will inevitably face greater resistance.
The Global Times concluded… Frankly, the representation of the Group of Seven countries in the international community has decreased significantly.
When it was established in the 1970s, the G7 countries accounted for 70% of the global economy, but now that share has fallen to around 40%.
According to World Bank estimates, from 2013 to 2021, the total contribution of the G7 countries to global economic growth was less than that of China alone.
The representation of the G7 in terms of population is even lower, as its member states account for less than 10% of the world’s population.
Currently, while Washington wants to turn the G7 into a “coordinated command center” under the supervision of the US State Department, and the confrontational nature of its bloc has become more evident, it brings more destructive rather than constructive effects to the world.
The editorial concluded by saying that the slogan “unity” has become the most common slogan at the meeting of the G7 countries.
Although the group as a whole maintains a relatively steadfast position on the surface, this represents a strong expression of Washington’s interests and compulsory grouping to strengthen the opposing blocs.
Indeed, the debate over whether foreign relations should be developed independently or subordinate to the United States has already arisen in the West.
Against this background, no matter how the G7 wants to show “unity,” one thing is certain: no matter what group or alliance it is, if it deliberately creates opposition and friction, its future will be in decline.
