Born in the 1970s, the G7 is the primary mechanism for developed Western countries to meet and discuss policy. But it stubbornly adheres to ideological prejudice, which is why the organization is losing its appeal in the international community.

Capping the price of Russian oil will mean that unfettered trade in accordance with the law of supply and demand will be undermined. Free markets will be distorted when the “invisible hand” is replaced by anti-market government intervention.

Last October’s G20 Leaders’ Summit – held in Rome, and hosted by then-Italian Prime Minister Mario Draghi – produced a declaration brimming with promises to “address today’s most pressing global challenges” and “converge upon common efforts to recover better from the COVID-19 crisis and enable sustainable and inclusive growth” across the world. What a difference a year makes.

Russia’s deep integration in the global energy market is the result of a long and complex interaction of many actors in the value chain. Therefore, so-called moral clarity will require precise, case-by-case analysis of real-world facts. The outcome remains to be seen.

Some in India are advocate an American alliance to counter China. But such an alignment would be contrary to India’s founding principles of autonomy. It would also erode India’s standing in the BRICS and SCO groups and damage its relations with Russia.

China’s Belt and Road Initiative is clearly mapping out its ambitions for global influence challenging the primacy of the U.S. Now, Western allies have presented a B3W Partnership to challenge China with additional global infrastructure investment.

The Group of Seven’s (G7) fixation on China and Russia is problematic because member countries still have serious internal problems related to their domestic economies and income inequality.

The Group of Seven (G7) Leadership Summit held last June was stated to be an occasion for the Western leaders to “reestablish” the international order after the COVID-19 pandemic. It was also for the U.S. to demonstrate its return “back at the table”.

It’s not a contest between America and China alone, or one pitting democracy against autocracy. Moves by the United States to hold China down affect other countries as well. Unlike the U.S., which is trying to protect its hegemony, China is committed to building a community with a shared future for mankind.

Rhetoric at NATO’s recent summit intensified the U.S.-China rivalry in global affairs. Now that the U.S. is in competition with China, will NATO member states follow suit?