G20 draft statement on Gaza stirs Israeli unease over perceived bias

The wave of sympathy generated for Israel in the wake of The October 7 Massacre has largely faded as the war continues to drag on.

Israel now finds itself engaging in defensive diplomacy with limited results, with the country facing harsh criticism at events like the UN General Assembly and the BRICS summit. This week’s G20 summit in Rio de Janeiro, which will include representatives from Turkey, Saudi Arabia, Qatar, and many other countries, is likely to take a similar tone.

The G20, or Group of 20, is an intergovernmental forum that brings together 19 countries, the European Union, and the African Union. Focused on addressing global economic challenges, the G20 tackles issues such as international financial stability, climate change mitigation, and sustainable development. 

Israel, which is not a member of the forum, has expressed concerns that the meeting’s summary statement ventures beyond its mandate, delegitimizing Israel’s right to self-defense and implying that violence from Hamas should be expected.

Foreign Minister Gideon Sa’ar called the draft document “unbalanced and biased,” noting that it reportedly mentions the humanitarian and socioeconomic impacts of the war without condemning Hamas’ actions or addressing Israel’s right to self-defense.

Marianna Albuquerque, a professor at PUC-Rio’s International Relations Institute and a participant in a G20 engagement group, told The Media Line that the declaration is set to mention the conflict only to express regret for the suffering and in the context of its socioeconomic impacts. “Israel’s pressure to include these issues in the declaration about hostages and the right to self-defense seems out of place and misaligned with the typical scope of a G20 statement,” she said. “I find it highly unlikely that such pressure will lead to concrete results.”

G20 likely to deliver neutral declaration

Similarly, Monique Sochaczewski, a senior researcher at the Brazilian Center for International Relations and at the Middle East Studies and Research Group, said that the final declaration will likely be “a watered-down, consensus-driven statement.”

“The professional Brazilian diplomatic corps, who is hosting the meeting, seems intent on delivering something constructive, aiming to demonstrate Brazil’s ability to build consensus in this highly polarized world,” Sochaczewski said. “I anticipate Brazil might push for a statement linking global governance reform to current conflicts, but it will likely avoid deeper political commentary given the diverse political spectrum at the table—from far-right to far-left participants, as well as representatives from Muslim-majority countries.” 

Nimrod Goren, president of the Israeli Institute for Regional Foreign Policies and a senior fellow for Israeli Affairs at the Middle East Institute, said that the G20 final declaration is mostly symbolic but significant nonetheless. 

“Of all international fora, it is the UN Security Council that is most important, and the G20 is nowhere near,” Goren told The Media Line. “Its final statement will mostly be symbolic and will try to balance the diverse positions voiced during the debates. Specific countries are likely to use the stage to advance their agendas, so we can expect, for example, Turkey to be highly critical of Israel and the US to be generally supportive of Israel.”

Another country that is expected to support Israel is Argentina, under populist President Javier Milei’s leadership. Milei is a staunch supporter of Israel who is likely to disagree with criticism of the Jewish state.

Argentina has already displayed a willingness to go against the grain at the G20, refusing to sign two of the summit’s policy recommendation documents, known as communiques, and demanding the group put out a critical statement on Russia. 

Ensuring that the final statement is not critical of Israel is “a legitimate policy goal, but one that does not necessitate public bashing of draft statements, but rather skilled diplomacy,” Goren said. 

“Israel should seek to end the war, release the hostages, and advance a future of peace and normalization, but the right-wing government has been using international gatherings to try and promote this reactive diplomacy, which is often used to court the domestic right-wing electorate,” he said. 

Just like the Russia-Ukraine conflict, security in the Middle East is not on the G20 agenda. The group might, therefore, choose to avoid assigning blame around the war in Israel. 

Saudi Arabia, the G20’s sole Arab member state, has criticized Israel, but the Saudis are inclined to improve relations with the Jewish state ahead of a potential Abraham Accords revival.

“Structurally, Israel’s argument about an anti-Israel bias within the G20 doesn’t hold,” Albuquerque said. “So, this perspective does not hold up under scrutiny. The draft is not expected to name responsible parties or demand any measures. This aligns with the G20’s typical approach of avoiding direct involvement in conflict resolution and focusing instead on broader humanitarian and economic concerns.”

Regardless, Israel might face some harsh words at the summit, including comments from Brazil’s first lady, who Sochaczewski said might accuse Israel of committing genocide in Gaza. “While her comments don’t represent official policy, they could add tension to an already delicate scenario,” Sochaczewski said. 

Sochaczewski described a significant shift ongoing in Brazil in the public perception of the Gaza war among academics, diplomats, and even the general public, including evangelicals. “Many are describing it as genocide,” Sochaczewski said. “From academic circles to the general public, there’s a growing unease with the reports coming out of Gaza that there’s a far-right agenda aimed at recolonizing Gaza and undermining the possibility of a Palestinian state.”