Baumann, Max-O o; No oselo a, Anna; Su asky, Ja ie ; Schön ock, Philipp
Wo king Pape
The G oup o 77 and global dialogue in he Uni ed Na ions
Gene al Assembly
IDOS Discussion Pape , No. 13/2024
P o ided in Coope a ion wi h:
Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS), Bonn
Sugges ed Ci a ion: Baumann, Max-O o; No oselo a, Anna; Su asky, Ja ie ; Schön ock, Philipp
(2024) : The G oup o 77 and global dialogue in he Uni ed Na ions Gene al Assembly, IDOS
Discussion Pape , No. 13/2024, ISBN 978-3-96021-238-6, Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and
Sus ainabili y (IDOS), Bonn,
h ps://doi.o g/10.23661/idp13.2024
This Ve sion is a ailable a :
h ps://hdl.handle.ne /10419/305248
S anda d-Nu zungsbedingungen:
Die Dokumen e au EconS o dü en zu eigenen wissenscha lichen
Zwecken und zum P i a geb auch gespeiche und kopie we den.
Sie dü en die Dokumen e nich ü ö en liche ode komme zielle
Zwecke e iel äl igen, ö en lich auss ellen, ö en lich zugänglich
machen, e eiben ode ande wei ig nu zen.
So e n die Ve asse die Dokumen e un e Open-Con en -Lizenzen
(insbesonde e CC-Lizenzen) zu Ve ügung ges ell haben soll en,
gel en abweichend on diesen Nu zungsbedingungen die in de do
genann en Lizenz gewäh en Nu zungs ech e.
Te ms o use:
Documen s in EconS o may be sa ed and copied o you pe sonal
and schola ly pu poses.
You a e no o copy documen s o public o comme cial pu poses, o
exhibi he documen s publicly, o make hem publicly a ailable on he
in e ne , o o dis ibu e o o he wise use he documen s in public.
I he documen s ha e been made a ailable unde an Open Con en
Licence (especially C ea i e Commons Licences), you may exe cise
u he usage igh s as speci ied in he indica ed licence.
h ps://c ea i ecommons.o g/licenses/by/4.0/
The G oup o 77 and Global Dialogue in
he Uni ed Na ions Gene al Assembly
Max-O o Baumann
Anna No oselo a
Ja ie Su asky
Philipp Schön ock
IDOS DISCUSSION PAPER
13/2024
The G oup o 77 and Global Dialogue
in he Uni ed Na ions Gene al
Assembly
Max-O o Baumann, Anna No oselo a, Ja ie Su asky & Philipp Schön ock
Bonn 2024
D Max-O o Baumann is a Senio Resea che in he esea ch p og amme “In e - and T ansna ional
Coope a ion” a he Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) in Bonn, Ge many.
Email: max-o o.baumann@idos- esea ch.de
D Anna No oselo a is a Resea che in he esea ch p og amme “In e - and T ansna ional Coope a ion” a
he Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) in Bonn.
Email: anna.no oselo a@idos- esea ch.de
Ja ie Su asky, PhD, is an Associa e Fellow a CEPEI and P o esso o Public In e na ional Law a he La Pla a
Na ional Uni e si y in La Pla a, A gen ina.
Email: ja ie .su [email protected]
Philipp Schön ock is he Di ec o o he Cen o de Pensamien o Es a égico In e nacional (CEPEI), an
independen hink ank in Bogo á, Colombia.
Email: [email protected] g
Published wi h inancial suppo om he Fede al Minis y o Economic Coope a ion and De elopmen (BMZ),
based on a esolu ion o he Ge man Bundes ag.
Sugges ed ci a ion:
Baumann, M.-O., No oselo a, A., Su asky, J., & Schön ock, P. (2024). The G oup o 77 and global dialogue in
he Uni ed Na ions Gene al Assembly (IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024). Bonn: Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen
and Sus ainabili y (IDOS). h ps://doi.o g/10.23661/idp13.2024
Disclaime :
The iews exp essed in his pape a e hose o he au ho (s) and do no necessa ily e lec he iews o policies
o he Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS).
Excep o he wise no ed, his publica ion is licensed unde C ea i e Commons A ibu ion (CC BY 4.0). You a e
ee o copy, communica e and adap his wo k, as long as you a ibu e he Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen
and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) gGmbH and he au ho (s).
IDOS Discussion Pape / Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) gGmbH
ISSN 2751-4439 (P in )
ISSN 2751-4447 (Online)
ISBN 978-3-96021-238-6 (P in )
DOI: h ps://doi.o g/10.23661/idp13.2024
© Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and Sus ainabili y (IDOS) gGmbH
Tulpen eld 6, 53113 Bonn
Email: publica ions@idos- esea ch.de
h ps://www.idos- esea ch.de
P in ed on eco- iendly, ce i ied pape .
The ins i u es o he Johannes-Rau-Fo schungsgemeinscha a e ins i u ionally unded by he s a e o NRW.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
III
Acknowledgemen s
Rela i ely li le is known abou he in e nal decision-making p ocess o he G oup o 77 and how
i a ec s global dialogue a he Uni ed Na ions. When we se ou on his esea ch p ojec wi h
he pu pose o con ibu ing o a be e unde s anding o No h-Sou h ela ions and a mo e
e ec i e UN mul ila e alism, i was ob ious ha such a p ojec needed o lead by example. I
needed o be a No h-Sou h collabo a ion i sel . The planning, equen exchanges and join
hough p ocess in he eam o au ho s – wo om he Ge man Ins i u e o De elopmen and
Sus ainabili y (IDOS), wo om Cepei, a hink ank based in Colombia – has been he highligh
o he s udy o us. None o us could ha e p oduced his publica ion alone.
We a e g a e ul o hose UN delega es om bo h sides, he G oup o 77 and he global No h,
who sha ed hei insigh s and expe iences wi h us. In e iews wi h a numbe o UN s a and
independen expe s, whom we assu ed con iden iali y, p o ided c ucial con ex ual in o ma ion.
Du ing he inal s ages o w i ing, Susan S. Ekoh, Daniel Esse , Sebas ian Haug, Heine Janus,
and S ephan Klingebiel p o ided aluable eedback on he manusc ip . We a e also g a e ul o
ou s uden assis an s o hei suppo wi h desk esea ch. Any emaining de ici s a e ou own
aul .
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
IV
Con en s
Acknowledgemen s 2
Execu i e summa y 1
1 In oduc ion 3
2 G owing an agonism a he Uni ed Na ions 5
2.1 Ai ing dissa is ac ion: G77 chai s in he Gene al Assembly 6
2.2 F us a ions and dys unc ionali ies: a global No h pe spec i e 8
2.3 The “ ax esolu ion”: o ing in e es s h ough 10
2.4 Summi o he Fu u e: s alema e and dispu es 12
2.5 Vo ing beha iou : a high deg ee o uni y main ained 13
3 The G77’s in e nal decision-making 19
3.1 S uc u e o he g oup 19
3.2 Consensus-based decision-making 21
3.3 The issue o diploma ic capaci y 24
3.4 Gene al Assembly nego ia ions 25
4 The s uggle o uni y in he ace o di e si y 27
4.1 Uni y in heo y: cen i ugal o ces and solida i y mechanisms 28
4.2 Uni y in p ac ice: ways o each a decision 30
4.2.1 Summi o he Fu u e: opposing subg oups and a case-by-case uni y 31
4.2.2 Gende : s alled p og ess amid opposing ac ions 33
4.2.3 Ci il socie y engagemen : unb idgeable di e si y 35
4.2.4 Tax esolu ion: bypass o a G77 posi ion 36
5 Powe and in luence wi hin and o e he g oup 37
5.1 The “ adicals”: small, bu in luen ial 37
5.2 China: de eloping coun y supe powe 40
5.3 BRICS: no a cohe en o ce 42
5.4 A ica: he co e o he global Sou h 43
5.5 Global No h: ex e nal in luence 44
6 Conclusions and ecommenda ions 45
6.1 Inclusi e decision-making 48
6.2 Focus on s a egic p io i ies 49
6.3 G ea e ne wo king 49
6.4 Capaci y o impac 50
Re e ences 51
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
V
Boxes
Box 1: Summa y o G77 posi ions, p esen ed in he same o de as in he Thi d Sou h
Summi ou come documen 7
Box 2: Decision-making a angemen s in o he UN g oups 23
Figu es
Figu e 1: G77 posi ions in he 2024 Sou h Summi ou come documen 10
Figu e 2: Resolu ions adop ed by o e 14
Figu e 3: G77-sponso ed and adop ed esolu ions by commi ee o o igin 15
Figu e 4: G77 membe s’ de ec ion a io 16
Figu e 5: Va ia ion in G77 membe s’ de ec ion a io 17
Figu e 6: Change in he sha e o global GDP 18
Figu e 7: In luence o G77’s BRICS membe s, Cuba, Egyp , and Pakis an 38
Figu e 8: Size o selec ed UN membe s a e missions in New Yo k 39
Tables
Table 1: Pas chai s o he G77 (New Yo k chap e ) 21
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
VI
Abb e ia ions
AI a i icial in elligence
BMZ Fede al Minis y o Economic Coope a ion and De elopmen (Ge many)
BRICS B azil, Russia, India, China, Sou h A ica
CANZ Canada, Aus alia, New Zealand
CSO ci il socie y o ganisa ion
ECOSOC Economic and Social Council (o he Uni ed Na ions)
EU Eu opean Union
FAO Food and Ag icul u e O ganiza ion o he Uni ed Na ions
G77 G oup o 77
GDP g oss domes ic p oduc
GIZ Deu sche Gesellscha ü In e na ionale Zusammena bei (GIZ) GmbH
IFI in e na ional inancial ins i u ion
LDC leas de eloped coun y
NAM Non-Aligned Mo emen
NGO non-go e nmen al o ganisa ion
OCA Ou Common Agenda
ODA o icial de elopmen assis ance
OECD O ganisa ion o Economic Co-ope a ion and De elopmen
QCPR Quad ennial Comp ehensi e Policy Re iew
SDG Sus ainable De elopmen Goal
UK Uni ed Kingdom
UN Uni ed Na ions
UNCTAD Uni ed Na ions T ade and De elopmen
US Uni ed S a es
WTO Wo ld T ade O ganiza ion
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
1
Execu i e summa y
This s udy examines he G oup o 77’s in e nal s uc u e, decision-making, and powe
dis ibu ion and how hese a e ac o s o he No h-Sou h dialogue a he Uni ed Na ions (UN),
he wo ld’s o emos mul ila e al o ganisa ion. The G77 comp omises 134 de eloping coun ies
and se es as a pla o m o he global Sou h a he UN. I plays an impo an ole in UN
mul ila e alism by agg ega ing and ep esen ing he in e es s o i s membe s is-à- is i s long-
s anding coun e pa , he global No h. In heo y, an inclusi e consensus-app oach can lead o
s ong G77 posi ions ha a e in e nally ep esen a i e o and well-g ounded in he in e es s o
he g oup, and ex e nally conduci e o s iking deals o global solu ions. Bu any o m o g oup
poli ics is also p one o sho comings, such as he dominance o speci ic mino i y in e es s, d i
owa ds he leas common denomina o , in lexibili y in nego ia ions, and heigh ened
con on a ion. I is agains his concep ual backg ound ha he s udy analyses he G77 and how
i ope a es, seeking o iden i y challenges and po en ials ega ding he ep esen a ion o global
Sou h in e es s in he UN and, by ex ension, a mo e e ec i e UN mul ila e alism in gene al.
The s udy s a s by p o iding a snapsho o No h-Sou h ela ions a he UN Gene al Assembly
(see Sec ion 2). Ac oss se e al a eas, a pic u e o inc easing an agonism and mu ual
us a ions eme ges. G77 coun ies a icula e di ec and asse i e c i icism o he global No h
and pe cei ed injus ices in he global sys em, in ways no hea d o a decade ago. Global No h
coun ies egis e inc easingly con on a ional diploma ic p ac ices by he global Sou h ha
challenge hei p edominan oles. Reaching a consensus seems o become mo e challenging.
The ax esolu ion p o ides a powe ul example o he global Sou h aking he ini ia i e and
dealing a isible de ea o he global No h. O he p ocesses, such as he Summi o he Fu u e,
we e ma ked by s alema e o e con lic ing in e es s. All his migh be symp oms o global
economic powe shi s in he ecen decade and a changing global discou se abou No h-Sou h
ela ions.
The ollowing sec ions o his s udy analyse decision-making in he G77 om di e en angles o
gauge he g oup’s ole in UN mul ila e alism. Sec ion 3 p o ides a desc ip i e analysis o he
g oup’s s uc u e and i s adi ional consensus-app oach, ocusing in pa icula on i s inclusi i y.
Decision-making in he G77 is essen ially a ma e o in-pe son consul a ions ha lead o g oup
posi ions, wi h li le anspa ency and accoun abili y owa ds he g oup in i s en i e y. This
app oach, which di e s om how he Eu opean Union (EU) ope a es, ensu es basic
ep esen a ion, bu bea s he isk o de iciencies such as he concen a ion o decision-making
in he hands o a ew membe s, he p oduc ion o iable and igid posi ions, and some imes
e a ic beha iou by some membe s. The lack o diploma ic capaci y in many G77 membe s a e
missions has a majo impac on he g oup’s decision-making, as i p e en s smalle membe s
om e ec i e pa icipa ion.
Sec ion 4 zooms in on he ension be ween uni y and di e si y in he g oup. Mo e han e e
be o e, he G77 is ma ked by cen i ugal o ces, as i now comp ises membe s a es om almos
all con en ional s a e ca ego ies in use oday. Wi h ecou se o he li e a u e, we iden i y h ee
mechanisms o solida i y ha can explain bo h he g oup’s con inued uni y, and limi s o i : i)
Thei common in e es in c ea ing an in e na ional en i onmen conduci e o hei na ional
de elopmen ; ii) con on a ion wi h he global No h as he main coun e pa ; and iii) p ac ices o
ecip ocal suppo . Tu ning, hen, o ou case s udies o ecen policy p ocesses (Summi o he
Fu u e; gende ; ci il socie y; ax esolu ion) we ind ha he g oup is no always able o each a
posi ion because o in e nal disag eemen s. When i does, he decision-making pa h owa ds a
common posi ion is o en an impe ec one in which ac ions o he g oup o e ide o e o
ele an posi ions, o e en bypass g oup p ocesses al oge he only o ely on he g oup’s
suppo when p oposals ge abled in he Gene al Assembly.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
8
2.2 F us a ions and dys unc ionali ies: a global No h
pe spec i e
The us a ion is mu ual. Delega es om global No h membe s a es ha e hei own s o y o
ell abou in e ac ions wi h he G77 and “ he y anny o nego ia ing in blocs” a he Gene al
Assembly (in e iew 9). The e appea s o be a b oadly sha ed eeling ha nego ia ion ac ics
ha e become ha she and mo e poli icised in ecen yea s. “We s opped lis ening o each o he ”,
as one delega e no ed (in e iew 2). Mi o ing he G77’s g owing dis us owa ds he global
No h, sou ces om he la e camp exp essed hei doub s abou he possibili y o app oaching
“ he o he side” wi h cons uc i e p oposals, be i o lack o iendly ecep ion o simply
because he g oup is p eoccupied wi h i sel (in e iew 14). Ei he way, us seems o ha e
hi a low poin , and con on a ional p ac ices appea o ha e become mo e pe asi e. A elling
example o he lack o us a e he con o e sies a ound he wa in Uk aine. Global No h
s a es pu ood secu i y on he agenda in he Rome-based UN o ganisa ions and demanded
om he global Sou h suppo o he condemna ion o Russia’s iola ion o he UN Cha e ,
assuming ha his would be in he in e es o de eloping coun ies; ye , in he end, he la e
ejec ed his ou each which hey saw as a geopoli ical mo e and unnecessa y poli icisa ion o
he UN’s de elopmen wo k, speaking mo e o Wes e n double s anda ds han o a since e
in e es in he UN’s no ms and mission (in e iews 21, 23).
G oup con on a ion also plays ou in sea ing a angemen s. In he Gene al Assembly’s Fi h
Commi ee which deals wi h budge a y ma e s – an a ea whe e he global No h’s “powe o he
pu se” is pi ed agains he global Sou h’s majo i y in o es – delega es om he same bloc si
oge he , opposi e hei global coun e pa s. Acco ding o one sou ce, e o s o change sea ing
a angemen s in ecen yea s had ailed due o he objec ion o he G77 ha pu s a high p emium
on uni y in he Fi h Commi ee (in e iews 3, 12). The Second Commi ee p esen s a mo e
elaxed pic u e no only om a sociological poin o iew, bu also wi h ega d o g oup uni y in
nego ia ions. Ye , e en he e, delega es eel he “ y anny o nego ia ion in blocs” and he lack o
us in he ace o diploma ic p ac ices hey conside coun e p oduc i e o he UN Cha e
manda e o “p omo ing in e na ional coope a ion in he economic, social, cul u al, educa ional,
and heal h ields” (UN Cha e , A . 13, 1).
A pa icula ly us a ing – and in he eyes o global No h delega es agg essi e – ac ic is wha
one sou ce desc ibed as “blun dele ions” o ag eed language in ze o d a s o annual
esolu ions by he G775 (in e iew 2). Fo example, he d a o he annual ECOSOC esolu ion
on he Quad ennial Comp ehensi e Policy Re iew (QCPR)6 was cu down o app oxima ely
25 pe cen in e ms o he wo d coun compa ed o he p edecesso in 2023; he numbe o
decisions we e educed om 23 o 4.7 Such “blun dele ions” may happen o a ious
easons. The G77 may do i o emo e con en ious posi ions ha complica e he in e nal
sea ch o consensus, o emo e poin s on which hey disag ee, o simply o coun e he
pa ag aph in la ion in UN esolu ions ha has become inc easingly unwieldy. Ei he way,
his p ac ice o s ipping down d a s hen igge s a ime-consuming nego ia ion p ocess o
eins a ing p e iously ag eed con en , es o ing he esolu ion o he p e ious yea ’s shape and
5 By con as , see subsec ion 5.5, “Global No h: ex e nal in luence” o mo e in o ma ion on ac ics used
by global No h coun ies when in e ac ing wi h he G77.
6 This is he ecu en policy p ocess h ough which he Gene al Assembly e iews and manda es he
wo k o he UN de elopmen pilla .
7 Resolu ion: “P og ess in he implemen a ion o Gene al Assembly esolu ion 75/233 on he
Quad ennial Comp ehensi e Policy Re iew o ope a ional ac i i ies o de elopmen o he Uni ed
Na ions sys em”.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
9
con en . In he end, bo h sides can claim he ic o y o ha ing success ully de ended he s a us
quo, while none o hem ha e made subs an ial p og ess. Some delega es o he global No h
see a end ha ze o d a s inc easingly all back behind he e sions om p e ious yea s
because o a mo e bellige en G77 (in e iews 2, 14).
Ano he us a ion el by global No h delega es is ha he G77 does no lis en o hem – ha
i does no ha e o, gi en ha i has he majo i y o o es equi ed o pass decisions8 o he
Gene al Assembly, and so “ hey push wha e e hey wan ” (in e iew 2). They eel ha he G77
can a o d o igno e hei submissions in nego ia ing p ocesses, hus unde mining he inclusi e-
ness o Gene al Assembly nego ia ions and in oducing an elemen o powe poli ics in o wha
should be, a leas o some ex en , policy-o ien ed delibe a ions (in e iew 2). While domina ing
he unding o he UN (Baumann & Haug, 2024) – a o m o in luence ha eaches a in o he
UN’s policies – global No h delega es eel hey a e on he de ensi e in he Gene al Assembly
(in e iew 1). (Howe e , i is wo h men ioning ha his sense o being powe less is also sha ed
by G77 membe s who unde s and ha a majo i y migh be good o pass a esolu ion, bu no o
ge i implemen ed – and global No h membe s a es can always discou age majo i y o es by
h ea ening o igno e esolu ions adop ed ha way).
Global No h delega es a e also us a ed abou he pe cei ed G77’s na ow ocus on inancial
gains. “The G77 applies he same solu ion o all p oblems: ‘mo e ODA’” (in e iew 28; also in
2, 14). D awing a pa allel o psychological pa ne he apy, one can see a ibu ions like “you
always do his and ha ” as sign o a dys unc ional ela ionship. Ye , he allega ion is no
en i ely baseless. I ma ches wi h he analysis o he G77’s o icial posi ions (see Figu e 1).
I we dis inguish ou ypes o posi ions ela ed o i) he g oup’s own policy commi men s; ii)
demands o be e ep esen a ion in global go e nance; iii) p oposals o new/ e o med
in e na ional egula ion; and i ) demands o No h-Sou h esou ce ans e s, hen he la e
accoun ed o 42 pe cen o he wo d coun in he Sou h Summi ou come documen o
2024. (This analysis aises u he ques ions, howe e : whe he global No h delega es “see”
ha he e a e o he G77 demands ha in i e collabo a i e in e na ional app oaches; and
whe he he G77 adequa ely a icula es hese o he p io i ies in he Gene al Assembly – he
ou come documen , o example, has a clea posi ion on gende , bu in he Gene al
Assembly, he G77 has been unable o ag ee on a posi ion on gende , as Sec ion 4 explains).
8 This applies o decisions on impo an issues such as ecommenda ions on peace and secu i y, he
elec ion o he non-pe manen membe s o he Secu i y Council and o he membe s o ECOSOC, he
admission o new membe s o he UN, he suspension o he igh s and p i ileges o membe s a es,
and budge a y ques ions equi e a wo- hi ds majo i y.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
10
Figu e 1: G77 posi ions in he 2024 Sou h Summi ou come documen
Sou ce: Au ho s, based on he Sou h Summi ou come documen (G77, 2024a). C ea ed wi h Da aw appe .
No es: The g aph displays he ela i e weigh o ou ypes o G77 posi ions in he 2024 Sou h Summi ou come documen
as measu ed by a wo d coun . Demands o No h Sou h- ans e s igu e p ominen ly on he G77’s o icial agenda, while
less space is gi en o p oposals o new/ e o med in e na ional egula ion, demands o be e ep esen a ion in global
go e nance and commi men s o he g oup i sel .
2.3 The “ ax esolu ion”: o ing in e es s h ough
As we u n o speci ic cases, he “ ax esolu ion” (UN, 2023i) adop ed in 2023 p o ides p obably
he mos powe ul illus a ion o he poin s discussed abo e and he new No h-Sou h eali y a
he UN. As a as we can ell, he e has been no esolu ion om he Second Commi ee in ecen
yea s ha made he expe communi y si up and ake no ice in he way he ax esolu ion did.
The ax esolu ion manda ed he s a o an in e go e nmen al p ocess owa ds a binding
in e na ional ax con en ion, which global No h s a es did no wan (in e iews 2, 7, 27). The
global Sou h and ci il socie y, howe e , celeb a ed i as “a his o ic ic o y deli e ed by coun ies
o he global Sou h” (Bou Mansou , 2023). Fo coun ies o he global No h, i signi ied a
d ama ic loss o con ol a he UN; a ailu e o hold hei “ ed lines”; and a depa u e om he
consensus p inciple (in e iews 14, 15). (While he UN Cha e p o ides o Gene al Assembly
decisions o be adop ed by o ing, i has become cus oma y p ac ice o adop decisions wi hou
a o e; o es a e hen only aken when no consensus can be achie ed). This esolu ion would
p obably no ha e been possible in p e ious yea s, and he ac ha i passed in 2023 indica es
an escala ion in he global Sou h’s willingness o asse i s in e es s.
The backg ound o he esolu ion is a decades-long s uggle owa ds gi ing he UN a g ea e
ole in in e na ional ax coope a ion. Su e ing huge losses h ough illici lows, in pa icula he
A ican coun ies had o yea s ad oca ed o upg ading he UN’s Tax Commi ee o an
in e go e nmen al body. Tax coope a ion has also been an ongoing issue in he Financing o
De elopmen p ocess. In hese p ocesses, global No h s a es had esis ed he call o an
e ec i e ole o he UN, a guing ha he issue be be e deal wi h in he O ganisa ion o
Economic Co-ope a ion and De elopmen (OECD) because o i s expe ise on ax issues.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
11
Al hough de eloping coun ies we e in ol ed in he OECD p ocess, hey el ha hey did no
ha e a meaning ul say in his global No h-domina ed g oup (UN, 2023b). The ax ag eemen
p e iously adop ed a he OECD in 2021 was c i icised as “insu icien ly inclusi e and ai ,
especially conce ning non-OECD membe coun ies” (Amnes y In e na ional, 2023; also in
Alonso, 2018). The ax issue can be seen as pa o a longe adi ion in e o s by global No h
s a es o keep economic and ade issues ou o UN o ums, a ba le hey ha e la gely won a e
ma ginalising UNCTAD (Uni ed Na ions T ade and De elopmen ) in he 1970s (Bou os-Ghali,
2006, pp. 5-8; Hogan & Pa ick, 2024; Toye, 2014).
I is hus his o ically signi ican ha , h ough he ax esolu ion, global Sou h coun ies elying on
hei majo i y o o es challenged he ma ginalisa ion o economic issues and o ced hem back
in o he UN. The esolu ion was sponso ed by Nige ia on behal o he g oup o A ican s a es.
I was adop ed by 125 o es in a ou wi h ou G77 coun ies abs aining (Cos a Rica, El
Sal ado , Pe u, Uni ed A ab Emi a es) and 10 no o ing (eigh small island s a es and wo
coun ies ha had los hei o ing igh s, A ghanis an and Venezuela), and was ejec ed by
i ually all global No h s a es, wi h abs en ions om No way and Iceland only. Al hough an
A ican p ojec , he en i e G77 membe ship suppo ed he esolu ion h ough o es and wo ds,
wi h bo h Asian and La in Ame ican membe s a es making s a emen s in suppo o i (UN,
2024b). Global No h delega es exp essed su p ise and shock a hei loss o con ol (in e iews
1, 6). Thei e o s be o e he o e o ha e he e e ence o a binding con en ion eplaced by
language on a non-binding “ amewo k” we e b ushed o by he global Sou h (Bou Mansou ,
2023). One delega e said he en i e p ocess le hem “blindsided and us a ed” (in e iew 1).
In he pas , global No h s a es ha e elied on he consensus app oach o s op o wa e down
impo an ini ia i es (in e iew 6). Global Sou h s a es pushing ahead and abling he esolu ion
o adop ion agains global No h esis ance signalled no only a dis up ion o consensus-based
decision-making (al hough echnically speaking he o e was eques ed by he Uni ed S a es
(US) which said i “could no join a consensus on he d a ” (UN, 2023g, p. 20)).9 I also es i ied
o a new willingness o pu he global No h on he spo . I emains open how global No h s a es
will engage wi h he policy p ocess igge ed by he esolu ion; ypically, majo i y o es a e
py hic ic o ies, which he sponso s likely knew and he US and global No h pa ne s p obably
delibe a ely wan ed in his case as he lesse e il. Bu no hing is su e in a c isis and, unde a
new global powe balance, majo i y o es migh no jus se e o shame he opponen o
unde mine a policy; hey migh ha e o be aken mo e se iously han be o e, because he
majo i y can also be a ac o in he implemen a ion p ocess. In he case o he ax esolu ion, i s
p oponen s may also p o e o be a signi ican o ce in he in e go e nmen al p ocess manda ed
by he esolu ion.
The de ea was pa icula ly pain ul o global No h s a es on he le el o public discou se as
shaped mainly by Wes e n media and non-go e nmen al o ganisa ions (NGOs). The public
discou se was la gely on he side o he global Sou h (in e iews 2, 7). Global No h s a es we e
pe cei ed as ha ing a weak in ellec ual case o hei de ensi e posi ion (in e iew 13), and hei
nego ia ing app oaches – epo ed a emp s o obs uc he p ocess, o “kill” p oposals, he
alleged lack o will o nego ia e in good ai h – became a ma e o be discussed in newspape s
(Financial Times, 2023). Pe haps wo se han losing a o e, global No h s a es hus el ha hey
no longe con olled he public discou se and he na a i es, which pos -colonial hinke s see as
he deepe sou ces o powe and domina ion. Commen ing on he esolu ion, one A ican s a e
explained ha A ica was i ed o he “na a i es o local go e nance and co up ion o explain
he p oblems hey aced” (UN, 2024b, p. 17).
9 Howe e , his eques came a e Nige ia had eques ed a o e on he Uni ed Kingdom (UK)
amendmen , hus essen ially o cing a o e on he esolu ion i sel .
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
12
2.4 Summi o he Fu u e: s alema e and dispu es
The Summi o he Fu u e p ocess, a guably he UN’s dominan opic in he pe iod 2022-2024,
p o ides ano he example o he exis ing discon en o he global Sou h owa ds he global No h,
al hough wi h an opposi e e ec : Had he ax esolu ion pu some hing in mo ion on an issue he
global Sou h wan ed, hen he Summi o he Fu u e demons a ed he cu en limi a ions o
global coope a ion on an issue signi ican pa s o he G77 did no wan . I sp ung om he Ou
Common Agenda p ocess in which he UN Sec e a y-Gene al p esen ed his ision o imp o ed,
mo e e icien and inclusi e mul ila e alism and measu es o inc ease he pa icipa ion and
ep esen a ion o he global Sou h in he UN’s global go e nance pla o ms (in e iew 9).
Howe e , aced wi h poli ical and p ocedu al di e ences, p epa a ions o and nego ia ions
a ound he Summi , o iginally bound o ake place in Sep embe 2023, became a enue whe e
he global Sou h’s demands we e me wi h he unwillingness o he global No h o commi o
meaning ul changes (in e iews 8, 9, 12, 13). The G77, and speci ically i s mo e “ adical”
membe s oge he wi h Russia, also con ibu ed o he s alema e (see Sec ions 4 and 5),
hanging on o igid posi ions and insis ing on ce ain p ac ices ( o example, nego ia ing
pa ag aph by pa ag aph behind closed doo s) which slowed down he al eady complex and
loaded p ocess (Beisheim, 2024).
The esul was a p o ac ed p ocess ha ell a behind he ini ial plans. The summi ul ima ely
had o be pos poned by one yea un il Sep embe 2024 a he eques o he G77 (Beisheim &
Weinlich, 2023; Lynch, 2023a). Addi ionally, in he i s hal o 2023, all p epa a ions o he e en
we e hal ed a he insis ence o he G77, u ging he UN and i s membe s a es o ocus on
de elopmen issues and he SDG (Sus ainable De elopmen Goal) Summi , ins ead o wo king
on ano he pa allel p ocess. G77 coun ies we e also a he pessimis ic abou he summi . They
doub ed ha i could lead o subs an i e and meaning ul e o ms o he exis ing sys em and deli e
on hei key in e es s (in e iews 8, 9, 12). The summi was seen as an ini ia i e d i en solely by
he Sec e a y-Gene al and in luenced by global No h- hinking. The global No h o i s pa ook
a de ensi e posi ion, no willing o gi e away con ol and o e ing mo e “cosme ic” changes
(in e iew 10; also in 11).
In e ms o policy, he summi p ocess e ealed p o ound global di e ences. Du ing consul a-
ions on he Summi and i s main ou come documen 10, he Pac o he Fu u e, he e o m o
he in e na ional inancial a chi ec u e became a majo con en ious issue. The e was a b oad
consensus among coun ies o he global Sou h ha hey equi ed inc eased pa icipa ion in he
in e na ional inancial ins i u ions and mo e a ailable unding o add ess hei clima e and deb
bu dens. Wi h g ea e sel -con idence in ecen yea s (Thaku , 2020, p. 307), bu also wi h
p essing s uggles linked o inc easing le els o deb , he G77 pu espec i e demands on he
able (see Passa elli & Jus ino, 2024; Gowan, 2024b) which we e ei he no ully aken in o
conside a ion by he global No h o no in a meaning ul way. While he gene al sen imen o he
global Sou h is ha e o ms will no ma e i he en i e mul ila e al sys em is no e o med
(in e iew 26), s a es o he global No h did no seem o be p epa ed o make meaning ul
concessions on Sou he n ep esen a ion, speci ically in global economic go e nance. Al hough
main aining he o icial na a i e abou a need o mo e ep esen a ion and a oice o he global
Sou h (in e iew 30; also, o ins ance, UN, 2022a, p. 25), global No h s a es acknowledged
ha hey did no wan o elinquish powe (in e iews 15, 25) and sough o keep he s a us quo:
“We ha e o show ha he cu en sys em is able o mee he needs – ha is ou momen o
u h” (in e iew 11).
10 The Global Digi al Compac and he Decla a ion o Fu u e Gene a ions we e adop ed as annexes.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
13
A he momen o w i ing, he second e ision o he Pac o he Fu u e d a was no e y
p omising. Despi e calls o “bolde ac ions” (Sou h A ica11), “mo e ope a ional and binding
language” (Egyp ), and “a pac o ac ions” a he han “a pac o good in en ions” (Came oon),
he second e ision has only inc eased in size and has allen sho o p o iding mo e conc e e
and ac ionable commi men s (Su asky, 2024). The eeling in New Yo k among delega es and
obse e s was ha , compa ed o 2015 when he 2030 Agenda was ag eed, no simila diploma ic
achie emen would be easible in he ace o inc eased ensions ha ha e o do wi h he b oade
poli ical si ua ion (which includes he wa in Gaza), accusa ions o double-s anda ds, and
un ul illed p omises (in e iews 8, 12, 13; Beisheim, 2024). One global No h sou ce no ed he
spi i o uni e sali y o he 2030 Agenda – an achie emen ha embodies he UN Cha e ’s “we
oge he ”, gi es meaning o he High-Le el Poli ical Fo um (a o um whe e all UN membe s a es
accoun o hei na ional sus ainable de elopmen e o s) and se es as he basis o sea ching
o common solu ions – seemed o ha e disappea ed, whe eas pa e ns o No h-Sou h
con on a ion a e being e i ed (in e iew 14).
2.5 Vo ing beha iou : a high deg ee o uni y main ained
A e he quali a i e insigh s p esen ed abo e, we now u n o a s a is ical analysis o o ing
beha iou a he Gene al Assembly. Vo ing is impo an o s udy because i p o ides a ela i ely
objec i e measu e o No h-Sou h an agonism a he UN, e en hough i can only cap u e a
speci ic dimension o a la ge phenomenon. An impo an s a ing poin is he obse a ion –
b ie ly no ed abo e – ha , as pe cus oma y p ac ice, mos Gene al Assembly esolu ions a e
adop ed by consensus, ha is, wi hou a o e. I is only in cases whe e membe s a es do no
achie e consensus on a d a esolu ion ha a o e may be eques ed (as was he case wi h he
ax esolu ion). Resolu ions a e hen adop ed by a simple majo i y o membe s “p esen and
o ing” (UN Cha e , A . 18, 3).12 F om his, we can de i e a p oxy o he deg ee o No h-Sou h
an agonism: The mo e di ided membe s a es a e, he mo e o es we can expec . We analysed
o ing since 2015, conside ing esolu ions om all i e Gene al Assembly commi ees.
As can be seen om Figu e 2, he numbe o o es climbed o a maximum o 110 in 2018/2019
( he 73 d egula session o he UN Gene al Assembly), be o e alling back o app oxima ely
whe e i was in 2015. The inc ease o 35 esolu ions decided by o ing compa ed o 2015/2016
appea s mode a ely signi ican . I ep esen s an inc ease o app oxima ely 10 pe cen gi en an
a e age o 321 esolu ions adop ed e e y yea .13 I also coincides wi h he eme gence o mo e
asse i e language a ound his ime, as no ed abo e. A pa ial explana ion, poin ing in he same
di ec ion, migh come om inc eased G77 ac i i y. I we ocus on he subse o esolu ions
sponso ed by he G77 i sel (depic ed in o ange), we also see an inc ease om 5 in 2015/2016
o 15 in 2018/2019, again ollowed by decline. This can only be a pa ial explana ion, hough, as
he 10 addi ional G77-sponso ed esolu ions canno ully accoun o he inc ease in he 35
esolu ions adop ed by o ing. Wha e e we can say abou he inc ease, he e also seems o
ha e been a no malisa ion in ecen yea s. A he ime o w i ing, i is no clea whe e he longe -
e m end is headed.
11 This, along wi h he ollowing e e ences o Egyp and Came oon, a e om he in o mal consul a ions
on he Summi o he Fu u e, 15 May 2024, a ailable a h ps://web .un.o g/en/asse /k1n/k1noa92u89
12 Excep o some ca ego ies o “impo an issues” such elec ions o membe s o he Secu i y Council
whe e a wo- hi d’s majo i y is equi ed (UN Cha e , A . 18, 2).
13 The o al numbe o esolu ions adop ed by consensus o by o ing each yea emains ela i ely
cons an a ound he a e age o 321 esolu ions pe Gene al Assembly session; he maximum (347)
was eached in 2018/2019, he minimum (305) in 2015/2016.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
14
Figu e 2: Resolu ions adop ed by o e
Sou ce: Au ho s’ calcula ions, based on UN Digi al Lib a y in o ma ion. C ea ed wi h Da aw appe .
No es: The columns show he numbe o UN Gene al Assembly esolu ions adop ed by o ing based on egula
sessions o he Gene al Assembly. The o ange segmen s show he numbe o esolu ions ha ha e been sponso ed
by he G77 and adop ed by o ing ( he o e all numbe o G77-sponso ed esolu ions is bigge ). The da a sugges s a
mode a ely signi ican , bu empo a y, ise in No h-Sou h an agonism, as a as o ing is conce ned.
Ou analysis comp ises esolu ions om all i e Commi ees, as no ed abo e. When we
disagg ega e G77-sponso ed esolu ions by he commi ee o o igin,14 we ind ha mos o hem
come om he Second Commi ee, which ep esen s he G77’s main a ea o in luence in he
Gene al Assembly (see Figu e 3). This indica es ha he No h-Sou h an agonism does indeed
play ou in mainly he economic and inancial ield and is no d i en by human igh s o secu i y
issues.
14 The commi ees a e o ganised hema ically: he Fi s Commi ee discusses disa mamen and in e -
na ional secu i y a ai s; he Second, economic and inancial a ai s; he Thi d, social, humani a ian,
and cul u al a ai s; he Fou h, special poli ical and decolonisa ion a ai s; and he Fi h, adminis a i e
and budge a y a ai s.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
15
Figu e 3: G77-sponso ed and adop ed esolu ions by commi ee o o igin
Sou ce: Au ho s’ calcula ions, based on UN Digi al Lib a y in o ma ion. C ea ed wi h Da aw appe .
No es: G77-sponso ed esolu ions acco ding o he Gene al Assembly commi ee om whe e hey o igina e. A small
numbe o esolu ions was di ec ly p esen ed o he Gene al Assembly plena y ( ep esen ed in g ey). This analysis
con i ms ha he No h-Sou h an agonism cen es on economic and inancial issues, he ealm o bo h he G77 and
he second commi ee.
Vo ing da a also allow us o analyse he uni y o he G77, which is ano he p oxy o No h-Sou h
an agonism. A mo e uni ed G77 will gene ally mean a highe deg ee o pola isa ion. To measu e
he g oup’s uni y, we look a he “de ec ion a io”, a concep sugges ed by Iida (1988). Bo h
agains - o es and abs en ions15 a e coun ed as de ec ions om he g oup posi ion. The
calcula ion o he de ec ion a io is simple: Following Iida (1988, p. 377), he o al numbe o
de ec ions in he Gene al Assembly is coun ed o a gi en session and hen di ided by he
numbe o esolu ions adop ed by o ing and he numbe o G77 membe s p esen in he
Gene al Assembly. Mul iplying by 100 gi es he pe cen age. We only conside adop ed
esolu ions, bu no o es on amendmen s and esolu ions ha did no ecei e a majo i y. An
objec ion migh be ha , in his model, de ec ions a e measu ed no agains he G77 posi ion
(which s ic ly speaking canno be known om o ing da a) bu agains he esolu ion i sel .
Howe e , he wo scena ios a e ypically he same, excep o he a e ci cums ance whe e a
mino i y o he g oup o es wi h global No h s a es agains a G77 posi ion (see subsec ion 4.2.2
o such a case). In gene al, he G77 wins o es ( he ques ion is only: wi h wha ma gin?), and
i a esolu ion has no p ospec o ge ing passed, a o e would gene ally no be eques ed in he
i s place by ei he he G77 o global No h membe s.
15 Abs en ions can ha e di e en causes: They can be a way o a oiding a poli ically incon enien
agains - o e, bu hey can also esul om a lack o guidance om capi al o capaci y (and he inabili y
o adop an in o med posi ion). Following Iida, we did no include absences in he calcula ion o he
de ec ion a io. Membe s a es may s ay absen o he same easons hey abs ain, bu gene ally he
inabili y o pa icipa e will play a bigge ole han poli ical conside a ions.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
16
Figu e 4: G77 membe s’ de ec ion a io
Sou ce: Au ho s’ calcula ions, based on UN Digi al Lib a y in o ma ion. C ea ed wi h Da aw appe .
No es: De ec ion a io o he G77 in Gene al Assembly esolu ions, based on he me hodology o Iida (1988). The
lowe he de ec ion a io, he highe he g oup uni y. On a e age, only 10 pe cen o he G77 de ec om he p esumed
g oup posi ion ( ed line). The de ec ion a io d ops o app oxima ely 3 pe cen when only G77-sponso ed esolu ions
a e conside ed (g ey line).
As we can see om Figu e 4, he e has been a ai ly consis en deg ee o g oup uni y o e he
las decade. The a e age de ec ion a io is app oxima ely 10 pe cen when we conside all he
esolu ions o ed on, and 3 pe cen when e e ing only o G77-sponso ed esolu ions o ed on
in he Gene al Assembly. I is no su p ising ha , when he g oup sponso s a esolu ion, i is
mo e uni ed in e ms o i s o ing beha iou . The e is no signi ican end in he de ec ion a io,
meaning ha s a es o he global No h aced a ai ly uni ed G77 when i came o o ing. I would
be di icul o explain his uni y i no h ough he e ec o g oup poli ics. While he ups and downs
a e small compa ed o he o e all le el o uni y, i is no ewo hy ha he yea wi h he lowes
de ec ion a io (2019/2020, o he 74 h session) was also he one in which he g oup sponso ed
he mos esolu ions (see Figu e 3). Tha pa icula yea coincided wi h he s a o he COVID-
19 pandemic and he discussions on global access o accines and medical ea men s. This
poin s o an obse a ion made by a G77 delega e ha global c isis ends o s eng hen he G77’s
uni y (in e iew 8).
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
17
Figu e 5: Va ia ion in G77 membe s’ de ec ion a io
Sou ce: Au ho s’ calcula ions, based on he UN Digi al Lib a y in o ma ion. C ea ed wi h Da aw appe .
No es: The g aph shows he numbe o esolu ions pe session ha we e adop ed wi h high, medium and low G77
uni y (de ined h ough de ec ion a ios below 5 pe cen , be ween 5 and 10 pe cen , and abo e 10 pe cen ). The
scou ge o high-uni y esolu ions in 2018/2019 is no able, as is he e e sal in 2022/2023.
We can add u he nuance o his analysis by zooming in on he de ec ion a io. We dis inguish
h ee ca ego ies o esolu ions based on de ec ion a ios below 5 pe cen , om 5 o 10 pe cen ,
and abo e 10 pe cen . This co esponds o esolu ions on which he G77 can be said, based
on he 10 pe cen a e age de ec ion a io, o display compa a i ely high, a e age and low uni y.
As Figu e 5 shows, he e is a signi ican inc ease in high-uni y esolu ions ha wen up in
2018/2019 bu ha e been on he decline since, and in pa icula du ing 2022/2023, he las
Gene al Assembly session co e ed by ou analysis. Complemen a y o ha , low-uni y
esolu ions ha e been ela i ely ew o e he las decade bu ose sha ply in 2022/2023 –
howe e , i is oo ea ly o see i his indica es a pe manen end. O e all, he end so a
con i ms he “ ise and all” pa e n o No h-Sou h an agonism no ed in he s a is ical analysis
abo e. A ull explana ion o his o ing pa e n is beyond he capaci y o his s udy. The swelling
and ebbing o global c ises migh play a ole, as no ed abo e, bu also in a-g oup dynamics
ela ed o he leade ship o G77 chai s (see Sec ion 3). The main ake-away om he en i e
o ing analysis is ha he G77 con inues o show a consis en ly high deg ee o uni y when i
comes o o ing. This speaks o he No h-Sou h an agonism in he UN Gene al Assembly.
In e im conclusion
The analysis in his sec ion shows ha No h-Sou h ela ions ha e become mo e augh in
ecen yea s, and o a conce ning deg ee. T us is a a low poin and us a ion a a high poin ,
on bo h sides. Global No h delega es eel he G77 does no lis en and is no a ailable as a
pa ne o cons uc i e p oblem-sol ing. G77 membe s a es ad ance iden ical claims abou
he global No h. While one could dismiss hese issues as una oidable ea u es in he sea ch
o consensus among he UN’s 193 so e eign membe s a es, he analysis we p o ided
indica es ha he global dialogue has wo sened in ecen yea s o a poin o signi ican
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
24
3.3 The issue o diploma ic capaci y
Ano he ac o es ic ing equal ep esen a ion in he G77 is he limi ed diploma ic capaci y o
Pe manen Missions in New Yo k. “The issue o bandwid h is eal”, as one close obse e no ed
(in e iew 13; also in 27). Al hough i a ec s all Pe manen Missions, including global No h
coun ies, he p oblem o insu icien s a numbe s is pa icula ly acu e o many de eloping
coun ies. Fo hem, i can mean losing hei abili y o pa icipa e in he G77’s decision-making.
The demand o diploma ic capaci y appea s s agge ing. A delega e om a small de eloping
coun y explained ha i would ake 50 pe cen o he weekly wo k ime simply o si in all egula
G77 coo dina ion mee ings (in e iew 12), and hen he e a e mee ings a ound nego ia ions ha
can un la e in o he nigh and in o weekends. Wi h so much ime being abso bed by mee ings,
delega es ha e li le capaci y le o imme se hemsel es in subs an ial issues. Thei capi al will
also o en no p o ide suppo o hem. The Summi o he Fu u e p ocess, wi h i s se ies o
leng hy epo s issued by he Sec e a ia , p esen ed a pa icula challenge (no only) o smalle
missions – he e simply was no ime o diges all his in o ma ion.
This has implica ions. Lack o capaci y ansla es in o exclusion and e o m-a e seness in all
UN- ela ed ma e s. Some delega es may eel ha a ce ain ma e has ele ancy o hei
coun y, and ye hey canno engage. “I can’ a gue wi h G77 colleagues on a i icial in elligence,”
one G77 delega e allegedly complained, because he had nei he ecei ed a se posi ion om
his capi al no had a sound analysis on his opic (in e iew 27). Ye , a i icial in elligence is a
p ime example o a policy issue ha a ec s all coun ies and whe e in pa icula smalle ones
should ha e an in e es in ules ha a e no dic a ed exclusi ely by he leading economies
(in e iew 27). Obse e s o UN p ocesses see a la ge pa e n in how a simple lack o capaci y
ends up ha ing an ou sized impac on g oup posi ions, and ha dynamic was on display du ing
he Summi o he Fu u e p epa a ions in 2023 and 2024: unable o ully analyse an issue,
de eloping coun ies allegedly “au oma ically” de aul ed owa ds es ablished concep s,
opposing e o m e en when, in he opinion o pundi s, a p oposed e o m should ha e been in
hei in e es (in e iew 3). O hey e ec i ely ga e up engaging wi h he G77 (in e iew 2),
lea ing decision-making o hose membe s a es ha had mo e capaci y o engage. Fo su e,
some G77 membe s will simply us he G77 o ep esen hei in e es s, bu o o he s, hei
absence om he p ocess is no olun a y and hey do eel hei inabili y o ha e hei in e es s
ep esen ed agains opposing iews and/o mo e in luen ial membe s (in e iew 9, 12). Du ing
he Summi o he Fu u e p ocess, i appea ed ha a ela i ely small in-g oup de ined he G77’s
hesi an posi ion in he ea ly o ma i e s age while, behind he scenes, se e al coun ies old
people in he Sec e a ia and global No h delega es ha hey had a much mo e open a i ude
owa ds he Summi o he Fu u e p ocess (in e iew 9).21
The e ha e been a emp s o suppo smalle coun ies. On speci ic issues, coali ions o small
de eloping coun ies, hink anks o NGOs and global No h membe s a es ha e closely wo ked
oge he . Th ough such o ms o coope a ion, de eloping coun ies bene i om he expe ise o
(global No h) hink anks and diploma ic suppo om global No h membe s a es. E en small
o ms o suppo , such as dispa ching in e ns om New Yo k-based uni e si ies o small missions,
can gi e hese missions he capaci y o moni o nego ia ions and s ay in o med (in e iew 27).
These uncon en ional o ms o No h-Sou h coope a ion may no be p ac ical o all hema ic a eas
– on some issues, he in e es s o small coun ies may no su icien ly o e lap wi h global No h
in e es s o ha e a p oduc i e collabo a ion a he le el o s a es (bu he e will always be hink
anks and NGOs a guing o he global Sou h’s in e es s). Ne e heless, hese examples speak o
he po en ial bene i o wo king ac oss g oup-di isions and oge he wi h non-s a e ac o s.
21 Global No h membe s a es also s uggle wi h capaci y issues bu seem o ha e g ea e us ha he
Sec e a y-Gene al, whom by de aul hey gene ally suppo , s ee s he p ocess in he igh di ec ion
policy-wise (wi h he excep ion o in e na ional inancial ins i u ional e o m).
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
25
3.4 Gene al Assembly nego ia ions
The p oduc ion o posi ions canno be iewed en i ely sepa a ely om nego ia ions a he le el
o he Gene al Assembly. The e a e usually se e al ounds o nego ia ions, du ing and in
be ween which he g oups ha e o adjus hei posi ions. The in e play o wo consensus-based
sys ems – he G77 and he Gene al Assembly – seems o lead o a po en ia ion o di icul ies,
and i can also p oduce i s own sho comings. Wi h se e al dozens o esolu ions o be
nego ia ed e e y yea , he chai canno always ep esen he g oup i sel . O en, i needs o ely
on bu den-sha e s om he g oup. The se -up o nego ia ions is hus ha he G77, acili a ed
by he chai , selec s a delega e om i s anks o be he (in e nal) coo dina o and nego ia o o
a speci ic p ocess. Acco ding o one sou ce om he G77, he e is no mechanism o appoin ing
nego ia o s; “whoe e olun ee s” because o an in e es in he opic will ge he job (in e iew
5). O he membe s o he G77, and in pa icula a delega e om he mission ha holds he chai ,
migh be p esen in nego ia ions bu will ypically no engage (in e iew 14). Apa om he G77
nego ia o s, he e a e nego ia o s om he EU, Canada, Aus alia, New Zealand ( e e ed o as
“CANZ”), he UK, and he US aking pa in Gene al Assembly nego ia ions.
Two issues came up in ou in e iews ega ding he G77’s ole in Gene al Assembly nego-
ia ions: he igidi y o he G77 posi ions, and conce ns abou he impe ec ep esen a ion o
g oup in e es s. The i s is almos a logical implica ion o di icul in e nal decision-making
p ocesses: once posi ions a e ag eed h ough a long and o uous p ocess, he e is a high
p emium placed on de ending hem in nego ia ions. F om wha we hea d, G77 nego ia o s do
no ha e au ho ised all-back posi ions, o ma gins o comp omise (in e iew 11). The in lexi-
bili y o G77 nego ia o s appea s o be one o he majo ac o s in ende ing Gene al Assembly
nego ia ions p o ac ed and us a ing p ocesses. I i ks global No h pa ne s ha he G77 is
qui e “ igid”, placing a high emphasis on e aining ag eed language (in e iew 1). Acco ding o
ou sou ces, nego ia ions hen equen ly each a poin whe e he G77 nego ia o needs o go
back o he g oup o ge comp omises app o ed, igge ing ano he ound o (o en leng hy)
in e nal coo dina ion. Du ing he nego ia ions on he poli ical decla a ion o he SDG Summi in
2023, he g oup appa en ly nego ia ed un il ou in he mo ning (in e iew 7). Bo h global No h
and G77 delega es poin ed ou ha G77 nego ia o s o en ind hemsel es in a e y igh spo ,
whe e hey ha e “a ha sh ime asking o changes” in he g oup which – because o he di e si y
o in e es s – comes wi h a s ong s a us-quo o ien a ion (in e iew 2; also in 1). In con as o
he G77, EU nego ia o s ha e posi ions ha always include a ma gin o comp omise, gi ing
hem mo e lexibili y (in e iew 11).
Howe e , he issue is p obably no unique o he G77, and some con ex is in o de . Acco ding
o Swa and Lund (2011, p. 126), G77 delega es ha e in he pas also complained ha global
No h s a es dispa ch ela i ely young and unexpe ienced delega es o UN nego ia ions who do
no ha e he g a i as equi ed o s ike a comp omise and sell i o hei g oup and/o capi al.
The igidi y o G77 posi ions, and hei impac on decision-making in he Gene al Assembly, is
hus jus one piece in a la ge puzzle ha also includes he cons an expansion o policies
discussed in he Gene al Assembly, he capaci y his g owing diploma ic agenda equi es, and
he consequen inabili y o any membe s a es o pa icipa e in all o hese p ocesses a
adequa e senio i y.
The o he conce n goes back o he ep esen a ional de ici s o he g oup and he space his
opens up o na ional in e es s. This is a ma e ha is no en i ely clea -cu , and we s a he
discussion by ci ing global No h pe spec i es. A equen allega ion made by he global No h
is ha G77 nego ia o s in use g oup posi ions wi h na ional in e es s, o en wi h he esul o
unduly p io i ising con o e sial geopoli ical issues o e mo e genuine, de elopmen - ela ed
in e es s (in e iews 15, 23). Cuba, in pa icula , was accused o mixing na ional in e es s
(speci ically: he issue o “coe ci e mul ila e al measu es”, UN pa lance o sanc ions) wi h g oup
in e es s (in e iews 1, 2, 7, 9, 11, 12, 23). Wi h such alleged ep esen a ional de ici s, i was no
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
26
los on global No h delega es ha he g oup’s posi ions we e o en “mo e agile han i migh
seem” (in e iew 15), some hing ha also seems o be e lec ed in he G77’s de ec ion a ios
when i comes o o ing (see Sec ion 2). In one ins ance om he o ma i e phase o he
p epa a o y p ocess o he Summi o he Fu u e, he chai (Cuba) eques ed a s op o he
consul a ions by sending a le e o he co- acili a o s – allegedly, no e en he Namibian co-
acili a o , a membe o he G77, had been in o med, while behind he scenes o he G77
delega es c i icised ha beha iou o people in he Sec e a ia and global No h colleagues
(in e iews 9, 10, 16). Ano he case comes om Rome: In an elec ion ma e , which was abou
he chai posi ion o he FAO (Food and Ag icul u e O ganiza ion o he Uni ed Na ions)’s
Commi ee on Cons i u ional and Legal Ma e s, he chai o he G77 chap e in Rome ad anced
a candidacy om Venezuela bu , when a global No h coun y eques ed a o e, i u ned ou
ha he G77 did no suppo he G77’s o icial candida e (in e iews 16, 22, 30). Ano he sou ce
sha ed an anecdo e whe e she ound a posi ion ad anced by he G77 nego ia o so a o om
wha she assumed o be he g oup’s posi ion ha she called o he G77 membe s in o he oom
o p o ide some balance (in e iew 2).
I such impe ec ions esul in weak G77 posi ions ha global No h membe s may a emp o
b eak, hey can also esul in missed oppo uni ies o inding common g ound. Ano he a ia ion
o he conce n abou he ai h ul ep esen a ion o in e es s pe ains o how delega es ep esen ,
o do no ep esen , hei na ional in e es s. Global No h delega es and obse e s sha ed
expe iences o how a G77 membe s a e di e ged d as ically om wha hey hough hey knew
abou na ional policies o he G77 membe s (in e iew 2, 14, 25; see also Swa & Lund 2011,
p. 123). Tha allega ion is di icul o p o e (s a emen s ake place in in o mal se ings). Ye , ou
sou ces said hey we e “absolu ely su e” abou inciden s in which G77 delega es di e ged om
wha hey (ou sou ces) hea d a minis e o go e nmen documen exp ess a hei capi al
(in e iews 25, 27). One sou ce also no ed ha she some imes could no make sense o why
ce ain posi ions had been adop ed, no ing ha policies o a membe s a e could change apidly
as he espec i e ep esen a i es assumed o le hei posi ions in New Yo k (while he
go e nmen i sel emained he same) (in e iew 27). The assump ion behind hese obse a-
ions is ha he eal in e es s be ween global No h and de eloping coun ies a e o en pe cei ed
o be much close han hey appea unde he in luence o g oup poli ics, whe e membe s o he
g oup can hide behind g oup posi ions. Fo global No h membe s, all ha speaks o he no ion
o a diploma ic bubble in New Yo k ha ope a es wi h insu icien accoun abili y and gene a es
e a ic beha iou .
Fo con ex , he e a e di e en deg ees in how delega es a e connec ed o capi als.22 Some
pe manen missions ecei e ins uc ions on all ele an ma e s om hei capi als. Wi h o he s,
i is a ma e o pe sonali ies and hei expe ise whe e he cen e o g a i y in decision-making
se les. Finally, he e a e he pe manen missions o small coun ies which do no ha e he
capaci y o suppo hei missions in New Yo k in he same way ha global No h membe s a es
do. Ou sou ces also poin ed o speci ic explana ions ha illus a e he di icul posi ions a G77
delega e migh occupy a he UN. In Rome, i was sugges ed ha FAO managemen held a
conside able sway o e delega es om he global Sou h. The FAO leade ship was appa en ly
no shy o “ epo ” an incon enien delega e o he capi al, leading o ha pe son’s demission
and e u n o he capi al, o o ewa d delega es, and hei coun ies o ha ma e , wi h an FAO
de elopmen p ojec (in e iew 35). Delega es may also censo hemsel es as hey seek jobs
wi h he UN, hus pu ing hei pe sonal in e es o e he in e es o hei coun y. Thi d, he en i e
p ocess o gi e and ake, on which g oup uni y depends, migh lead o shi s in posi ions. I is
pa and pa cel o g oup poli ics ha membe s de end hei collec i e in e es s e en in cases
whe e i di e ges om he na ional in e es . I would make he coo dina ion o he g oup much
mo e di icul i all G77 delega es only ac ed on speci ic ins uc ions om hei capi als (Swa &
Lund 2011, p. 16).
22 This sec ion is pa ly based on p e ious ield esea ch (Baumann, 2018).
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
27
In he pas , s a es om he global No h ha e eached ou o de eloping coun y capi als in o de
o bypass “loose” delega es in New Yo k o o y o in luence hese capi als as a way o shaking
up igid G77 posi ions. Swa and Lund epo an inciden in 2009 in which he EU eached ou
o capi als o e nego ia ions on he me hodology o he egula budge because i hough he
G77 was “pa icula ly in lexible on his issue”. Howe e , his ini ia i e appa en ly “caused a g ea
deal o ange among hose Missions conce ned” (Swa & Lund, 2011, p. 13). Ano he emedy
can be o eques o ing, on he assump ion ha delega es – hen subjec o sc u iny by he
public and hei capi al – ha e o align wi h na ional in e es s o , whe e p ocesses in o he
egional G77 chap e s a e conce ned, wi h posi ions aken in New Yo k (in e iew 16).
In e im conclusion
The challenge o adop ing common posi ions in a g oup o 134 so e eign membe s a es should
no be unde es ima ed. The way he G77’s consensus app oach ope a es – in o mal, ad hoc
coo dina ion wi h limi ed pa icipa ion om g oup membe s – ensu es a somewha p ac ical
app oach o his challenge. No e e y G77 membe has o engage ully on e e y opic, and ha
al eady is a big asse . The ic ion in ol ed in he decision-making p ocess sugges s ha basic
ep esen a ion wo ks. Ye , one canno simply dismiss he impe ec ions o he g oup’s decision-
making p ocess as una oidable o e en desi able. Fo many G77 membe s, hei lack o di ec
in ol emen in he g oup’s decision-making p ocess e lec s no so much a us ha hings wo k
ou in hei way, as an inabili y o pa icipa e in a mo e subs an ial manne . The impe ec ions
a e also no jus he esul o he complexi ies o decision-making in a la ge g oup, bu o some
ex en hey esul om o ganisa ional a angemen s ha one o ou sou ces om wi hin he
g oup cha ac e ised as “medie al” (in e iew 12), because hey pu oo many demands on
membe s a es’ diploma ic capaci ies. The sys em migh ha e wo ked well when he g oup was
much smalle bu appea s da ed now. The implica ions a e a - eaching. The g oup’s
ep esen a ional impe ec ions can unde mine i s c edibili y and legi imacy in he eyes o he
G77’s coun e pa s, and hey also make he g oup p one o a kind o igidi y ha a bes
s eng hens i s nego ia ion posi ion bu may also be de imen al o he abili y o he Gene al
Assembly o ind common solu ions o common p oblems. I hus unde mines hose asse s o
g oup poli ics needed o manage he ising ensions desc ibed in he p e ious sec ion.
4 The s uggle o uni y in he ace o di e si y
Ea ly documen s o he G77 celeb a e he g oup’s uni y and he sense o hope and solida i y i
con eyed. In ac , he G77 eme ged ou o he expe ience o uni y du ing he i s UNCTAD
con e ence in he 1960s, a uni y o ged by he “common in e es in a new policy o in e na ional
ade and de elopmen ” (G77, 1964, pa a 5). In ecen decades, he p omise o s eng h h ough
uni y has become mo e di icul . The g oup has g own o 134 membe s, and his expansion in
membe ship along wi h une en economic and global de elopmen s has exposed he g oup o
new cen i ugal o ces. Some obse e s ha e poin ed o he possibili y o disin eg a ion o he
G77 in he ace o unmanageable di e si y (Puchala e al., 2007, p. 103). Ye , he g oup s ill
exis s, and no only on pape . I has held i s membe ship (only i e coun ies ha e le he G77
since he 1990s23) and shapes UN discou ses and policy p ocesses, as Sec ion 2 has made
clea . Hence, we u n ou a en ion o he ac o s ha hold he g oup oge he and examine how
he g oup econciles di e ging in e es s – o ails o do so. We p o ide a concep ual accoun o
23 Mexico (1994) and Sou h Ko ea (1997) when hey joined he OECD; Mal a, Cyp us (2004) and
Romania (2007) when hey joined he EU. Palau was b ie ly a G77 membe om 2002 o 2004. OECD
membe ship does no au oma ically e mina e G77 membe ship. Chile, Colombia and Cos a Rica a e
bo h G77 and OECD membe s.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
28
g oup uni y and i s limi a ions, be o e iden i ying ou p ac ical a enues o how he G77 eaches
decisions. Fou empi ical cases hen demons a e how hese a enues may play ou in p ac ice.
4.1 Uni y in heo y: cen i ugal o ces and solida i y
mechanisms
To illus a e he di e si y o he G77 in he 21s cen u y, i may be use ul o compa e i o he
EU. The EU comp ises 27 membe s a es and, despi e s a k di e ences in size, hese coun ies
a e all high-income coun ies, ma ke economies, and democ acies (some wi h de ici s). Mos
impo an ly, hey a e uni ed in an in e na ional o ganisa ion ha has sup ana ional elemen s and
s ong no ma i e ounda ions and ha de ines hei posi ion in he wo ld. Compa ed o ha , uni y
is a daun ing a ai o he G77. I s 134 membe s di e on e e y s a e ca ego y and me ics in
use oday: coun y income (low, medium, high); geog aphic posi ion (landlocked o no );
geopoli ical inclina ion (Wes e sus Eas ); go e nmen sys em (au oc acy e sus democ acy);
poli ical s abili y (peace ul e sus con lic - idden); deb si ua ion; clima e-a ec edness, and so
on. On many o he issues, he di e gence has inc eased in ecen yea s. In e ms o po e y,
o example, pe sis en po e y in he leas de eloped coun ies co-exis s wi h eme ging
economies wi h solid middle classes (Kha as, 2023; UN, 2023h). An au oc a ic backlash in
ecen yea s has accen ua ed he aul line wi h democ acies (Ca o he s & P ess, 2022;
F eedom House, 2022). The BRICS expansion in 2023 e ealed ensions be ween a g oup
a ound China and Russia ha emb ace an i-Wes e n s ances, whe eas o he s, like Sou h A ica,
India, and B azil, a e keen o simply s eng hen hei independence (Ashby e al., 2023; Ga cia-
He e o, 2024; G imm, 2023).
F om p e ious analysis on he G77, we know ha a emp s o analyse he G77’s o e all cou se
in e ms o any o hese aul lines a e u ile (Lees, 2021; Swa & Lund, 2011). The g oup is no
an i-democ a ic pe se and, gi en he economic di e si y i con ains, one would oday no longe
desc ibe he G77 as “a kind o ade union o he poo ” as global Sou h leade Julius Nye e e
did in he 1970s (Sau an , 1981, p. 9), e en hough demands o No h-Sou h- ans e s emain
a p io i y (Vihma e al., 2011, p. 317; see Sec ion 2). On each opic ha comes on he agenda
in he UN, a di e en combina ion o in a-g oup aul lines will eme ge. Some o hese aul lines
a e e lec ed in he eme gence o in o mal subg oups in he Gene al Assembly, gi ing ise o
he phenomenon o “g oup poli ics” (Fa ell, 2017; Laa ikainen, 2017). These subg oups include,
o example, he longs anding Small Island De eloping S a es G oup; he mo e ecen ly ounded
G oup o F iends in De ense o he Cha e o he UN;24 o he A ican G oup (as an example o
a egional g oup). These g oups ep esen o ms o coali ion-building and pe o m ce ain
unc ions ha a e simila o hose o he G77, which is he la ges among hem: hey a e spaces
o in o ma ion-sha ing, o b oke ing posi ions, and ac as pla o ms o ad ance common
in e es s and isibili y a he UN (Laa ikainen, 2017, p. 133). Ha ing a smalle membe ship can
make hese unc ions easie o ealise, and he subg oups mo e e ec i e.
Unsu p isingly, he eme gence o subg oups was ci ed as a angible h ea o G77 uni y by ou
sou ces (in e iews 7, 20, 25, 27, 29). A o me G77 chai no ed hei “ endency o b eak away”
om he g oup, complica ing he sea ch o consensus (in e iew 8). Subg oups can be a
pla o m o build alliances wi h global No h s a es on speci ic opics (in e iew 3). Some g oups
a e known o ep esen opposing in e es s – o example he Small S a es G oup, which has an
in e es in e ec i e mul ila e alism, and he g oup F iends o he Cha e wi h i s ocus on
so e eign y and non-in e en ion (in e iew 18). As subg oups g ow along wi h di e si y in he
G77, hey can lead o a mo e agmen ed and less ele an g oup simila o he G77 chap e in
Rome, whe e egional g oups a e much s onge , and whe e, acco ding o se e al sou ces,
24 This g oup eme ged in 2021 and has i s own websi e h ps://www.go -uncha e .o g/
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
29
“nobody om he global Sou h wan s o be ep esen ed by ano he G77 coun y” (in e iew 22;
also in 20, 21). Ye , he eme gence o subg oups also holds a po en ial o a mo e ib an and
inclusi e G77, in which subg oups s eng hen he oice and ep esen a ion o mino i ies while
no necessa ily unde mining he g oup’s uni y. In ac , he o ing analysis does no show a
decline in uni y o e he las decade. Ra he , i emains consis en ly high (see Sec ion 2).
This equi es a en ion o wha uni es he g oup. Gene ally, he p inciple o any alliance is ha ,
oge he , membe s a es can be mo e e ec i e in he pu sui o hei common in e es agains
ex e nal ac o s han i membe s ac alone. Ye , he g owing di e si y in he g oup and he
eme gence o ela i ely s ong ac o s (such as China and o he egional leade s) sugges s he
need o a mo e di e en ia ed accoun o solida i y. Based on he li e a u e, we p esen h ee
heo e ical models ha help o c ea e a mo e nuanced unde s anding o wha keeps he g oup
oge he – and whe e he limi s o his uni y a e. The i s wo models a e adop ed om Iida
(1988), he hi d om social psychology li e a u e. While hese h ee models may no exhaus
explana o y app oaches,25 hey p o ide h ee di e se accoun s o g oup uni y.
i) Communi y o sha ed in e es s: Schola s ha e a gued ha de eloping coun ies a e ma ked
by wo challenges, ex e nal economic ulne abili y and in e nal poli ical weakness, om which
a ise sha ed in e es s (Iida, 1988, p. 382):
Highly dependen on he wo ld economy, he de eloping coun ies a e subjec o ou side
economic dis u bances. In addi ion, hey a e no s ong enough in e nally o make
adequa e domes ic adjus men s. Since in e nal solu ions a e e y di icul , Thi d Wo ld
s a es seek ex e nal emedies and y o u n in e na ional egimes om libe al o
au ho i a i e ones ha can p o ide mo e s able and p edic able ansac ion lows.
We ind an exp ession o ha sha ed in e es in he G77’s i s decla a ion ha in oked he
“common in e es in a new policy o in e na ional ade and de elopmen ” (G77, 1964, pa a 7).
And i was gi en a powe ul exp ession by Nye e e (1979, p. 5): “Wha we ha e in common is
ha we a e all, in ela ion o he de eloped wo ld, dependen – no in e dependen – na ions.
Each o ou economies has de eloped as a by-p oduc […] o de elopmen in he indus ialized
No h”. Howe e , a he ime his analysis was made (“Thi d Wo ld” was he accep ed e m in
he 1970s), he economic di e si y o he g oup was al eady seen as cons i u ing explana o y
weakness, and wi h he g owing di e si y in he g oup, he common in e es explana ion is
becoming e en mo e di icul . Bu i also holds a p edic ion: s ong uni y is o be ob ained only
in ma e s ha a e, by and la ge, p io i ies o he en i e g oup. In ecen his o y, clima e seemed
o be one such a ea (in e iews 23, 26; see also U pelainen, 2012; Vihma e al., 2011). Ano he
a ea is global go e nance e o m ha also includes he issue o No h-Sou h ans e s, as no ed
in Sec ion 2.
ii) Ins i u ionalised ecip oci y: The second model s esses ecip oci y as a way o os e ing
solida i y in ana chical con ex s (Iida, 1988, p. 386). Recip oci y desc ibes quid p o quo p ac ices
in which pa ies exchange suppo o hei espec i e p io i ies. This c ea es solida i y as long
as he gi e and ake deli e s be e esul s han wha pa ies can achie e ac ing ou side he
g oup. As Iida poin s ou , his kind o uni y only wo ks on he basis o di use ecip oci y. I ac o s
concei e o g oup membe ship in pu ely ansac ional e ms and eage ly ally he cos s o
suppo ing o he s in o de no o be disad an aged, ecip oci y would spi al down as ac o s lose
us in each o he . Recip oci y as a ac o o solida i y he e o e only wo ks o e longe pe iods
and when i is guided by a gene ous a i ude h ough which pa ies build a epu a ion o being
suppo i e o he g oup. When we asked a delega e abou he coun y’s suppo o esolu ions
ha s uck us as being ai ly un ela ed o he coun y’s na ional in e es s, he delega e said, “we
25 While he ole o leade ship om indi idual g oup membe s could be a ou h model (Iida, 1988), we
discuss i in he nex sec ion whe e we ocus on he ole o powe .
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
30
do i o show solida i y o o he coun ies” and because she assumed ha a some poin in u u e,
he coun y migh need suppo om he g oup (in e iew 12). O he sou ces also con i med ha
“no G77 membe wan s o le go o he ecip oci y and mu ual suppo ; o en, hey a e willing o
ole a e a lo [o ] wha he g oup ad ances as hey in o he ins ances depend on he suppo o
he g oup” (in e iew 27; also in 14). Analy ically, ecip oci y can explain he con inui y o uni y
when common in e es s and common ideological sou ces s a o wea o . I can also explain
he leng h o o icial G77 documen s, whe e some posi ions e lec mo e he indi idual in e es s
o membe s a es a he han common in e es s. Wi h mo e ac i e subg oups, quid o p o
p ac ices migh become mo e p e alen . Ye , ecip oci y as an ins umen o sa egua d a sel -
in e es eaches a dead end when he in e es s a e mu ually exclusi e (Sau an , 1981, p. 17).
iii) In e g oup dynamics: This model is based on social psychological heo y and explains
in ag oup solida i y as a unc ion o ex e nal con lic (Böhm e al., 2020; Iida, 1988, p. 395).
Despi e he eno mous di e si y o he G77, all i s membe s sha e simila his o ical expe iences
o colonialism, po e y and ma ginalisa ion in he in e na ional sys em ou o which e ol ed he
uni y o he global Sou h as an “indispensable ins umen ” o achie e a be e in e na ional
posi ion agains he global No h (G77, 1964). The ocus on he global No h as “ he o he ”
pe mea es G77 documen s (Alden e al., 2010, pp. 3-4; Swa & Lund, 2011, p. 149). F om he
s a , he g oup unde s ood i s main pu pose and he oo o i s solida i y as s emming om “a
uni y o opposi ion” agains an “exis ing Cen e o Powe ”, a he han o any no ma i e ideal
(Nye e e, 1979, p. 4). Uni y is hen a gene alised pu pose, as i “p o ec s hem om being played
o agains each o he ” (Sau an , 1981, p. 18). This model can explain an equally gene alised
no m o uni y ha makes de ec ion cos ly, no ma e wha he policy a hand is abou . Ou
sou ces indica e ha G77 membe s can indeed come unde in ense p essu e when hey b eak
away om g oup posi ions.26 This model can also explain why he g oup is mo e uni ed in imes
o global uphea al and con on a ion – “ he g oup h i es on c isis”, as a G77 delega e no ed
(in e iew 8) – despi e ising le els o di e si y.
4.2 Uni y in p ac ice: ways o each a decision
While hese h ee concep s p o ide explana ions o uni y, and how uni y can be main ained in
he longe a ch o his o y, hey ell us li le abou how he p ocess owa ds a g oup posi ion looks
like. Hence, he ques ion a ises: How does he s uggle be ween di e si y and uni y play ou in
p ac ice? Whe e does he G77 cu en ly all be ween hese wo poles? Concep ually, we s a
whe e we le o in Sec ion 3. As he consensus-me hod is p one o sho comings, i makes
sense o zoom in a bi mo e and di e en ia e a enues owa ds decision-making ou comes.
Based on ou ield esea ch and in o med by he exis ing li e a u e on he G77’s decision-
making, we iden i y ou possible a enues owa ds decision-making ou comes. One o a
combina ion o hem can help unde s and how he g oup eaches – o ails o each – posi ions.
i) Failu e o ag ee: No all di e ences can be econciled, and he esul o a decision-making
p ocess can be he decision ha he g oup simply has no common posi ion. The ailu e o b ing
in e nal nego ia ions o a success ul end migh e en be mo e common han he G77’s epu a ion
o uni y sugges s. The membe s o he g oup a e hen ee o speak in hei na ional capaci ies
in Gene al Assembly nego ia ions (in e iews 8, 26). Failu e o ag ee is mos likely when one o
a combina ion o all h ee solida i y mechanisms do no wo k: lack o a genuine common in e es ;
26 Some said ha “bullying and p essu ing plays a g ea ole” and ha hose who go agains he g oup
“ ace he isk o being iced ou ” (in e iew 25); smalle coun ies we e said o ha e exe cised pa icula
es ain unde Cuba’s asse i e leade ship o he g oup (in e iew 28); on gende , he La in Ame ican
s a es had, acco ding o one sou ce, aced massi e backlash and “saw hei ole in he G77 diminished
a e hey had spoken ou on gende ” (in e iew 2). All his plays ou mo e a he pe sonal le el, whe e
delega es may ace he i e o colleagues (in e iew 9).
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
31
a low le el o in e g oup an agonism; and unwillingness o ecip oca e in he ace o a s ong
na ional in e es . Some imes, he exis ence o hese ac o s is clea , ei he om his o y o
poli ical ac o s, and he g oup will no e en y o each a posi ion o a oid a highly di isi e
expe ience (in e iew 8).
ii) O e iding opposi ion: Con lic s o in e es can also be esol ed by o e iding he posi ions
o g oup membe s. This seems o equi e leade ship, o a leas powe poli ics, in he sense o
ha ing a dominan ac o o subg oup ha uses a ious o ms o powe o muscle h ough a
pa icula solu ion (Iida, 1988, p. 383-386; also see Sec ion 5). Such leade ship migh come
om he “ adicals” in he g oup o indi idually powe ul coun ies. I can also esul in
“maximalis ” posi ions, when mode a e oices a e excluded. Al hough powe play is p esen in
his a enue, he bene i s o main aining g oup uni y and, wi h i , he p ospec o being on he
o he side he nex ime – ha is, expec ing ecip oci y – will gene ally so en he blow o hose
being o e idden.
iii) Ve o playing: Ano he ou e o consensus obse ed in he G77 s ems om exe cising e oes.
I he abo e-men ioned a enue o o e iding su e s om aking oo ew in e es s in o accoun ,
his a enue su e s om he inclusion o oo many in e es s, in pa icula he e oes o speci ic
membe s. I mani es s i sel in ( ailed) e o s by membe s o use he G77 o ad ancing hei
in e es s, bu a he cos o ha ing hem wa e ed-down o a poin whe e he e o de ea s he
pu pose. One sou ce om a small s a e complained ha i s mo e p og essi e p oposals ela ed
o deb go “killed” by o he membe s (in e iew 12), and ano he , la ge coun y, simila ly had
o back ack on a p oposal deemed cons uc i e, a leas in he eyes o global No h sou ces
(in e iew 28). One in luen ial ac o in he g oup ha “opposes e e y hing” on a speci ic opic,
such as clima e, can be enough o condemn he g oup o gene ali y (in e iew 22).
i ) Bypassing he g oup: Limi ed p ospec s o going h ough he g oup can p omp s a es o
bypass i , while coun ing on he g oup’s solida i y once a d a esolu ion has been submi ed o
he Gene al Assembly. Ou sou ces sugges ed ha he mo e impo an a ma e is o a coun y,
he less likely hey a e o go h ough he g oup (in e iews 1, 12). The sponso s o a esolu ion
hen essen ially c ea e a ai accompli: hey e ain ull con ol o e he con en , bu hen pu he
g oup’s solida i y o he es by demanding a o e in he Gene al Assembly. This a enue comes
wi h he dange s o aliena ing o he G77 membe s. Howe e , in a p ocess o gi e and ake, a
mo e expensi e “ ake” oday can also esul in a s onge “gi e” omo ow, hus s ill se ing o
b ing he g oup oge he . Addi ionally, he in e g oup dynamics can encou age he es o he
g oup o show solida i y.
We now ( e) u n o ou ecen cases in which he G77’s uni y was es ed. Two o hem ha e
been men ioned in Sec ion 2 (Summi o he Fu u e and ax esolu ion), whe e – based on he
assump ion o he G77 as a uni a y ac o – hey se ed as examples o g owing No h-Sou h
ensions. He e, we ocus on in e nal di isions wi hin he G77 and how hey we e (no , o
impe ec ly) esol ed. The o he wo (gende and ci il socie y engagemen ), while ela ed o he
Summi o he Fu u e, ouch on longs anding neu algic poin s in he No h-Sou h ela ionship in
he UN.
4.2.1 Summi o he Fu u e: opposing subg oups and a case-by-case uni y
The Summi o he Fu u e no only pi ed he G77 agains he global No h, as no ed in Sec ion
2, i also es ed he G77’s uni y. Membe s a es signalled di e ging p io i ies, and soon majo
aul lines began o eme ge, leading o he o ma ion o compe ing subg oups and highligh ing
he agmen a ion o he G77.
Two majo g oups, hos ing di e en G77 membe s and o he s a es, eme ged ea ly in he
p ocess (Beisheim, 2024; Gambale, 2024; in e iews 14, 18). On he one hand, he Like-Minded
G oup, led by Pakis an, eme ged as a s ong and ac i e oice. As o Janua y 2024, i comp ised
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
32
17 membe s,27 among hem Cuba, Venezuela, I an, Egyp (and Russia, as a non-G77 membe ).
China some imes joined he g oup’s s a emen s. The Like-Minded G oup held conse a i e and
o a ce ain ex en e isionis posi ions on issues such as human igh s, gende equali y,
sanc ions, and s akeholde engagemen in he UN (Beisheim, 2024). I pu na ional so e eign y
a he o e on o i s conce ns, which helped unde s and hei posi ions on a ious aspec s o
he Pac o he Fu u e. As e iden om he analysis o in o mal consul a ions on he Summi ,28
one o he g oup’s key posi ions was ha he a en ion di ec ed o human igh s, gende equali y,
and mul ila e alism in he Pac o he Fu u e o e shadowed opics ha i saw as mo e impo an
o he global Sou h, in pa icula po e y e adica ion, in as uc u e, and comba ing hunge .
Behind his is he g oup’s ea men o he UN as a pu ely in e go e nmen al o ganisa ion o
so e eign s a es: he Like-Minded G oup was pushing back agains he in ol emen o o he
s akeholde s ac oss UN p ocesses and s eng hening o he Sec e a ia (Beisheim, 2024;
in e iews 13, 18), ea ing i would educe he ole and powe o membe s a es in he
o ganisa ion (in e iew 15). Fi ing wi h i s conse a i e domes ic agenda and he impo ance i
pu s on so e eign y, he g oup also exp essed a s ong opposi ion o he inclusion o mo e
p og essi e human igh s and gende language, ad oca ing ins ead o he main enance o a
clea sepa a ion be ween he de elopmen and human igh s pilla s o he UN (see in o mal
consul a ions on he Summi o he Fu u e; also Pakis an, 2024).
On he o he side, he Small S a es G oup, consis ing o 55 membe s om bo h he global No h
and Sou h (Gambale, 2024), eme ged as an impo an oice in eac ion o he Like-Minded
G oup. The Small S a es G oup is spea headed by Singapo e, a ocal suppo e o he Summi
o he Fu u e p ocess. The G oup saw he Summi as an e o o s eng hen mul ila e alism, and
as small s a es, hey pe cei ed mul ila e alism o be in hei in e es (in e iew 18) and
hemsel es as i s “de ende s” (Ga oo , as ci ed in Gambale, 2024). Al hough no a nego ia ing
bloc, i did ake posi ions on he Pac o he Fu u e (Gambale, 2024). Speci ically, i ocused on
issues like s eng hening human igh s and p omo ing gende equali y, as well as on pushing
o s akeholde engagemen in UN deba es and inc eased anspa ency, seeing hese as ools
o making mul ila e alism mo e democ a ic, e ec i e, and aligned wi h oday’s global policy-
making needs. The main clea age be ween he Like-Minded G oup and he Small S a es G oup
was he way hey iew he UN: as a me e pla o m o so e eign s a es o as an independen
ac o espec i ely (in e iew 18).
While he Small S a es G oup was a big p oponen o he Summi o he Fu u e, he Like-Minded
G oup was a he scep ical (in e iew 9). When he co- acili a o s o he Summi , Ge many and
Namibia, planned he adop ion o he esolu ion on he scope o he Summi o Augus 2023,
he Like-Minded G oup eques ed he ex ension o nego ia ions o he esolu ion ex un il
Sep embe 2023. Some o i s membe s b oke he “silence p ocedu e” o a co- acili a o s’ i s
d a o ha esolu ion, o cing nego ia ions o con inue. P io o ha , Cuba, a membe o he
Like-Minded G oup and Chai o he G77 a ha ime, eques ed on behal o he G77 ha
p epa a ions o he Summi be hal ed, a guing ha many di e en p ocesses we e happening
a he same ime, including he SDG Summi , and ha he UN mus ocus on how o be e
ad ance he implemen a ion o he SDGs. Allegedly, Cuba had no p ope ly consul ed wi h G77
membe s on his (in e iew 16; see also Sec ion 3). Behind he scenes, a ious di e en
membe s o he G77 exp essed hei suppo o he summi along wi h hei us a ions abou
how Cuba had handled i (in e iew 9). Howe e , he e was also a gene al ag eemen in he
G77 ha he SDG Summi dese ed due a en ion (Lynch, 2023a).
27 Based on he s a emen deli e ed by Pakis an on behal Alge ia, Boli ia, China, Cuba, Egyp , E i ea,
I an, I aq, Libya, Nica agua, Nige ia, he Russian Fede a ion, S i Lanka, Sy ia, Venezuela, Zimbabwe,
see h ps://web .un.o g/en/asse /k13/k131jwybc8
28 Mo e in o ma ion is a ailable a h p://web .un.o g/en/asse /k13/k131jwybc8
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
33
Gi en he exis ence o such di e se p e e ences ega ding he Summi o he Fu u e and i s
con en , i is no su p ise ha he G77 ailed o p esen a common posi ion on some c i ical opics
(in e iew 36). Speci ically, he g oup ailed o ag ee and did no nego ia e as a g oup on
in e na ional peace and secu i y and you h and u u e gene a ions (in e iews 9, 14, 26, 28). On
secu i y, his can be explained by he ac ha di isions we e oo g ea o be econciled (in e iew
18). As desc ibed by an expe , he Like-Minded G oup was pa icula ly di icul in his ega d
(in e iew 9). The g oup c i icised qui e ex ensi ely he second e ision o he Pac o he
Fu u e, s a ing ha he sec ion on in e na ional peace and secu i y should add ess he “ eal
challenges” o peace and secu i y, such as “ iola ions o he UN Cha e and in e na ional law,
g ea powe i al y and geopoli ical ensions and hei disp opo iona e impac on de eloping
coun ies”. I also lis ed “ eceding us , e oding mul ila e alism, o eign occupa ion, he use o
o ce, unila e al coe ci e measu es and injus ice agains na ions” as he main causes o hese
challenges (Pakis an, 2024, p. 3). The G77 also appea ed o be genuinely unable o ind con-
sensus on he you h and u u e gene a ions pa o he Pac . You h pa icipa ion is conside ed
by he Like-Minded G oup o be a isk o becoming an ins umen o he global No h o p omo e
i s agenda on gende and en i onmen al issues (Beisheim, 2024). On he ans o ma ion o
global go e nance, he G77 only had a pa ial common posi ion.
Howe e , on issues a ound he collec i e desi e among he g oup o ocus on he SDGs (G77,
2023a) – and in pa icula on issues o po e y and de elopmen – he g oup achie ed a ce ain
uni y. The g oup ound a common posi ion on he pa s o he Pac conce ning sus ainable
de elopmen and inancing o de elopmen , demanding ai e ep esen a ion (see G77, 2023b,
2024b). Addi ionally, he G77 nego ia ed as a g oup on science, echnology and inno a ion, and
digi al coope a ion, which was he opic o he G77 summi in 2023 (in e iew 18). The g oup
demanded ha he Summi o he Fu u e should no in oduce any modi ica ions o he SDGs,
ei he di ec ly o indi ec ly, by c ea ing new goals. Ins ead, i demanded a ocus on comba ing
po e y and hunge , a posi ion ha was made clea by he ep esen a i e o B azil du ing he
discussion on he Summi o he Fu u e modali ies esolu ion: “We al eady ha e a mul ila e ally
ag eed amewo k o ackle ou de elopmen challenges – he 2030 Agenda o Sus ainable
De elopmen […]. Ou cu en c ises, such as he ise in ood insecu i y and he de e io a ion o
li ing condi ions, among o he s, illus a e ha his is a ime o highligh he cen ali y o he
Agenda and o accele a e i s implemen a ion, no o o e shadow i by c ea ing new agendas”
(UN, 2022b, p. 17). Howe e , e en on he issue o he IFI (in e na ional inancial ins i u ion)
e o m – key o he G77’s s a egic p io i ies – he g oup had di e ging posi ions ega ding how
o nego ia e on his, wi h he poo es s a es and he Small S a es G oup calling o p agma ic
ba gaining and membe s o he Like-Minded G oup such as Pakis an, Venezuela, and
Nica agua seeking in coo dina ion wi h China and Russia o “expand he discussion o highligh
he damage done by unila e al US and EU sanc ions o he global economy” (Gowan, 2024b).
To sum up, he Summi o he Fu u e p ocess p o ed ai ly di isi e o he G77: no only was i
ma ked by he s ong p esence o opposing subg oups, bu he g oup as a whole also did no
nego ia e oge he on all pa s o he Summi ’s ou come documen . When i did nego ia e as a
g oup, uni ed by a common in e es and a a he high in e g oup an agonism ( e o m o IFIs,
and he lack o commi men o meaning ul ans o ma ions om he global No h, espec i ely),
i eso ed o a kind o leas common denomina o , demanding e o m bu s ill disag eeing on
how o nego ia e he desi ed esul .
4.2.2 Gende : s alled p og ess amid opposing ac ions
Ano he majo di ision in he G77 ela es o women’s igh s and gende equali y, a ield whe e
he UN has de eloped global no ms o e he las decades and se ambi ious goals in he 2030
Agenda (SDG 5). Se e al o ou sou ces poin ed ou ha he G77 does no ha e a common
posi ion on gende because o he s a kly di e ging posi ions o i s membe s a es. This is no
en i ely co ec . In p inciple, he G77 does ha e a posi ion on gende : he Thi d Sou h Summi
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
40
capaci y a e likely o ansla e in o di e ences o in luence in he G77 and he Gene al Assembly. The g aph e lec s
a snapsho om Sep embe 2024; numbe s luc ua e.
iii) Leade ship: The leade ship explana ion pu s a ques ion ma k behind he assump ion ha
he “ adicals” do no ep esen he g oup well. They may on ce ain issues ha e di e ences wi h
he g oup, bu in one aspec – leading he opposi ion is-à- is he global No h – hey migh be
mo e ecognised by he g oup han ex e nal assessmen s sugges . As no ed abo e, hei
uncomp omising a i ude owa ds he global No h is a key, i no cons i u i e aspec o hei ole
as “ adicals” (in e iew 13; Puchala e al., 2007). Global imes o uphea al and No h-Sou h
con on a ion migh in pa icula c ea e a demand o obus leade ship – a e all, who else da es
o s and up in he Gene al Assembly and condemn he global No h in a way “ adicals” ha e
done in ecen yea s (see Sec ion 2)? Obse e s and delega es indeed poin ed ou ha G77
membe s may silen ly applaud i when some o hem adop s ong posi ions and “gi e he big
powe s a bea ing” (in e iew 13; also 24). Cou ageous beha iou migh in ha sense be a
collec i e good o he g oup, and a sou ce o in luence wi hin he g oup i p es ige is indeed he
“day- o-day cu ency o in e na ional powe ” (Gilpin, 1981).
i ) Mo i a ion: The global go e nance sys em o e s a ou h explana ion, hough no so much
o he “ adicals’” powe i sel , bu a he he mo i o cul i a e he abo e-men ioned powe ac o s.
The “ adicals” a e no membe s o clubs like he G20. They only ha e he UN, and o some
ex en , hey ha e i o hemsel es, gi en ha BRICS and o he eme ging economies a e pa
o he G20 (wi h he excep ion o Russia) (in e iew 25). India and B azil, o example, we e
men ioned by ou sou ces as wo coun ies ha seem o p io i ise he G20 as a pla o m o build
hei oles as global Sou h leade s – pla o ms, on which hey can in e ac wi h global powe s
on an equal oo ing (in e iews 9, 13). This lea es a powe acuum a he UN in which he
“ adicals” can lou ish, de elop idiosync a ic p o iles, and se he agenda in he shadow o wo ld
poli ics. The coun ies o he global No h may hemsel es ha e con ibu ed o his si ua ion by
keeping mac o-economic and ade issues ou o he UN (see he case s udy on he ax
esolu ion in Sec ion 2).
5.2 China: de eloping coun y supe powe
O e he las decade, China has signi ican ly expanded i s engagemen wi h he UN’s
de elopmen wo k, and his engagemen has un olded mainly on he poli ical le el a he han
h ough inancial con ibu ions (Baumann e al., 2022; Fung & Lam, 2022). As he la ges global
Sou h alliance, he G77 is key o China’s e o s o build a global leade ship ole o i sel , and
China is also he mos powe ul membe o he G77, exe ing signi ican in luence on many
de eloping coun ies, much mo e so han, o example, i s egional i al India (Economis , 2024).
So how does his in luence play ou in he UN con ex and wha implica ions does i ha e o
bo h sides, China and he G77?
The o e all pic u e ha eme ges om ou esea ch is ha China’s ole in he UN Gene al
Assembly has ans o med om a mos ly silen obse e o an ac i e and asse i e playe , i no
a “big b o he ” o he G77, hough one ha p e e s o ac behind he scenes (in e iews 7, 14).
An obse a ion om he Fi h Commi ee was ha , in he pas , China had ne e been he lead
nego ia o bu could be elied on o help cu a deal behind he scenes. Since Xi Jinping’s ise o
powe in 2013, howe e , China appea s o ha e s a ed o speak up in mee ings, becoming one
o he ha dline s i sel (in e iew 6). In he Second Commi ee, China was said o main ain a low
p o ile, isibly engaging only whe e key Chinese in e es s we e di ec ly in ol ed (in e iew 16).
Ye , when asked abou China, almos e e y delega e we in e iewed desc ibed China as
omnip esen and engaged behind he scenes, p e e ing o go h ough p oxies in g ea powe
s yle ( o ins ance, in e iews 7, 20, 24, 28).
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
41
Behind he “op ics”, he ela ions be ween China and he G77 is a case s udy in he complexi ies
o alliance poli ics, which o en cu s bo h ways o bo h sides. China needs he G77 bu canno
o ally a oid being cons ained by i – some hing ha inds i s exp ession in China’s s angely
ambi alen o icial ela ionship wi h he G77. Despi e being lis ed as a egula G77 membe on
he g oup’s o icial websi e, China makes a poin o no being a membe o he G77 (Minis y o
Fo eign A ai s o China, 2024). Thus, he common exp ession “G77 plus China”. Technically,
his allows China o in luence G77 posi ions wi hou being o mally cons ained by g oup
posi ions and expec a ions o g oup solida i y. Poli ically, howe e , China is gene ally keen o
emphasise i s solida i y wi h ellow global Sou h coun ies and o speak on behal o he global
Sou h, which equi es China o be ecep i e o he in e es s ep esen ed in he g oup (in e iews
5, 29; Takahashi, 2021).
This appea s o be a di icul balancing ac . Fo he G77, China comes wi h bene i s and
downsides. One G77 delega e desc ibed China as a “ o midable ally” ha is “coming in handy”
o de eloping coun ies (in e iew 5). China has some hing o o e : a de elopmen model seen
as a ac i e o coun ies o he global Sou h; he p ospec o a sys em ha o e s de eloping
coun ies poli ical al e na i es; and di ec suppo in nego ia ions. Fo his, G77 membe s appea
eady o gi e some hing in e u n. The mu ual accommoda ion ha ollows om ha indica es
how China has e ol ed om a la gely he o ical o a poli ical p esence in he G77. Fo example,
he esolu ion on u al de elopmen 34 is sponso ed by China and con ains Chinese “language”
such as “sha ed u u e o mankind”, ph ases ha a e seen as key o China’s aspi a ions o c ea e
a mo e China-cen ic wo ld o de (Baumann e al., 2022). The esolu ion has in all p e ious
yea s been adop ed wi h a la ge G77 majo i y agains he “no”- o es om global No h coun ies.
In a simila ein, Chinese ini ia i es (such as he Bel and Roads Ini ia i e and he Global
De elopmen Ini ia i e) show how de eloping coun ies a e willing o lend poli ical ecogni ion in
he UN o China’s hegemonic ambi ions (in e iew 29; Haug, 2024).
The expec a ion o mu ual accommoda ion can be pain ul, in pa icula o smalle coun ies
gi en he powe di e ences which il he cos -bene i calculus owa ds China. All G77 membe s
will s i e o make hei own posi ions a g oup posi ion, bu when China as a supe powe ies
o do so, he e ec s become mo e isible and may pose a isk o he g oup’s ideal o inclusi e
consensus. In e iewees no ed ha China is “always” p esen in discussions and nego ia ions
(ope a ing he la ges UN mission in he g oup, i has unique capaci ies). E en in small se ings
whe e only he nego ia o s speak, China is no mally in he oom – a no ewo hy “big b o he ”
s a egy, acco ding o some sou ces, o exe cise con ol o e ellow G77 membe s (in e iews
14, 15, 16). And when China hen weighs in, i can be qui e e ec i e. An example was men ioned
o us whe e a G77 membe e e sed i s posi ion comple ely a e being old o do so by China
(in e iew 27). In ano he case, a G77 delega e appa en ly go “c uci ied” a e ha ing gone
agains Chinese in e es s (in e iew 15). I seems o ha e become di icul o G77 membe s o
speak up agains China, a leas in Gene al Assembly se ings (in e iews 14, 23).
This is pa icula ly conce ning when China pu sues in e es s ha a e no aligned wi h hose o
he a e age de eloping coun y. Delega es om bo h he G77 and global No h coun ies no ed
ha China o en ames i s s a emen s as being in he in e es o he g oup, when hey a e in
qui e ob ious ways no (in e iews 11, 12, 23). In gene al, inancing o de elopmen and in
pa icula deb , as well as peacekeeping a e di icul opics o China as a majo dono ha does
no wan o commi u he esou ces (in e iews 11, 14, 17). On he issue o deb , o example,
China has in G77 in e nal p ocesses allegedly “killed” he p oposals o smalle coun ies, making
his “a e y bad expe ience” o hem (in e iew 12). In he Fi h Commi ee whe e he UN’s
egula budge is discussed, China, ha ing become he second la ges con ibu o behind he
US, was said o ha e g own “hawkish” and keen o cu b Sec e a ia expendi u es on issues
34 UN Gene al Assembly esolu ion “E adica ing u al po e y o implemen he 2030 Agenda o
Sus ainable De elopmen ”, i s in oduced in 2018.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
42
whe e o he de eloping coun ies would p e e he UN o spend mo e libe ally (in e iew 13;
Lynch, 2023b). Also, in he la ge geopoli ical con ex s, China seems o be keen o use he G77
o accen ua e o e en c ea e global di e ences, which can pu de eloping coun ies ha enjoy
good ela ions wi h global No h coun ies in a di icul posi ion. One global No h delega e
obse ed ha , as he No h-Sou h an agonism inc eased in ecen yea s, China had pushed o
his and “ he e we e ec imina ions o coun ies ha did no go along wi h i ” (in e iew 15).
5.3 BRICS: no a cohe en o ce
China is also a membe o BRICS,35 a g oup ha has eme ged as a coun e weigh o he global
No h in he in e na ional a ena. BRICS a e no known o be a g oup wi hin he UN.
Ne e heless, he ques ion was aised mo e han a decade ago whe he (o when) he
ascendance o BRICS migh also esul in he poli ical econ igu a ion o he G77 (Swa & Lund,
2011, p. 151 .). On he one hand, BRICS could unde mine he ele ance and cohe ence o he
G77 by cu ing hei own deals wi h he global No h ou side he UN. On he o he hand, hey
could also in use he G77 wi h new poli ical ene gy, s eng hening i s posi ion in he UN. The
expansion o BRICS om 5 o 11 membe s in 2023 and he inclusion o s a es such as I an,
Saudi A abia and he Uni ed A ab Emi a es ha poin o an “appe i e o non-Wes e n led
mul ila e al a angemen s” (Bha , 2023) only adds ele ance o his ques ion.
Howe e , we ound li le e idence o such a poli ical shake-up o he G77. Delega es and
expe s ha we in e iewed did no see BRICS ac ing as a cohesi e o ce in he Gene al
Assembly o wi hin he G77, ei he in New Yo k o in Rome (in e iews 6, 7, 15, 24). Indi idual
BRICS membe s seem o engage mo e in hei espec i e egional g oups, aspi ing o become
“sel -appoin ed leade s” (S ephen, 2012, p. 293; in e iews 7, 25). Some o ou sou ces hink
hey ha e de ec ed some kind o ecip oci y among BRICS membe s in he sense ha hey
suppo each o he as long as na ional in e es s do no s and in he way (in e iews 1, 12). This
would be b oadly in line wi h he esea ch on how BRICS o e in he Gene al Assembly. Some
schola s do ind a high le el o o ing cohesion among BRICS (Binde & Lockwood Pay on,
2022; Fe dinand, 2014). O he s, howe e , disag ee (Hooijmaaije s & Keukelei e, 2016). As a
bloc, BRICS a e said o be mo e p esen and isible in peace and secu i y- ela ed issues, ha
is, in he Secu i y Council (in e iew 7). Bu when i comes o Secu i y Council e o m, hey a e
di ided be ween he e o powe s China and Russia and he aspi ing membe s B azil, India and
Sou h A ica ega ding wha he e o m should look like.
This shows ha BRICS ace a simila challenge as he la ge G77, namely inding uni y in he
ace o di e ging in e es s – which, o BRICS, a e mo e de ined and d i en by capi als han is
he case o many de eloping coun ies. Di e ences a e pa icula ly no able wi h ega d o
human igh s and nuclea disa mamen , hough wi h g ea e con e gence on de elopmen
issues (Binde & Lockwood Pay on, 2022; Fe dinand, 2014; Hooijmaaije s & Keukelei e, 2016;
Ku şun & Pa la Dal, 2017). BRICS also di e in hei a i ude owa ds he global No h, as
deba es abou he ecen expansion o BRICS ha e shown: Some (China, Russia, I an) wan o
posi ion BRICS as an an i-Wes e n alliance and an incuba o o a new, mul ipola wo ld o de
(Ga cia-He e o, 2024; G imm, 2023; Mu phy, 2022, pp. 41-42). O he s (Sou h A ica, B azil)
a e mo e conce ned wi h s eng hening hei in e na ional independence and e o ming he
global sys em o be e ep esen a ion o he global Sou h (G imm, 2023; Lehne, 2023). This
di e gence makes i unlikely o he g oup o eme ge as a cohesi e block in he UN any ime
soon. S ong commi men s o he G77 and o “ad ancing he common in e es s o de eloping
coun ies” (see, o example, join s a emen s in 2017, 2019 and 2023 by B azil, Sou h A ica,
35 While Russia is a BRICS membe , i does no belong o he G77. Addi ionally, he majo i y o he in e iews
we e conduc ed be o e he expansion o BRICS; he e o e, we e e o BRICS a he han BRICS+.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
43
India, and China on clima e change (BASIC, 2017, 2019, 2023)) a e mos ly he o ic and se e
o inc ease hei legi imacy as “ he ones speaking on behal o he global Sou h” (in e iew 15)
– as we ha e seen abo e in he case o China.
5.4 A ica: he co e o he global Sou h
The powe analysis o he G77 also leads o A ica, a con inen ha has long been seen as he
weakes egion globally. Bu i Ikenbe y (2024) is igh abou he e olu ion o a “ h ee-wo ld
sys em” wi h he “Wes , Eas and Sou h” as dis inc “wo lds”, hen A ica mus be said o
ep esen a signi ican pa o he global Sou h. In con as o Wes and Eas , A ica is no led by
any global supe powe no e en a dominan egional powe . A ica’s powe is essen ially ha o
a “global audience” o which he supe powe s speak and ha can gi e o wi hhold suppo and
legi imacy o hem (Ikenbe y, 2024, p. 132). Ye , A ica may no en i ely be he kind o passi e
powe ha Ikenbe y’s analysis sugges s. The con inen may ac ually be on he e ge o
de eloping i s own agency a he UN, ac i ely ad ancing i s demands. As one sou ce obse ed
in ha ega d, he A ican g oup seems o ha e “decided in ecen yea s ha i will no longe pu
up wi h how he UN (and global No h membe s a es o ha ma e ) is dealing wi h hem”
(in e iew 13).
The A ican g oup has one ea u e ha is a a e commodi y in in e na ional alliances: i is
ela i ely homogenous, and so he solida i y mechanisms ha also apply o he G77 a la ge
wo k ela i ely well in he A ican g oup (Pa e son & Vi k, 2013). Some o he aul lines
men ioned abo e also un h ough A ica, bu he e a e s ong common in e es s, in pa icula ,
on axes and inances, wi h subs an ial cohesion also a ound de elopmen and in e na ional
coope a ion in gene al (in e iews 14, 32). The A ican Union, which main ains a diploma ic
mission in New Yo k, p o ides an ins i u ional and ideological amewo k o A ican solida i y. In
e ms o p ocess, he G oup was said o egula ly mee a he ambassado ial le el (in e iew 4).
The e o e, as one sou ce opined, “i he A ican g oup is uni ed, hey a e conside able o ce
wi hin he G77” (in e iew 7). This also ex ends beyond he G77. Fo example, du ing clima e
nego ia ions, he g oup p o ed o be one o he mos uni ed ones wi h a clea and a icula e
posi ion (Makina, 2013).
This uni y, along wi h a new ound appe i e o asse i s in e es s, we e isible in he ax
esolu ion, spea headed by Nige ia on behal o he A ican g oup (see subsec ion 4.2.4). The
esolu ion ouched on i al A ican in e es s in esou ces o SDG implemen a ion and gaining
“a c i ical oice in no m-c ea ion and decision-making p ocesses” (Nige ia, quo ed in UN, 2024b,
p. 7). As no ed in Sec ion 2, he signi icance o he p ocess was ha he A icans pushed ahead
on he esolu ion agains esis ance, dealing global No h s a es a highly isible de ea in he
Gene al Assembly, ein o ced by s a emen s such as ha A icans we e i ed o “na a i es o
local go e nance and co up ion o explain he p oblems hey aced” (see Sec ion 2). The A ican
g oup appea s o ha e calcula ed ha , gi en i s inc easingly s onge posi ion, i could a o d o
en e in o a policy con lic wi hou ea o no able e ibu ion om ei he inside he G77 o global
No h s a es. This quali y o being an ac o – and a bold one o ha ma e – is e y much wha
he e m “new Sou h” signi ies.
In addi ion o he abili y o p omo e i s own in e es s, A ica is impo an o o he global playe s
because o i s o es. Being he a ge o geopoli ical a en ion con e s in luence. As one
diploma ic sou ce no ed when e lec ing abou he cu en poli ical clima e in New Yo k, “nobody
wan s o be agains he A icans” (in e iew 14). China appea s o ha e a keen in e es in
winning A ica’s suppo , and Russia also cou s A ica as i seeks o d i e a wedge be ween
A ican and Eu opean membe s a es (in e iew 11). I is p obably agains ha backd op ha
Russia eme ged as an unlikely co-sponso o he d a esolu ion on ax coope a ion, explaining
his wi h he “conce ns o he G oup o A ican S a es” on he one hand and he “obs uc i e
s ance aken by mos o he OECD membe s” on he o he (UN, 2024b, p. 8). I A ican s a es
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
44
ha e o es o gi e, and s a emen s o make ha may a ec he global public discou se, hen i
seems A ican s a es a e conscious abou he alue o hei suppo ha may also be wi hheld.
Rega ding he Uk aine c isis, he s a es o he global No h ha e been denied ull suppo om
A ica: In o es on he wa in Uk aine, pa icula ly hose in ol ing conc e e measu es o in lic
punishmen on Russia, mos A ican coun ies chose o s ay neu al, abs aining om o es
a he han aligning wi h ei he side in his geopoli ical con lic (Gö z e al., 2023; Gowan e al.,
2023). In Rome, whe e he Uk aine c isis also became a opic in he FAO, he A ican s a es
adop ed a posi ion o explici neu ali y o p o ec hei uni y in he ace o p essu e om global
No h s a es o pull hem o e o hei side (in e iews 20, 23). The wa agains Uk aine seems
o ha e awakened A ican s a es’ appe i e o independence, and a new ound b a e y in
challenging global No h leade ship.
5.5 Global No h: ex e nal in luence
Global No h s a es s ill hold conside able in luence a he UN as unde s o he o ganisa ion
and h ough hei economic and poli ical s eng h wi hin he wide global go e nance sys em.
His o ically, global No h s a es we e he eason why he G77 came in o exis ence in he i s
place (Sau an , 1981). How do global No h s a es deal wi h he G77? F om ou in e iews, we
a e no awa e o some hing esembling a g and s a egy. The global No h app oach seems o
in ol e a mix u e o a emp s o build us ed ela ionships on he one hand and powe poli ics
aimed a di ide-and- ule ac ics on he o he .
To s a wi h he mo e social aspec s, i seems o be an unw i en no m ha global No h
delega es immedia ely begin o each ou o build pe sonal ela ionships wi h delega es om he
global Sou h when hey a i e a hei du y pos s in New Yo k (in e iews 7, 15, 16). Good
ela ionships wi h he mo e eclusi e, in luen ial, and “di icul ” membe s o he G77 seem o
ca y pa icula p es ige. In gene al, he alue o pe sonal ela ionships o building us and
main aining communica ion channels is hus well unde s ood. The EU has ecen ly begun o
hos an annual ecep ion o all G77 nego ia o s and acili a o s – some hing ha was well
app ecia ed by G77 delega es (in e iews 11, 12). On a pe sonal le el delega es alk o each
o he and concei e o hemsel es as being pa o he same communi y o UN diploma s. Global
No h delega es o en seem o ha e as onishingly de ailed and di ec ( hough anecdo al) insigh s
in o a ai s o he G77 h ough hei us ed G77 colleagues (in e iew 28). Building pe sonal
ela ionships can also be a pa o an ou each s a egy o ad ance policy goals h ough pe sua-
sion a he han powe -poli ics. One obse e no ed ha e o s by he US ambassado o engage
wi h G77 membe s indi idually, one by one, o build suppo o he esolu ion on a i icial
in elligence (see Sec ion 2) “almos su p ised de eloping coun ies” and was essen ial in
secu ing he b oad majo i y ha he esolu ion a ac ed (in e iew 27).
A he same ime, global No h s a es a e no s ange s o powe ac ics ha se e o di ide he
g oup. When push comes o sho e, global No h s a es may engage in coo dina ed e o s o
in luence indi idual membe s o he G77. As one delega e na a ed, hey may ag ee on a
di ision o labou whe e one minis e (a he capi al le el) calls a coun e pa in he global Sou h,
and a bila e al de elopmen p ojec , inancial suppo , expo oppo uni ies, and such like, may
be o e ed o cajole he coun y in o changing i s s ance in New Yo k (in e iew 1). Swa and Lund
(2011) ha e also desc ibed such p ac ices – and how hey a e esen ed by he G77. A mo e ecen
example om ou own esea ch comes om Rome, whe e he EU employed “all ins umen s in
he diploma ic oolbox”, as one delega e said, o mobilise suppo o he condemna ion o Russia’s
wa agains Uk aine, which p omp ed he A ican s a es o o icially adop a neu al posi ion as
no ed abo e (in e iews 20, 23; see also Baumann, 2022). In New Yo k, a G77 delega e no ed
ha he ins umen s o global No h coun ies – in pa icula he “ elephone call” be ween
minis e s o ollow up on déma ches – ha e become weake (in e iew 8). A s ill powe ul ool
o di iding he g oup can be ound in he a ea o no ma i e issues. One G77 sou ce sugges ed
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
45
ha , by b inging no ma i e issues o he nego ia ions ( o example, gende ), global No h s a es
delibe a ely di ide and incapaci a e he G77 (in e iew 12). Wi hou a common G77 posi ion, as
on he gende issue, he agg ega ion o in e es s is dis up ed, po en ially inc easing he global
No h’s oom o nego ia ing ou comes close o i s own p io i ies.
A hi d o m o ou each – engagemen wi h subg oups – alls be ween powe poli ics and
pe suasion. The EU migh suppo subg oups wi hin he G77, o example he Leas De eloped
Coun ies – o which Eu ope is he la ges dono – o pu sue common in e es s and bypass he
G77 (in e iews 16, 25, 27). Alliances may also be sough wi h o he G77 subg oups, in
pa icula he small s a es, island s a es, and he A ican and La in Ame ican g oups, each
cha ac e ised by a ela i ely high commi men o mul ila e alism and pa icula links o he global
No h, ei he h ough aid s eams o no ma i e alignmen . The collabo a ion wi h a subg oup
can gi e momen um o a policy issue “which he G77 hen can no longe igno e” (in e iew 27).
This can be a s a egy o mobilise poli ics o he sake o policy, o wo k h ough and os e
p agma ic coali ions – all wi h he bene i (in he eyes o global No h ac o s) o unde mining
G77’s cohe ence along he way. Howe e , such coali ion-building is inc easingly also being
seen as a delibe a e s a egy o o es all a emp s by Russia and China o gain in luence in he
G77 (in e iew 11).
In e im conclusion
The powe analysis p esen ed he e concludes he a c o ou analysis ha s a ed wi h he ideal
o he consensus app oach and w es led wi h he compe ing o ces o di e si y and uni y along
he way. China, and o a lesse ex en A ica, ha e become mo e impo an , e lec ing a ledgling
econ igu a ion o he powe landscape o he G77. Ye , no single powe domina es he G77.
And o e e y powe ac ion in he g oup, he e a e no able coun e o ces: The “ adicals” a e a
mino i y in he g oup and ace opposi ion om a signi ican g oup o mode a e global Sou h
democ acies; China occupies a singula posi ion as a global supe powe , bu wi h inc easingly
s uc u al di e ences compa ed o all lesse powe s in he global Sou h; BRICS a e no e en
uni ed hemsel es and a e checked by egional i al ies; A ica emains a mino i y whose
challenges a e no always sha ed by mo e de eloped G77 membe s; and global No h coun ies
can only make mino in oads in o he G77 whose main pu pose con inues o be checking global
No h in luence in he UN. Powe migh he e o e il ou comes o one side bu , ul ima ely, i s
ole needs o be unde s ood in andem wi h he consensus app oach ( ha opens he doo o
powe p ac ices) and mechanisms o solida i y ( ha can p o ide ehicles o in luence, in
pa icula h ough ecip oci y). None o he case s udies p esen ed in he p e ious sec ion can
be explained by he dominan in e es o one membe o subg oup o he G77 alone.
6 Conclusions and ecommenda ions
The G77’s posi ion a he UN Gene al Assembly needs o be seen in he con ex o he cu en
global uphea al, an impo an aspec o which is he eckoning wi h es ablished No h-Sou h
ela ions. Fo he i s ime in he pos -wa e a, he powe and aspi a ions o global Sou h
coun ies a e s a ing o align o an ex en ha angible changes become possible. The G77 may
no be he global spea head o he “new Sou h”, which makes i sel el ac oss he global
go e nance sys em and in bila e al ela ions as well: he he e ogenei y o in e es s and le el o
in luence o di e en g oup membe s can unde mine i s uni y as a ac o o he g oup’s
e ec i eness. Ne e heless, he G77 ep esen s an impo an piece in he o e all global poli ical
shi s in which es ablished oles o powe and in luence, and diploma ic p ac ices ha low om
hem, a e pu in ques ion and a new poli ical eali y seems o be in he making. Based on he
analysis conduc ed in his s udy, we can d aw i e conclusions ha speak o he G77’s po en ial
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
46
o shape his new eali y h ough he UN Gene al Assembly and con ibu e o a mo e e ec i e
mul ila e al sys em.
The G77 cu en ly enjoys a ela i ely s ong posi ion is-à- is i s global coun e pa s. As
one global No h sou ce no ed wi h a sigh, “ hey a e c uising” (in e iew 2). The G77 has been
able o pu global No h powe s on he spo ega ding key issues ha in he pas we e kep ou
o he UN. I global No h s a es ha e long held he mo al high g ound a he UN, he global
Sou h now inc easingly ac s wi h an in ellec ual ailwind om global public discou se. The G77
has b ough he discussion o ep esen a ion in global go e nance o he UN’s agenda whe e
global No h s a es ha e o igh an uphill ba le agains demands o g ea e ep esen a ion by
he global Sou h. Discussions o he in e na ional inancial a chi ec u e became an in eg al pa
o he Summi o he Fu u e p ocess, agains he will o global No h s a es. The ax esolu ion,
suppo ed ( hough no ini ia ed) by he G77, ma ks no only a decisi e diploma ic win o he
global Sou h, bu also indica es ha diploma ic consensus p ac ices in he Gene al Assembly
a e unde p essu e. Majo i y o ing eme ges as an op ion. I migh unde he new global powe
balance no longe esul in py hic ic o ies only bu may igge p ocesses ha de elop hei
own poli ical dynamics. While he G77 has he epu a ion o being good a saying “no” only,
global No h delega es a e inc easingly ecognising he G77 as a poli ical o ce ha shapes he
condi ions o he No h-Sou h dialogue a he UN. And i analys s ha e in ecen decades aised
doub s as o whe he de eloping coun ies s ill bene i om G77 membe ship, hen he g oup’s
cu en posi ion o s eng h appea s o p o ide a sound a ionale o i .
Ye , he G77’s in e nal decision-making sys em has oom o imp o emen . The G77
ope a es on he basis o he consensus p inciple, which is an app op ia e mechanism o a
loosely in eg a ed g oup. Howe e , he G77 cu en ly pe o ms below i s aspi a ions o an
inclusi e and p oduc i e sys em o decision-making. The e a e i ually no ins i u ional
gua d ails ha could guide g oup p ocesses. By and la ge, Sau an ’s obse a ion om he ea ly
1980s s ill holds ue oday: “No s ong uni ying ins i u ional o ce exis s: he G oup o 77 has no
long- e m leade ship, egula s a , headqua e s, sec e a ia [one should add: o no ewo hy
size] o , o ha ma e , any o he pe manen ins i u ion” (Sau an , 1981, p. 9). As a esul ,
decision-making akes place in a a he ad hoc and un egula ed way, which gi es space o he
eme gence o ce ain sho comings, o de ia ions om he ideals o inclusi e consensus. The
decision-making is e ec i ely in he hands o a ew membe s a es – no only because he o he s
us hem o ep esen hei in e es s, bu also because he sys em o in-pe son consul a ions
equi es diploma ic capaci y which many G77 missions in New Yo k do no ha e. In line wi h
heo e ical expec a ions, indi idual membe s can asse hei own na ional in e es s o e he
p esump i e common in e es o he g oup. Wi h g owing di e si y in he g oup, he G77 can
o en no each a common posi ion o only a weak one, e en in hose a eas a ound de elopmen
ha a e a he cen e o he g oup’s mission. Wi h such di icul ies, eaching common posi ions
is o en an impe ec p ocess ha in ol es powe poli ics, he o e iding o signi ican in e es s
in he g oup, o simply a quid-p o-quo game, which can explain he bu geoning o G77 posi ions
o e he yea s ha do no eally e lec common p io i ies, despi e being o icially sanc ioned as
g oup posi ions.36 Al hough he g oup main ains a high deg ee o uni y in o ing, i is no ably
less uni ed in policy p ocesses han he G77’s image o a powe ul global Sou h nego ia ion bloc
sugges s, an image nu sed bo h by i sel and global No h coun e pa s.
The impe ec ions o G77 decision-making ha e knock-on e ec s on he No h-Sou h
dialogue a he UN. The G77, in p inciple, has unc ions no only o de eloping coun ies, bu
also owa ds mul ila e alism in he Gene al Assembly. As he la ges poli ical g oup, i s unc ion
is o agg ega e in e es s, p o ide hem wi h legi imacy, and hus c ea e he condi ions o
36 The i s Minis e ial Decla a ion om 1964 had jus 10 pa ag aphs; he decla a ion om 1997 had 73;
la ely, he numbe ose o 343 in 2023. This co esponds o a la ge numbe o Gene al Assembly
esolu ions, mos o hem ini ia ed and “zealously p o ec ed” by he G77 (in e iew 15).
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
47
nego ia ions in he Gene al Assembly. De ici s in he g oup’s in e nal p ocess can hus a ec
he p ocesses a he Gene al Assembly, and hey can in pa icula con ibu e o heigh ening
No h-Sou h ensions. Se e al aspec s seem o be no ewo hy based on ou esea ch. Fi s ,
impe ec ions in in e nal decision-making can mean ha hose G77 posi ions ha a e di isi e in
he global con ex seem o ge mo e a en ion han posi ions ha a ec common global in e es s.
G oup membe s en angled in geopoli ical con on a ion wi h he global No h can ake
ad an age o he weak decision-making p ocesses and shape he agenda in ways ha se e
hei in e es s. This cons i u es no jus a missed oppo uni y o deal wi h p oblems ha a e close
o he g oup’s mission, i can also hu he g oup’s global epu a ion which is kind o he cu ency
o in luence. As Swa and Lund no e, “The G-77 should be awa e ha i s mo al unde pinning
is a isk when i is seen as unwilling o comp omise on issues ha a e no s ic ly a he hea
o he G-77’s o iginal mission” (Swa & Lund, 2011, p. 161). Second, he impe ec ions in
decision-making mean ha he g oup o en has no posi ion, a gene al posi ion only, and/o igid
posi ions. In pa icula , he la e can play in o a dynamic o ui less g oup-con on a ion, ma ked
by poli icisa ion and s alema e, and uelling mis us on bo h sides. Thi d, in e nal decision-
making de ici s can lead o g oup policies buil on he cons uc ion o a common global
ad e sa y. I is much easie o uni e a ound demands o g ea e No h-Sou h ans e s, which
ein o ces No h-Sou h di isions, han o wo k ou common in e es s on policies (which could
ha e a much bigge impac on esou ce lows). One could go one s ep u he and a gue ha
he G77 has an un esol ed and inconsis en concep ion o i s global posi ion, whe e he
dominan demand o ans e s pu s he g oup in o he symbolically in e io posi ion o a ecipien
o e he g oup’s mo e undamen al conce n o equal igh s and pa icipa ion in global
go e nance. This dep i es he G77 o oppo uni ies o a ec change, and by implica ion, i
weakens he G77 as an impo an oice in he global poli ical discou se.
The global No h, i sel a d i e o he No h-Sou h con on a ion, is also a ac o o he
G77’s impe ec ions. As no ed in Sec ion 4, g oup uni y can, among o he ac o s, be explained
by in e -g oup con lic . In ac , he G77 was ounded in esponse o he dominan ole o he
global No h. This aises he ques ion o wha ex en he uni y and he beha iou o he G77
migh be condi ioned by he global No h. W i ing in he con ex o he la e 1970s and i s deba es
on a new in e na ional economic o de , Sau an obse ed ha global No h s a es may ha e
in i ed and p omo ed G77 uni y by esis ing subs an ial and de ailed discussions on economic
and ade issues in he UN (Sau an , 1981, p. 10). Policies in his ield will ouch on key na ional
in e es s, which may c ea e a mo e p agma ic app oach o nego ia ions as expe iences om
ade nego ia ions sugges (Singh, 2002, p. 470). Focusing on la gely no ma i e and symbolic
issues, howe e , makes i ela i ely easy o g oups o uni e is-à- is global coun e pa s (wi h
he excep ion o di isi e human igh s issues). I ma ginalisa ion can explain con on a ional
ac ics, hen ecen yea s ha e o e ed he global Sou h a couple o expe iences ha may ha e
eminded hem o hei subo dina e in e na ional posi ion: The wa agains Uk aine (and he
global No h s a es’ muscula eac ion o i ); he wa in Gaza, a e i o y o he G77 membe
Pales ine (likened o a genocide); he Co id pandemic (and issues a ound access o accines);
clima e change (wi h angible e ec s o he i s ime) – all hese we e, o s ill a e, majo global
c ises in which he global No h has domina ed he in e na ional esponses. The allega ion o
double s anda ds ha we e aised in he con ex o hese c ises speak o he poin ha powe
(o which he global Sou h s ill has less) ma e s mo e han no ms (which can ha e an equalising
e ec ). When A ab leade s asked in he UN “how he UN could ha e a Summi o he Fu u e i
Pales inian child en ha e no u u e a all” (Gowan, 2024b), hey exp essed he kind o
undamen al dis us in he global No h om which an agonis ic a i udes a ise. In such a
si ua ion o heigh ened an agonism, i can be unde s andable ha he G77 allies behind wha
global No h delega es conside hei “ adical” membe s ha demons a e an appe i e o
con on a ion, hus educing he space o he mode a e o ces and o subs an i e policy wo k.
S ill occupying a posi ion o powe in he in e na ional sys em, he global No h he e o e has a
pa icula esponsibili y o c ea e condi ions ha a e conduci e o dialogue. The key ac o s a e
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
48
likely no he diploma ic beha iou (ou each and us -building ac i i ies) bu he o eign policy
s a egies made in global No h capi als. Two seemingly con adic o y goals need o be
balanced o he global No h coun ies: Re aining global in luence as a geopoli ical impe a i e
in he eme ging mul ipola sys em (Ikenbe y, 2024), and sha ing powe in in e na ional o gani-
sa ions, whe e global No h coun ies s ill occupy p i ileged posi ions in e ms o s a
ep esen a ion and in luence o e policies. Following he Chinese model o muscula in luence
migh no be sus ainable – in he longe e m, global No h coun ies migh be well-ad ised o
apply “sma powe ” based on he p inciples o consis ency, eliabili y and pa ne -o ien a ion in
o de o sa egua d bo h na ional in e es s and mul ila e alism (Chen e al., 2023). This needs o
be coupled wi h an adjus men o a i udes; i a leas speaks o global No h delega es ha hey
hemsel es ecognise beha iou in hei own global camp ha is “sel -cen ed and igno an
abou he changed eali y” and a ached o “anach onis ic belie s” (in e iew 25). As global powe
shi s occu , such a i udes come wi h he e e -inc easing isk o aliena ing pa ne s in he global
Sou h.
A less con on a ional G77 could make o be e global Sou h ou comes. Jus as he global
No h has a choice, so oo does he G77. I can use i s new ound powe o u n up he p essu e
on he global No h and app oach UN poli ics as a powe game whe e he goal is o maximise
in luence and win policy ba les. Wi h i s majo i y o o es, i could do ha . Howe e , while
majo i y o es a e legi ima e and can be used o send a s ong signal – he o e on he ax
esolu ion can be in e p e ed as a wake-up call o he global No h – hey a e no a sus ainable
ins umen o building condi ions o a cons uc i e dialogue, as hey could aliena e global No h
coun ies om he UN. A policy win in he UN would hen no ansla e in o any eal-wo ld bene i ,
o which he g oup should aspi e. This p omp s a conside a ion o how he G77 can iden i y and
pu sue i s common in e es s in a somewha mo e p agma ic way, whe e poli ical powe and
mo al pe suasion join hands. Like global No h coun ies, he g oup would be well-ad ised o
also seek o ms o “sma powe ” ha , while p incipled in he pu sui o he legi ima e in e es s
o he g oup, educe he isk o aliena ing coun e pa s. Such an app oach migh , in gene al,
in ol e ope a ing mo e h ough policy and discou se han h ough con on a ional powe ac ics;
i should be based on inclusi e p ocesses; and i should be conscious o he epu a ion o he
g oup as a sou ce o i s in luence in he UN.
Based on hese conclusions and he ision o he G77 as an e ec i e pa icipan in UN
mul ila e alism, we o e ou sugges ions abou he gene al di ec ion in which imp o emen s o
he G77’s decision-making could be pu sued:
6.1 Inclusi e decision-making
The s eng h o he G77 is no jus a ma e o i s uni y in o ing, and maybe no e en p ima ily.
Ra he , he e is a deepe and mo e compelling o m o uni y ha comes om he po en ial
inclusi eness o he G77’s in e nal decision-making. An inclusi e consensus will p oduce be e
posi ions ha a e mo e balanced and well-g ounded in common global Sou h in e es s and ha
o his eason ca y g ea e weigh in he Gene al Assembly. I will also ac as a sa egua d
agains he poli ics o “who ge s wha ” and o he sho comings ha eme ge when poli ics akes
p ecedence o e policy. I will make o g ea e us in he G77 bo h in e nally, om G77
membe s i sel , and ex e nally, om coun e pa s in he Gene al Assembly. The G77 is hus
well-ad ised o adjus i s a angemen s o building consensus. Rela i ely modes changes
could b ing subs an ial imp o emen s. Fo example, he g oup migh c ea e a mechanism o
G77 membe s o p o ide w i en inpu s o in e nal consul a ions, om which he chai o bu den-
sha e could hen cons uc a common posi ion. To acili a e he b oades possible in ol emen
o G77 membe s, an in o ma ion-sha ing sys em could ensu e ha missions a e ou inely
upda ed on consul a ions and nego ia ions. This would allow missions o ollow p ocesses
wi hou he need o be (pe sonally) p esen in all mee ings, and i could also gi e hem an
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
49
oppo uni y o un issues h ough hei capi als wi h ela i e ease. Such a angemen s would
b ing g ea e anspa ency o he g oup’s decision-making. A po en ial downside migh be seen
in he educed space o ank exchanges behind closed doo s. Howe e , he bene i s o a mo e
au ho i a i e, legi ima e, and balanced g oup posi ion based on inclusi i y would seem o
ou weigh he bene i s o sec ecy. The G77 migh also conside e i ing p ac ices o he 1970s,
whe e a wo king g oup o 27 membe s a es, consis ing o nine membe s om each egion,
p epa ed p oposals o he g oup ha we e hen ei he adop ed by consensus o e e ed back
o u he discussions (Sau an , 1981, pp. 75-77).
6.2 Focus on s a egic p io i ies
Impac equi es ocus. The cu en po olio o G77 posi ions (as exp essed in Minis e ial Decla-
a ions, o example) is oo expansi e o allow o a meaning ul ocus and ollow-up on p og ess.
No only global No h pa ne s bu also G77 membe s appea o lack a clea concep o wha
he G77 wan s, apa om i s demands on g ea e No h-Sou h ans e s and e o m o he
in e na ional inancial ins i u ions. De ici s in he agg ega ion o in e es a e no conduci e o
s a egic ba gaining in he Gene al Assembly, in he sense ha bo h sides can compa e policies
and nego ia e comp omises a ound hei p io i ies. The g oup would he e o e be well-ad ised
o egula ly e iew and de ine key p io i ies. The 2023 “Ha ana Decla a ion”, wi h i s ocus on
he ole o science, echnology and inno a ion, p o ides an example o such a p ocess and he
hema ic ocus i b ings (G77, 2023d). In he pas , he 27-membe wo king g oup and la e he
annual G77’s Minis e ial Mee ing, which akes place a he beginning o he egula session o
he Gene al Assembly, p o ided his unc ion o “limi [ing] he opics o be deal wi h by he G oup
o he main issues […] ha a e o conce n o he G oup as a whole” (Sau an , 1981, p. 79). This
unc ion should be e i ed, p oducing a well- ocused agenda and conc e e goals a ound which
he g oup’s ene gy and ou each ac i i ies could be bundled. This could also help o build g ea e
accoun abili y: A ew clea ly s a ed goals could p o ide a amewo k agains which he g oup
can e iew policy p og ess in he Gene al Assembly and, i necessa y, d aw lessons lea ned
when p og ess is no sa is ying. They could be he basis o delega ing wo k owa ds wo king
g oups cha ged wi h elabo a ing posi ions. As posi i e side-e ec s, ag eed policy p io i ies
would be a ac o o policy discipline, as de ia ions om hese p io i ies would ha e o be
jus i ied. They could also se in mo ion a e lec ion o whe e he key in e es s o he g oup lie,
and how hey a e bes pu sued. F om in e iews, and suppo ed by ou own analysis (Sec ion
2), he G77 is pe cei ed as being s ongly ocused on No h-Sou h ans e s, which can
o e shadow i s o he policies – policies ha could po en ially esul in much bigge inancial
lows. The exe cise o de ining annual (o mul i-annual) policy p io i ies could s eng hen he
g oup’s abili y o make policy p oposals.
6.3 G ea e ne wo king
The G77 in New Yo k appea s o ope a e in i s own bubble ha cen es on i s equen in e nal
consul a ions and whe e G77 delega es in New Yo k belong o he inside and e e ybody else
o he ou side. Links o he ou side wo ld appea o be minimal (apa om con ac s o global
No h delega es who a e hemsel es pa o he la ge UN cosmos in New Yo k). Howe e , i
he G77 aspi es o a g ea e ole in global go e nance, i would be well-ad ised o open up
owa ds he wo ld beyond he na ow pe ime e s o i s in e nal p ocesses. In oday’s ib an
public sphe e, he ou e o global in luence goes a leas pa ially h ough public discou se. To
some ex en , he o e on he ax esolu ion made sense, and in e na ional inancial ins i u ions
e o m became a opic in he Summi o he Fu u e p ocess because he e was a s ong public
suppo o hese issues, educing he abili y o global No h s a es o e ec i ely coun e hese
G77 in e es s. To build a case and aim o change ha is la ge han some language in speci ic
Gene al Assembly esolu ions, he G77 should he e o e engage in global ne wo king, ac i ely
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
56
Swa , L., & Lund, P. (2011). The G oup o 77: Pe spec i es o i s ole in he UN Gene al Assembly. Cen e
o UN Re o m Educa ion. h ps://old.cen e o un e o m.o g/?q=node/510
Takahashi, T. (2021). Rising and Leading: China wi h he G77 a he Uni ed Na ions Gene al Assembly.
h ps://dx.doi.o g/10.2139/ss n.3944408
Thaku , R. (2020). The Uni ed Na ions and he No h-Sou h Pa ne ship: Connec ing he Pas o he
Fu u e. E hics & In e na ional A ai s, 34(2), 305-317.
Toye, J. (2014). Assessing he G77: 50 yea s a e UNCTAD and 40 yea s a e he NIEO. Thi d Wo ld
Qua e ly, 35(10), 1759-1774.
UN (Uni ed Na ions). (2005). Ju idical Yea book 2005. h ps://www.un-
ilib a y.o g/con en /books/9789213633618
UN. (2017a). Gene al Assembly Se en y-second session. 7 h Plena y Mee ing (20 Sep embe 2017), UN-
Doc. A/72/PV.7.
UN. (2017b). Impac o mul iple and in e sec ing o ms o disc imina ion and iolence in he con ex o
acism, acial disc imina ion, xenophobia and ela ed in ole ance on he ull enjoymen o all human
igh s by women and gi ls. Repo o he Uni ed Na ions High Commissione o Human Righ s, UN-
Doc. A/HRC/35/10.
UN. (2019). Gene al Assembly, Second Commi ee, S a e o Pales ine: Re ised d a esolu ion. Women
in De elopmen , UN-Doc. A/C.2/74/L.28/Re .1.
UN. (2021a). Gene al Assembly Se en y-six h session. 10 h Plena y Mee ing (23 Sep embe 2021), UN-
Doc. A/76/PV.10.
UN. (2021b). Ou Common Agenda. Repo o he Sec e a y-Gene al. h ps://www.un.o g/en/con en /common-
agenda- epo /asse s/pd /Common_Agenda_Repo _English.pd
UN. (2022a). Gene al Assembly Se en y-se en h session. 14 h Plena y Mee ing (26 Sep embe 2022),
UN-Doc. A/77/PV.14.
UN. (2022b). Gene al Assembly Se en y-six h session. 102nd Plena y Mee ing (8 Sep embe 2022), UN-
Doc. A/76/PV.102.
UN. (2022c). Resolu ion adop ed by he Gene al Assembly on 14 Decembe 2022. Women in
De elopmen , UN-Doc. A/RES/77/181.
UN. (2023a). Gene al Assembly Se en y-eigh h session. 12 h Plena y Mee ing (23 Sep embe 2023), UN-
Doc. A/78/PV.12.
UN. (2023b). Gene al Assembly Se en y-eigh h session. 10 h Plena y Mee ing (22 Sep embe 2023), UN-
Doc. A/78/PV.10.
UN. (2023c). Gene al Assembly Se en y-eigh h session. 8 h Plena y Mee ing (21 Sep embe 2023), UN-
Doc. A/78/PV.8.
UN. (2023d). Gene al Assembly Se en y-eigh h session. 4 h Plena y Mee ing (19 Sep embe 2023), UN-
Doc. A/78/PV.4.
UN. (2023e). S a is ical Yea book 2023. UN Depa men o Economic and Social A ai s.
UN. (2023 ). P omo ion o inclusi e and e ec i e in e na ional ax coope a ion a he Uni ed Na ions.
Repo o he Sec e a y-Gene al. Ad ance unedi ed e sion, 8 Augus 2023.
UN. (2023g). Gene al Assembly Second Commi ee. Summa y eco d o he 25 h mee ing. Held a
Headqua e s, New Yo k, on Wednesday, 23 No embe 2022, UN-Doc. A/C.2/77/SR.25.
UN. (2023h). The Leas De eloped Coun ies Repo 2023. C isis- esilien De elopmen inance.
h ps://www.un-
ilib a y.o g/docse e / ull ex /9789213585368/9789213585368_web.pd ?expi es=1724660153&id=i
d&accname=ocid77015268&checksum=088DF99B2B20204C46F058F7D48D3F9A
UN. (2023i). P omo ion o inclusi e and e ec i e in e na ional ax coope a ion a he Uni ed Na ions.
Resolu ion 78/230, 22 Decembe 2023.
IDOS Discussion Pape 13/2024
57
UN. (2024a). Gene al Assembly, Second Commi ee, Summa y eco d o he 24 h mee ing. Held a
Headqua e s, New Yo k, on Tuesday, 21 No embe 2023, UN-Doc. A/C.2/78/SR.24.
UN. (2024b). Gene al Assembly, Second Commi ee, Summa y eco d o he 25 h mee ing. Held a
Headqua e s, New Yo k, on Wednesday, 22 No embe 2023, UN-Doc. A/C.2/78/SR.25*.
UN. (2024c). Pac o he Fu u e: Re .2. h ps://www.un.o g/si es/un2.un.o g/ iles/pac _ o _ he_ u u e_-
_ e .2_-_17_july.pd
UN. (s. a.). Wha does i mean when a decision is aken “by consensus”? Dag Hamma skjöld Lib a y.
h ps://ask.un.o g/ aq/260981
Unga , M. (2024). Poli ical di ides d i e a eassessmen o UN sanc ions. In e na ional C isis G oup.
h ps://www.c isisg oup.o g/global/poli ical-di ides-d i e- eassessmen -un-sanc ions
U pelainen, J. (2012). S a egic p oblems in No h–Sou h clima e inance: C ea ing join gains o dono s
and ecipien s. En i onmen al Science & Policy, 21, 14-23.
Vihma, A., Muluge a, Y., & Ka lsson-Vinkhuyzen, S. (2011). Nego ia ing solida i y? The G77 h ough he
p ism o clima e change nego ia ions. Global Change, Peace & Secu i y, 23(3), 315-334.
h ps://doi.o g/10.1080/14781158.2011.601853
