Por que a reunião de 2026 do G20 nos EUA terminou sem uma declaração oficial? - A visão chinesa do desentendimento

Por que a reunião de 2026 do G20 nos EUA terminou sem uma declaração oficial?

Os EUA manobraram para que ela contivesse uma linguagem expressando unicamente seus pontos de vista. Aqui o ponto de vista chinês (não sanemos o que exatamente o Brasil defendeu):

PRC explanation of why there was no G20 communiqué 

The G20 Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors Meeting in Asheville ended September 1 with a US chair's statement rather than a communiqué. The statement noted that all members present except the PRC agreed to the text and that the PRC objected to paragraphs 4, 10, 11 and 13. Asked about it Wednesday, the MFA spokesperson said the PRC "deeply regrets" the outcome and that the G20 should coordinate "based on the principles of consensus and equal participation."

Yuyuan Tantian, the CCTV-affiliated account that carries authorized leaks on trade issues, on Thursday published an "exclusive" laying out the objections. I have posted a full translation here. 

The three "concerns," in its framing: the text described the global economy without mentioning tariffs or high-tech export controls; paragraphs 10 and 11 were the US "smuggling in its own agenda" (夹带私货), since "non-market policies and practices" and "excessive reliance on export-led growth" are, per the piece, "the claims the United States has recently and repeatedly hyped—'overcapacity,' 'China shock 2.0' and the 'China squeeze' thesis"; and the debt paragraph singled out official bilateral creditors, who hold only about 15% of developing-country debt, while saying nothing about shrinking aid from developed countries.

A "person involved in the negotiations" told Tantian:

“The G20 has never discussed a definition of the term "non-market policies and practices"... Moreover, the so-called "non-market policies and practices" language actually comes from the United States' 2018 Section 301 investigation of China.”

The article sees the US moves at the meeting as an attempt to "reap the benefits twice": tariffs and export controls first, then a multilateral label that becomes the "basis" for more of both. And the “atmosphere for China-U.S. cooperation” is now damaged:

“A person close to the negotiations told Tantian: “By doing this, the United States is undermining the broader multilateral agenda this year. The G20 and APEC have always been the most important multilateral platforms for global economic governance, and this year the United States and China are serving as hosts, respectively. China-U.S. relations are at a critical stage, and the two countries’ heads of state have charted the direction for bilateral relations and multilateral cooperation. By playing these petty tricks at the G20 meeting, the United States has damaged both the G20’s credibility and the atmosphere for China-U.S. cooperation.”