By labelling China as not being a responsible international player, G7 is looking at ways to limit its growing influence
By Dr Gunjan Singh, Upamanyu Basu
At the landmark 50th G7 Summit in Apulia, Italy, there was a systemic convergence of global leaders acknowledging the challenges posed by Russia-China relations. G7 remains a single forum where the leaders of the global economic order, along with the European Union, strengthened their collective resistance against Russia and also expanded its strategic outreach to Africa, to counter one single player ie, China.
The G7 Leaders Communique seems straightforward in engaging with China as an adversary. It presents five key areas where it addresses the China challenge: trade relations, advanced technologies, geopolitical security, human rights and global cooperation.
Calling out China
The communique highlights the need for China to refrain from export control measures that could potentially disrupt global supply chains. In the realm of cybersecurity and advanced technologies, the G7 has been stringent in calling for China to act responsibly and address the malicious cyber activities originating from its country that could pose national security risks for other countries. The communique also expresses the question of the East and South China Sea, calling on China to refrain from obstructing maritime navigation and adhere to international maritime law. It also seems direct in calling for peace and stability across the Taiwan Strait.
The G7 does not shy away from citing China’s human rights violations, especially in Tibet, Xinjiang and Hong Kong, and has condemned the use of legislation to silence democratic protests. And lastly, the G7 Communique acknowledges the role China can play in addressing global challenges like pollution, health security and climate change, but it remains cautious in calling on China to promote international peace and security, rather than be an irritant in the global order.
One of the most significant announcements in the G7 Communique was the introduction of its flagship initiative, the Partnership for Global Infrastructure and Investment (PGII). It has been announced that PGII will particularly focus on Africa, aiming to facilitate investments in energy and sustainable infrastructure. Notably, the PGII is seen as a Western counter-strategy with respect to the extensive influence of Chinese President Xi Jinping’s own flagship project, the Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). While several BRI projects have been internationally criticised for labour violations, corruption scandals and creating debt traps, the G7 has consistently committed to providing high-quality infrastructure with economically viable plans, starkly contrasting the BRI projects.
It is clear that China is looking for fractions in the European landmass and is keen to engage with countries which are not towing the Western line
Beijing’s Reaction
Reacting to the G7 Leaders’ Communique, Chinese foreign ministry spokesperson Lin Jian sharply criticised it concerning the G7’s comments on the Taiwan Strait, South China Sea, Hong Kong, Xinjiang and Tibet as an irresponsible display of prejudiced allegations. He emphasised that the G7, which represents 10% of the global economy, should no longer hold credibility to have global standards of influence. Lin argued that the G7 has been inflicting ideological wars, rather than promoting its original purpose, which was the promotion of global economic stability. He lastly asserted that the G7’s actions would further politicise trade and harm itself by creating unilateral sanctions.
Beijing considers the statements to be politically motivated. Since Xi’s visit to Europe, it is clear that China is looking for fractions in the European landmass and is keen to engage with countries which are not towing the Western line. Since the talks of sanctions and tariffs on Chinese firms have gained momentum, Beijing is concerned about its trade with the EU. If the sanctions are imposed, they will derail the Chinese ambitions to succeed in the chip manufacturing industry.
The narrative being built by the G7 about China as not being a responsible international player is also trying to look at ways to limit the growing Chinese influence and ambitions. China today is one of the largest trading partners of the EU. In addition, it has also succeeded in manufacturing and exporting electric vehicles (EVs) and solar panels at cheaper rates, underscoring its commitment to move up the technological chart.
Matching Actions
However, to have any major effect, the statements from the G7 nations will have to be followed by matching actions too. Can the European countries actually look for alternative routes for trade and replace China as their primary trading partner? The Covid-19 pandemic has established the centrality of Beijing in the global supply chains. China is one of the largest manufacturers of EVs and has the capacity to mine and process the raw material needed for them.
Geopolitically, China’s position is getting central. Under Xi, China is not shying away from extending its influence and in subtle ways challenging the Western narratives too. The fact that the world wants Beijing to put pressure on Moscow also underscores the weakness of the European nations to impact international order. The consistent blame being pushed on China can also be an indication of the weakening of NATO and EU’s influence to mitigate the Russia-Ukraine conflict while also highlighting how little the G7 can influence China.
(Dr Gunjan Singh is Associate Professor at the OP Jindal Global University, Sonipat. Upamanyu Basu is Assistant Professor of Political Science at Manav Rachna International Institute of Research and Studies. He is pursuing his doctorate from National University of Juridical Sciences, specialising in South Asian Politics and Conflict Studies)