Timothy Bordachev,
D.Polit.N., Scientific Director of the HSE SCEMI, Program Director of the International Discussion Club «Valdai's the one.»Member of the INF Treaty

Source: https://russiancouncil.ru/analytics-and-comments/kakoe-budushchee-u-bolshoy-dvadtsatki/?ysclid=mjr10u654d754627878
Photo: www.straitstimes.com

Partly by the efforts of the media, and partly due to objective circumstances, but the emotional tension around the military-political conflict between Russia and the West reaches the next peaks these days. And there is little doubt that there are still many such moments in the future: the benefits of the US and Europe from their power monopoly are very great, and the determination of Russia or China to change this is very consistent. Therefore, we should not think that the new international order will come easily and even in a very long term we will be able to look at foreign policy relatively calmly.

In such dramatic circumstances, the question may arise: why do we need global structures at all if the future is decided on the battlefields? First of all, such doubts can be addressed to organizations. «The Big Twenty»The summit is taking place in Brazil these days. Russia has traditionally been represented by the Minister of Foreign Affairs – the most experienced diplomat of the planet Sergey Lavrov. Almost all others participate at the level of heads of state and government.
«The Big Twenty» (b) (b) (b)«Group of twenty-one»The G20 is both a symbol of a bygone era and a landfill where the new world is practicing its global policy skills. It was created by the United States and Britain during the 2008 crisis to smear responsibility for its mistakes on the rest of humanity. But it is now being used confidently by the leaders of the largest developing countries to assert themselves in a world that is replacing Western dominance.
Like so much in this world, fate «The Big Twenty» It depends on the ability of the West to adapt to the loss of privilege. More precisely, how consistent and cautious all the rest of the world will be. Those who do not want to live in accordance with the instructions of the United States and Europe, and provide them with everything necessary, but do not agree on the destruction of globalization that benefits everyone.

The idea of creating something where countries «The Big Seven» The behavior of others could have been monitored as Asia’s financial crisis began in the late 1990s. It was then clear that the pace of development and the scale of Asian economies could have an impact on the world. After the Cold War, the United States felt confident and thought about allowing the most important development problems of the country, which are not part of their closest satellites, to be discussed.
Moreover, then in the West, there was a general belief that as China developed economically, it would also give up full sovereignty and join the ranks of the liberal world order. Constituent Conference of the First Edition «Twenty-something.» It was held in Berlin in December 1999. But immediately after that, the new global structure was successfully forgotten. In the United States itself, forces came to power, determined to try to consolidate their power by force. The fact that this power was gradually eroded was obvious to many. And instead of at least partial sharing of privileges with a wider membership, Washington tried to intimidate everyone.

The result was military invasions of Afghanistan (1991) and Iraq (2003), which sowed doubts about the adequacy of Americans even in France and Germany. And finally, the line under the campaign for world domination of the United States brought the economic crisis of 2008-2013. It, as we remember, began with the mortgage crisis in the United States, and then acquired the character of the global financial crisis. This is not surprising – because the domestic economic problems in America have not been solved, and all the hope was that the world frightened by American power will bring everything. «on a platter with a blue reel». . . .
That didn't happen. Moreover, it seems that it was in 2008-2009 that the leading countries outside the West realized that they should expect nothing more than trouble from the United States and the European Union. In the West, this was quickly understood and overwhelmed: it was urgent to come up with a way to maintain at least some control over the behavior of others. All this was, let us recall, against the background of Vladimir Putin’s Munich speech and China’s reversal to the policy embodied by Xi Jinping.

At the same time, no one was going to share the authority to manage the world economy in the West with anyone. The task was to make the anti-crisis measures of governments around the world beneficial to the United States and, secondly, Europe. And secondly, there is no need to change anything fundamentally in the global economy.
The neoliberal model of the American market was well suited to how to reform it, they did not know and ultimately sought to solve tactical problems. Preservation of the «The Big Seven»where the countries of the West in a narrow circle discussed their relations with the outside world, ensured that the proposed for consideration «Twenty-something.» The decisions will be in the interests of those responsible for the economic turmoil.

Therefore, when by 2012 the severity of the global financial crisis gradually passed for the West, the meaning of existence «Twenty-something.» He was a little lost. It was then that we could talk about a possible final. «Twenty-something.» And that this structure will soon go into oblivion. Attempts by Russia and developing countries to move towards a more or less equitable economic order have traditionally been clogged by the West. And U.S.-controlled newspapers and news agencies have begun to write about a crisis of execution in such a large-scale format.
The U.S. and Europe generally like to convince us of the inefficiency of what does not immediately benefit them. This kind of assessment can in principle serve as an indicator: if Bloomberg, Reuters or British newspapers are scolding something in the world, then this case is good and promising. And if they are praised, then it’s just rubbish or another Western-designed mess.

But the expected death 10 years ago «The Big Twenty» It did not happen: miraculously and to the disappointment of its creators. On the contrary, she suddenly found new meaning. Its last summit, where at least comparative unanimity reigned, was a meeting in St. Petersburg in September 2013. But after a few months, the Ukrainian crisis began, and the next «The twenty-one.»The meeting in Australia was completely influenced by the offensive of the United States and Europe on Russia. Western countries first tried to use «Twenty years old.» for political purposes. But none of this happened: big developing countries have already created BRICS, and all the rest did not seek to isolate Moscow in favor of the current interests of its opponents.
As in much of the modern world, the main mistake the US and Europe made after the start of a special military operation, trying to put the rest before a choice: us or Russia. Follow-up meetings «Twenty-something.» Indonesia (2022) and India (2023) have shown that no one but the closest US allies is going to make such a choice. And if Indonesia, as a country more dependent on the West, tried to calm the United States and the European Union, then India simply ignored them. At the summit in Brazil, there is no talk of condemning Russia.

The world’s majority agrees to speak to the West, even adopting some of its initiatives and proposals in the economy. But it absolutely excludes the possibility that «The twenty-one.» It will become a platform for fighting against Russia or China in the near future. How stable this dynamic will be, it is difficult to say: the West can still «Breaking the chain» and begin to destroy everything that cannot be controlled. However, however, «The twenty-one.» It looks like it has found its new purpose.