![A mother’s taweez and the Cape’s interfaith traditions [+ video]](https://muslimviews.co.za/wp-content/uploads/2026/05/Michael-Weeder-Book-Launch-9May26-360x180.webp)
As the Trump 2.0 trade wars and economic nationalism deepens, an unlikely alliance of G20, BRICS and G77 can play a central role in saving multilateralism, the UN and global governance – but each with a vastly different focus and modalities.
By ASHRAF PATEL
During the second World War the fight against fascism brought together the ‘Grand Alliance’ of the most unlikely allies – the USA, Western Europe and the USSR, with swathes of the colonised world coming together to defeat fascism.
In 2025, the scale, scope, and velocity of Trumpism is so disruptive that new forms of partnerships are evolving in ensuring the global governance consensus and save United Nations (UN) multilateralism.
The Global South nations, especially G77, desperately need multilateralism functioning, and a fair World Trade Organisation (WTO) and World Health Organisation (WHO) to work, in order to broaden the benefits of trade, financial reforms and any hope for the UN Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs).
The BRICS Rio communique, signed on July 6, 2025 is significant. It starts with the 130-point plus final declaration, not only thoroughly detailing every major issue, with calculated moderation, but resolutely setting a trademark BRICS tone – and clear set of humanistic values – focused in three strategic pillars: economy-finance; designing a new global security framework; and cultural and people-to-people exchanges. And everything under the over-arching umbrella of inclusiveness and mutual respect.
The following week – July 14 to 18– the G20 Finance Ministers (minus the US) meeting in Zimbali, KwaZulu-Natal, was unable to reach a consensus statement on key issues of global minimum tax and African debt relief. While both the BRICS and G7 core are members of these groupings, prioritising different themes and modalities is proving illusory.
Convergences – saving multilateralism – from the UN to the WTO and WHO
Both G20 and the BRICS bloc are converging out of necessity at this moment in time.
You may also want to read
The BRICS Rio July 2025 declaration is groundbreaking in its scope, depth and clarity in saving the UN system and reforming multilateral institutions for common development and humanity:
Point 4: We underline the significance of the adoption of the BRICS Leaders’ Framework Declaration on Climate Finance and of the BRICS Leaders’ Statement on the Global Governance of Artificial Intelligence, as well as endorse the launch of the BRICS Partnership for the Elimination of Socially Determined Diseases. These initiatives reflect our joint efforts to foster inclusive and sustainable solutions to pressing global issues.
Point 5. We reiterate our commitment to reforming and improving global governance by promoting a more just, equitable, agile, effective, efficient, responsive, representative, legitimate, democratic and accountable international and multilateral system in the spirit of extensive consultation, joint contribution and shared benefits. In this regard, we take note of the adoption of the Pact of the Future at the Summit of the Future, including its two annexes, the Global Digital Compact and the Declaration of Future Generations. (BRICS Rio Declaration, July 2025)
BRICS AI governance, inclusion and sustainability
In an age where AI is leading to deepening inequalities and disruptions, the BRICS commitment to AI governance shows a deep commitment to multilateralism. Aligned to the UN Pact for the Future, the BRICS declaration is rooted in UN principles that balanced Digital Industrialisation, AI inclusion and privacy safeguards. There is good alignment with both G7 and G20 and the new EU AI Act.
The leaders of the BRICS nations – Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa – published a joint statement calling for a global governance framework for AI that is inclusive, representative and rooted in the principles of sovereignty, development and ethical responsibility. The guidelines, which strictly refer to the use of AI in the non-military domain, should be applied through either domestic or applicable international frameworks, as well as through the development of interoperable standards and protocols, in inclusive, transparent and consensus-based processes, the statement reads. (BRICS Rio Declaration, July 2025)
Diversions: BRICS, G20 ruptures in peace, security and climate pathways
Despite these new alignments between both Global North and South formations in saving multilateralism, it is in the area of peace and security where major real geopolitics come into play. The BRICS Plus is anchored in the Non-Aligned Movement, while the core G7 are still committed to preserving Western hegemony. Indeed, the announcement by NATO and EU core states in increasing defence budgets to 5% of GDP – and the drastic cuts in development aid is sobering and will negatively impact on the UN development agenda.
Here realpolitik, rooted in geo-political fractures, are laid bare in the grave conflicts of Gaza, Ukraine, Sudan, DRC, Libya and numerous war zones. Here the UN Security Council has so far failed to find consensus. Groups such as the Hague Group are examples of responsible nations committed to international law and are converging to confront the Genocide in Gaza, and such formations can catalyse new UN reforms and preserve the UN Charter.
Substance versus rhetoric of international financial institutions’ reform and African debt crisis
Last week’s G20 finance ministers meeting and the lack of any concrete agreement on Africa’s debt crisis or global minimum tax exposes the lack of coherence in the G20 model. The G20 Common Framework is essential in committing nations to financial reforms. So far ministers are engaged in merely the ‘Multilateral Development Bank (MDB) Roadmaps’ – essentially, talks about talks, a painful road that does not guarantee a global finance and tax deal. Sadly, given the G20 in 2025 is billed as the Africa Union’s year, its core development agenda relevant to Africa is still elusive, and unlikely to bear fruits. South Africa is now ‘treading lightly ‘as we hand over our G20 baton to the Trump administration later this year, which has stated it will ignore most of our G20 agenda and focus purely on the finance agenda – for their own interest given their trillion-dollar national debt crisis.
‘Just Energy Transition’ and climate change– the EU’s climate moment of truth arrives
Another area that is unravelling is the pathway to climate change mitigation. The EU, which has been the standard bearer of climate and the Just Energy Transition (JET) agenda, faces its moment of truth.
The scale and scope of Europe’s Big Oil scouring Africa is a throwback to the early 20th century colonialisation of Africa. Today its oil giants – BP, Total, Shell, ENI – play big for oil and gas in African states such as Angola, Mozambique, Nigeria etc. It is akin to the early 20th century great oil frontier. In South Africa, Shell Oil is embroiled in yet another controversial exploration in the Karoo and Northern Cape. Meanwhile, South Africa’s leading coal export destinations are EU nations, Germany, UK etc that are supposedly at the forefront of the Just Energy Transition. All of these have grave environmental consequence that makes mockery of our G20 themes of sustainability and climate change.
‘Italy’s energy needs are wrapped into Mattei Plan and not subtly: the plan is named after Enrico Mattei, an anti-fascist resistance leader who founded oil and gas giant ENI. Mattei championed energy partnerships with African countries that would drive their economic growth. What does Italy get out of Mattei? In theory, curbing haphazard African migration to its shores. Yet oil and gas supplies are more to the point. ENI will spend $26 billion on producing in Algeria, Libya and Egypt and is an investor in Angola.’ (Martin Camara, July 21, 2025)
In this context, the EU and G7’s signature Just Energy Transition project is riddled with contradiction and hypocrisy and will make the UN COP 30 deal much more difficult and unattainable. In climate change and decarbonisation, the EU wants its ‘Green cake and oil’. Furthermore, the EU’s Carbon Border Adjustment Mechanism (CBAM) programme further raises trade barriers for Africa, leading to further deindustrialisation and job losses, thus fuelling the migration crisis northwards.
Its glaring contradictions are no longer tenable and in substance the EU is no different from the Trump administration’s stated policy: ‘Drill Baby Drill’. The EU is drilling for oil in Africa and globally but not in their own backyards. Such condescending attitudes hark back to the old-world colonisation of the 20th century and gives credence to criticisms of a ‘new green imperialism’.
As the Trump 2.0 trade wars and economic nationalism deepens, an unlikely alliance of G20, BRICS and G77 can play a central role in saving multilateralism, the UN and global governance – but each with a vastly different focus and modalities.
Will a new consensus emerge and the centre hold- or rupture?
Here Be Dragons.
Ashraf Patel is a Senior Research Associate at the Institute for Global Dialogue, UNISA.
