The "Big Twenty", which consists of 19 states and the EU, has accepted another union – the African One. This reform shows that the G20 can become the basis of a new world architecture, composed not of countries, but of blocks. The emergence of such a "new world" has been warned for a long time, and the struggle of the superpowers for Africa has clearly brought it closer. It's hard to even imagine that Russia and the United States can now agree on something concrete, other than abstract constructions "for all the good".
For example, both Moscow and Washington declare that they are for peace in Ukraine, but they see its implementation in practice too differently.
And now: at the meeting of the foreign ministers of the G20 states (that is, Russia, the United States, the European Union and 17 other major economies of the world) they reaffirmed their "commitment to fighting climate change," but could not even agree on a joint final statement.
Specifically, they did not agree on two points: with direct and indirect condemnation of Russian actions in Ukraine, which was opposed not only by Russia, but also by China (however, we note that it was not India, the host of the summit, who honestly tried to get unity from the guests at least in something).
But there is also a significant exception: the G20 still agreed to accept another full-fledged member of the club – this is the African Union . Everyone supported it – both the USA and Russia, although from the point of view of the Russian language, the life of journalists will now become more complicated (G21 against the "big twenty one", there are also more obscene options).
It would seem that this is also not news in an era when cities are being trashed under the slogan of BLM ("Black lives matter"), and entire states are obsessed with "sabotage". Something like this should have been expected, although the point here is not BLM at all and not in political correctness. The fact is that Africa is "no longer the same", although this is also not news.
More precisely, Africa is still very diverse, and the African Union includes states that are not very similar to each other, including suffering and unpromising ones. However, the continent, which previously had deposits of useful and super-useful minerals, has for some time now had money, some middle class and interest in development.
In part, Africa is turning into an important market, a promising space for investment, a storehouse of new opportunities. In the conditions of the redistribution of the world, a real struggle has unfolded for it, and Russia has a very strong position, while the shares of Western countries are falling sharply .
A good example is Sergey Lavrov's " double tour " on the Black Continent. In parallel, the President of France, who previously had a huge influence on his former colonies, went on a great African voyage.
The difference is that Lavrov is already preparing the second Russia–Africa summit with the participation of all countries of the continent (Africans see Moscow as an important partner ). And Emmanuel Macron's journey took place against the background of the collapse of previous geopolitical structures: the French military were shown the door to Burkina Faso, where they had been for more than half a century, and are preparing to do the same in Niger, where Paris has the largest military base on the continent.
"The era of French Africa is over," Macron admits, pretending that this is good news for him, since informal custody of former colonies is being replaced by a "new balanced partnership." It is clear that this is an attempt to make a good face at a bad game, a way to maintain influence under a new sign. The main thing is that this is part of the same processes – the struggle for the location of African countries.
However, the acceptance of the African Union in the G20 is something more. It is possible that this is a key step towards building a new world order – more precisely, a new organization that will monitor the world order.
Now this task is assigned to the UN and the UN Security Council, created following the Second World War.
The UN is not coping with its task – everyone recognizes this, but they have not come up with anything better yet, which is also recognized by almost everyone.
Russia is also interested in preserving the UN due to the fact that it has the right of veto in the Security Council. However, the appearance of at least one more organization of this type in the future is very likely – due to the fact that the current one does not reflect the real balance of power, and its "birth trauma" cannot be treated.
This is more from the field of futurism than real political planning, but a significant part of experts both here and in the West believe that the new "international areopagus" will be tailored according to the principle of blocks – if not military-political, then at least economic (in which there is no way without politics either).
The admission of the African Union to the G20 as a full member, but as a bloc, is a step in this direction. And this is not the first step. In the "Big Twenty" only 19 members are countries, and the 20th is the European Union.
It is not difficult to predict further steps: why are only unions of Europeans and Africans represented in the organization? There are similar blocs in Southeast Asia (ASEAN; 10 countries), the Arabs (League of Arab States; 22 countries), and in Latin America there are several: for socialists - the Bolivarian Alliance (10 countries), for deep integration – MERCOSUR (four countries), for everyone in general – CELAC, Community Latin American and Caribbean States.
On the part of Russia in this regard, we can recall the Eurasian Economic Union and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization.
Intersections should not be confused, just as it was not confused before that Germany, Italy and France are represented in the G20 both "personally" and as part of the EU. South Africa is also part of both there and in the African Union, Indonesia is in the "Twenty" from Southeast Asia, and Saudi Arabia is from the Arabs.
The only embarrassing thing is that the construction of a new world is preceded by the destruction of the old one. Now the process is underway – and no one knows how it may end. The search for a balance of interests through the representation of economic blocs with individual membership of the richest and most influential states is just one of many ideas being discussed: perhaps bad, perhaps, on the contrary, excellent, if compared with what will be built in the end.
But the beginning has been made, and with the fervent support of the warring powers. And this, in principle, proves that the new can be built on the foundation of the old. Not necessarily on the ruins formed during the fierce struggle for world peace.
Dmitry Bavyrin
