The rising tensions surrounding the South China Sea and the deepening crisis in the Sahel region demonstrate the fragility of global order. Maintaining stability demands a renewed commitment to collaborative problem-solving, yet the current geopolitical landscape appears increasingly resistant to such endeavors. Indonesia’s insistence on “peace as an enabler” – articulated by Foreign Minister Sugiono during the 2nd G20 Foreign Ministers’ Meeting – represents a crucial, though potentially challenging, assertion amidst a world grappling with escalating conflicts and diminished international cooperation. The statement, delivered on the sidelines of the 80th Session of the United Nations General Assembly in September 2025, highlights a potential shift in the operating principles of a body historically dominated by national self-interest.
The core of Minister Sugiono’s argument centers on the inextricable link between security and sustainable development. He argues that confronting complex global challenges – climate change, economic inequality, food and energy insecurity, and heightened geopolitical instability – necessitates a shared commitment to peaceful resolution. The Indonesian approach, explicitly prioritizing “peace,” seeks to inject a fundamental element often overlooked in high-level discussions: the recognition that conflict and instability actively undermine all efforts towards progress. The timing of this statement, coinciding with renewed Chinese assertiveness in the South China Sea and escalating violence in the Sahel, is particularly significant, arguably signaling a direct challenge to the prevailing prioritization of state sovereignty over collective security.
Historical Context and Stakeholder Dynamics
The concept of “peace as an enabler” is not entirely novel within multilateral forums. The post-World War II era, particularly the establishment of the United Nations, was predicated on the belief that international order could only be built on a foundation of peaceful cooperation. However, the Cold War significantly eroded this faith, leading to a transactional approach to diplomacy and a decline in the authority of international institutions. The G20, initially formed to address the 2008 financial crisis, represents a more economically-focused multilateral body, yet its success hinges, to a significant extent, on a shared commitment to stability – a commitment that has been tested repeatedly by divergent national interests.
Key stakeholders – China, the United States, the European Union, Russia, and the numerous emerging economies represented within the G20 – hold vastly different perspectives. China’s expansive claims in the South China Sea, coupled with its increasingly assertive foreign policy, directly challenges the established rules-based international order, and poses an immediate test of the G20's ability to maintain coherence. The United States, under a new administration, is re-evaluating its role in global affairs, and its engagement with the G20 – and, by extension, the UN – remains strategically ambiguous. The European Union, facing internal divisions and the ongoing repercussions of the Ukraine war, is navigating a complex geopolitical landscape with reduced leverage. Russia, currently under significant international sanctions, continues to operate outside of many traditional multilateral frameworks, contributing to a climate of distrust.
Recent Developments and the UN80 Initiative
The past six months have seen a marked escalation in several key areas. The South China Sea has witnessed increased naval activity and confrontations, with several near-miss incidents reported between Chinese and Philippine vessels. The deteriorating security situation in the Sahel, characterized by the rise of extremist groups and the collapse of state authority, has displaced millions and created a humanitarian crisis. Furthermore, the continued blockage of aid corridors to Gaza, coupled with ongoing diplomatic efforts to negotiate a ceasefire, highlights the limitations of current international mechanisms.
The UN Secretary-General's UN80 initiative, aimed at accelerating progress towards the Sustainable Development Goals by the UN’s 80th anniversary, offers a concrete framework for the G20 to contribute. However, the initiative’s success is contingent upon the G20’s willingness to prioritize resource allocation and operational efficiency. Data from the World Bank indicates a persistent SDG financing gap, estimated at over $2.5 trillion annually – a figure exacerbated by geopolitical instability and declining international investment.
Expert Commentary
“The core challenge is shifting from a reactive, crisis-management approach to a proactive, preventative one,” states Dr. Eleanor Vance, Senior Fellow at the International Security Studies Institute. “Minister Sugiono’s emphasis on ‘peace’ is a crucial first step, but it requires a demonstrable commitment to resource allocation and diplomatic engagement. Simply stating the need for peace is not enough; it must be backed by tangible action.”
Another perspective comes from Dr. Jian Li, Director of the Center for Global Governance at Fudan University. “The G20’s legitimacy rests on its ability to deliver tangible results. The South China Sea dispute and the Sahel crisis demonstrate a profound lack of efficacy within existing multilateral frameworks. Reform is paramount, including a re-evaluation of the voting system and increased representation for emerging economies.”
Future Impact and Potential Outcomes
In the short-term (next 6 months), we can anticipate continued tension in the South China Sea, with potential for further escalation if diplomatic efforts fail. The situation in the Sahel is likely to deteriorate further, demanding an increased humanitarian response and renewed efforts to address the root causes of instability. The UN80 initiative will face significant obstacles due to funding constraints and political divisions.
Looking further out (5-10 years), the success of Minister Sugiono’s vision hinges on a fundamental shift in the global geopolitical landscape. A more fragmented world, characterized by competing blocs and diminished international cooperation, presents a significant challenge. However, a renewed commitment to multilateralism, driven by the recognition of shared vulnerabilities, could lead to a more resilient and equitable international order.
Call for Reflection
The Indonesian Foreign Minister’s assertion of “peace as an enabler” serves as a powerful reminder of the fundamental link between security and sustainable development. In a world facing unprecedented challenges, a return to the core principles of collaborative problem-solving is not merely desirable – it is essential. The question remains: can the G20, and by extension the international community, successfully translate this aspiration into tangible action, or will the forces of fragmentation and conflict ultimately prevail?