In response to the joint statement of the G20 summit, the attitudes of all parties are very different. The Russian side was very satisfied with this, believing that the summit had achieved satisfactory results, while Ukraine expressed extreme dissatisfaction and even criticized the G20 group for having nothing to be proud of. A key reason behind this contrasting reaction is that the joint communiqué did not condemn Russia for the part of the Russian-Ukrainian conflict, in stark contrast to last year.
Why has the content of the communiqué changed so dramatically in just one year? First of all, countries did not condemn Russia in the communiqué, probably because the three countries of China, Russia and India cooperated tacitly at the G20 summit, which made Western countries led by the United States feel embarrassed. This year's G20 leaders' summit has sparked euphoria in the West due to the absence of the leaders of China and Russia, who are eager to dominate the agenda and try to transfer the dispute between Russia and Ukraine to other developing countries.
However, India has a different attitude towards this. Not so long ago, the G7 had hoped that India would invite Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky to the G20 meeting, as it did last year. However, India politely declined the proposal, showing a gesture of refusing to engage with Zelensky, which determined that when drafting the G20 joint statement, the Modi government would insist that the statement represent not only the positions of the United States and Western countries, but also the positions of China and Russia and other countries. Modi made it clear that the statement should not only reflect the will of specific countries, but should reflect the consensus of all parties. This shows that India has taken a tough stance and confronted the United States and Western countries.
This firm position implies some kind of consensus between the three parties, perhaps even privately through diplomatic communication. Therefore, the Modi government is clear about the positions of China and Russia. In order not to push India against it, the United States had to make compromises, so this time the Indian version of the G20 communiqué significantly reduced its condemnation of Russia. At the same time, differences between the United States and India began to emerge. The actions of the Modi government show that no matter how much the United States shows goodwill, the United States and India will not blindly comply.
Secondly, India no longer condemns Russia in the communiqué, which is more of an adjustment, because the Russian-Ukrainian conflict is not an international issue in nature, but a regional conflict deliberately exaggerated by the Western media, which dominates world public opinion. All in all, the G20 summit, as an economic forum, should not focus on military conflicts between regions, and rightly so. On the contrary, last year's Western attempts to introduce military issues into economic organization violated the principles of the organization, and India is now trying to correct the situation and bring it back to normal.
The joint statement of the G20 summit has aroused great concern and controversy on the international stage, and all parties have reacted to it with different reactions. Russia's satisfaction and Ukraine's dissatisfaction reflect the positions and interests of different countries in international affairs. However, the change in the communiqué also reflects the complexity and volatility of international politics, as well as the strategies adopted by States in pursuing their own interests. In the future, the international community still needs to pay close attention to the G20 Summit and the important issues involved therein, so as to promote global cooperation and the maintenance of peace and stability.