THE SOUTH AFRICAN G20: a Suez-like shift in seasons
Adapted from an article by Tim Cohen on Currency News[1]
CONTEXT
The G20 is a global forum of the world’s major economies that meets to coordinate international policies on finance, trade, climate, health, and other pressing issues. It brings together 19 countries plus the European Union and the African Union, making it one of the most influential platforms for global cooperation.
The 19 individual countries (like the US, China, India, South Africa, Brazil, Germany, etc.) plus the European Union and the African Union, together represent about 85% of global GDP and two-thirds of the world’s population.
G20 – SOUTH AFRICA
About 42 nations and international organisations were represented at the 2025 G20 Summit in Sandton, Johannesburg. Each country typically provided:
- Head of State/Government (President or Prime Minister)
- Finance Minister
- Central Bank Governor
- Senior officials, advisors, and security staff
With 42 delegations, this adds up to several hundred official delegates, plus support staff, media, and security. For comparison, past G20 summits have seen 2,000–5,000 accredited participants, including delegates, journalists, and organisers.
FROM SUEZ TO SANDTON
There was something faintly Suez-like about the G20 meeting in Johannesburg. The G20 felt less like a summit, more like a turning point. And even though the Summit did not solve every problem, it successfully shifted the center of gravity. The world came to Africa, and for the first time, Africa set the agenda. But even more significantly, America was not there to dictate.
The mood was unmistakable: a global shift is underway, underscoring President Donald Trump’s decision to boycott and undermine the event.
To recall the history: Back in 1956, Egypt’s President Abdel Nasser seized the Suez Canal. Outraged, Britain and France conspired with Israel to reverse the move. The plan was simple but deceitful—Israel would invade Sinai, Britain and France would demand a ceasefire, and when Egypt refused, they would swoop in as “peacekeepers,” seize the canal, and topple Nasser.
At first, it seemed to work. Israel attacked on 29 October, Britain and France issued their ultimatum, and troops prepared to occupy the canal. But the world had changed. President Dwight Eisenhower feared the scheme would drive Arab states into Soviet arms, while Moscow welcomed the chaos. The plot collapsed. By early November, Britain and France were forced into retreat. Nasser emerged triumphant, and the crisis became a symbol of imperial decline. Prime Minister Anthony Eden resigned soon after, disgraced by the exposure of collusion.
Suez was a case study in how soft power collapses. Before Suez, the idea of colonial imperial power held, but afterwards the world knew that Britain and France could no longer act independently or enforce their will. The Suez Crisis of 1956 was the geopolitical equivalent of catching your reflection in a shop window and realising your trousers no longer fit.
Britain and France marched into Egypt with all the pomp of imperial muscle memory, only to find that the world had moved on.
Fast‑forward to Johannesburg. The United States faced a similar reckoning. Not militarily—its arsenal remains unmatched—but in reputation. Trump has achieved what no rival ever managed: he has made the world doubt America’s predictability. And when predictability falters, soft power crumbles.
Ironically, the G20 was designed to prevent precisely this—to steady the system, absorb shocks, and institutionalise leadership beyond personalities. Yet here we are, in Johannesburg of all places, watching the former conductor realise the orchestra is playing a conflicting tune.
Britain’s decline after Suez wasn’t declared; it was recognised. America’s soft-power erosion may follow the same path. Future historians may mark not a dramatic election night in Washington, but this subdued week in Johannesburg—when the world sighed, almost casually, that the age of American inevitability had ended.
A SHIFTING SEASON
Ecclesiastes 3:1 – “There is a time for everything, and a season for every activity under the heavens.”
- Past G20 (the old season):
For much of its history, the G20 was a forum dominated by the Western-led economic order. Its “season” was one of crisis management—especially during the 2008 financial crash, when coordinated stimulus and reforms stabilised the global economy. That was a time for repairing and preserving the existing system. - The New Season (today’s shift):
Now, the G20 is not merely about participation anymore—it is about setting the agenda. The G20 is entering a different “season”, and a clear invitation that every opportunity missed can be an opportunity waisted. With the African Union joining as a permanent member and with rising voices from the Global South, the forum is shifting from being a Western-centric steering committee to a multipolar roundtable. This is a time for rebalancing and inclusion, where emerging economies demand not just a seat but a voice in shaping the rules. - Biblical resonance:
Ecclesiastes reminds us that history is not static. To use an old proverb: “You snooze, you lose.” Just as there is “a time to plant and a time to uproot,” the G20 has had its time to preserve the old order, and now it faces a time to reimagine global cooperation. Those who choose to ignore this pivotal moment in history could find themselves on the margins of innovation and left out in future endeavours. The verse invites humility: no power bloc holds eternal dominance; every empire, every institution has its season under heaven.