The G20 summit in New Delhi on September 9-10 was preceded by a kind of sensation. India, as the organizer of the meeting in the prepared materials, called itself “Bharat.” According to government officials, this name will be used internationally, according to a correspondent for The Moscow Post.
The name “Bharat,” unusual for our ear, was used in an official invitation to dinner on behalf of President D. Murmu, to which the leaders of the G20 are invited, as well as in the booklet “Bharat is the mother of democracy.”
Foreign Minister S. Jaishankar, answering questions, offered to familiarize himself with the text of the Indian Constitution, where the name “Bharat” is also enshrined. The first article of the Constitution states: “India, also Bharat, is a union of states.”
“India” is used in English, “Bharat” is used in Hindi. Hindi and English are the state languages. The same word is “Bharat,” contained in the name of the ruling “Bharatiya Janata Party” (BJP, Indian People’s Party).
The UN is ready to consider renaming India Bharat if requested. Ankara’s request was granted last year. In official UN documents, the country is now called Trkiye, not Turkey.
From the change of places Bharat system does not change
Prime Minister Nerendra Modi is said to have advised cabinet members to shy away from commenting on the topic. All this is happening on the eve of the G20 summit and on the eve of parliamentary elections. In the election campaign, the BJP’s ruling coalition will assert the right to lead the country. She is opposed by the opposition united in the INDIA alliance. It is an acronym for Indian National Developmental Inclusive Alliance.
Opposition parties have accused Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s government of trying to unilaterally rename the country. Although, the ruling party went the same way as the opposition, deciding to use the name of its country “Bharat” in official documents in the hope that this would help attract votes.
The leader of the main opposition Indian National Congress party, Shashi Tharoor, said “it would be foolish to drop the name’India’ altogether.” Delhi Chief Minister Arvind Kejriwal, whose Aam Aadmi party also belongs to the new opposition bloc, told reporters the BJP was concerned about the INDIA alliance. He suggested concerns about votes had prompted the ruling party to go down that path. One BJP leader and Assam Chief Minister Himanta Biswa Sarma told reporters that the country was “Bharat,” there is “Bharat” and will remain “Bharat.”
“This whole Congress party is against Hindus and Bharat,” Sarma said.
Hello to the “colonizers”
Some Indian politicians consider the name “India” a legacy of colonial times. The country gained independence in 1947, after nearly 200 years of British rule. Although the name appeared long before the arrival of the colonizers, and Europeans developed or captured lands sometimes also called the new lands of the West Indies or East Indies.
Those days are long gone. The world has become different and India (Bharat), chairing the G20, will host in New Delhi among the guests of the G20 summit and former colonialists. Ironically, the British prime minister ethnically belongs to “that very India.”
And the “twenty” itself has changed, as well as relations within the group, given the obvious and hidden contradictions in the geometric “figure” formed by the United States, China, Russia, the European Union, Japan and other countries, including India. Sanctions and new military-political alliances do not contribute to economic stability, as well as the effectiveness of the economic forum of leaders, which is the G20.
There are so many problems that the economy is receding to the background, Nazism in Ukraine and open Russophobia in the West came to the first. In the center of all the troubles is a proxy war, which the “NATO forces” imposed on Moscow on the territory of the former Ukrainian SSR. The Armed Forces of Ukraine act as the main detachment of these NATO forces, not even having time to join the alliance.
In an article published in the British newspaper The Times, Modi suggested that the countries of the world unite, overcoming disagreements and breaking down barriers, maintaining global supply chains, paying attention to food security and nutrition in connection with the consequences of climate change.
However, the main “chain breaker” himself goes to New Delhi. US President Joe Biden goes to Asia, despite his wife’s illness. In addition to India, Biden intends to visit Vietnam, which is perceived by everyone as a gesture directed against China.
Chinese President Xi Jinping will not come to New Delhi. To meet there with Biden and not to “talk,” about which “sleepy Joe” dreams – only to complicate an already difficult relationship. And it seems that there is nothing to talk about yet. China will be represented by Premier of the State Council Li Qiang.
Russian President Vladimir Putin instructed Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov to conduct all the work at this meeting, he does not plan to send a video message to the summit participants. One way or another, this summit is unlikely to be able to “strengthen multilateralism,” although Modi’s call for “reforms of global institutions” may help shape the agenda for the next G20 + 1 meeting.
India has advocated granting the African Union the status of a permanent member of the G20. Russia supported this step to expand the G20. So far, the European Union is the only organization in the G20 that has the status of a full-fledged, and not invited (as Afrosoyuz) member. EU representatives sit at summits with the heads of the participating states on an equal footing. And in the event of a positive decision, the African Union will receive the same status.
The West keeps the results behind the bosom
Another problem for the organizers of the summit is what the final statement will be. The West insists that the document contain a strong condemnation of Moscow and become a sign of solidarity with Ukraine.
The participation of the Russian Federation in the summit does not allow this. To find an acceptable form, India proposed to include in the document a clause condemning the special military operation of the Russian Federation in Ukraine, and reflect the positions of Moscow and Beijing.
But to make sure that Russia, the countries of the Group of Seven and China, are satisfied with some common text, may not work. There was fierce debate in Bali last November over condemnation of military action in Ukraine. Indonesian President Joko Widodo then said that the issue became the most difficult, but the document was still agreed upon.
The United States, Great Britain and the European Union criticized the Indian “all-accommodating” approach to the problem and the version of the declaration proposed by New Delhi. They considered that the document turns out to be too soft, that is, in fact the same as it was adopted a year ago. Then the following wording got into the declaration: “Most countries condemned the special operation in Ukraine” and stressed that it exacerbates instability in the global economy, but “other points of view and different assessments of the situation and sanctions were voiced.”
There has not yet been a case in the history of the G20 summits when the final declaration would not have been adopted. Such a precedent would be a serious blow to the prestige of the forum. The declaration following the meeting should appear soon. What it will be is unlikely to change anything in a group where political contradictions clearly outweigh the ability to maintain economic stability.
At the same time, G20 members condemning the actions of the Russian Federation were not listed. Thus, the event did not turn into the forum that the West would like.
Judging by the data of Bloomberg, which refers to information from French sources, China changed its initial proposals for the wording of the declaration. True, how exactly is not very clear. Nevertheless, it can be concluded from the agency’s data that by Thursday consultations on the wording conducted by representatives of the G20 countries still gave some result, most likely, will be adopted.