Opinion | Why Ukraine’s peace summit had so little to show for it

The recent two-day summit on the Ukraine war yielded few tangible results towards peace. Ukraine’s President Volodymyr Zelensky wanted to galvanise international support, particularly from the Global South, to maintain global focus on Russia’s invasion.

But major Global South nations, including India, South Africa, Saudi Arabia, Indonesia, Thailand, Mexico and the United Arab Emirates, refrained from endorsing the joint communiqué, showing significant global divide. It was a setback for Zelensky.

China had declined to attend the June 15-16 summit, which was a culmination of Zelensky’s 19-month efforts to engage world leaders to resolve Europe’s largest conflict since the second world war.

Switzerland hosted the event with the hope of laying the groundwork for a peace process inclusive of Russia, though Moscow was not invited. US President Joe Biden also opted not to attend, with Vice-President Kamala Harris going in his stead.

Biden’s absence, ostensibly due to a fundraiser in California, subtly signalled his low expectations for the summit. And so, it seems, were the expectations of many summit participants.

Despite invitations to over 160 countries and international organisations, the attendee list fluctuated and ultimately fell to around 100. Countries such as Brazil, India and South Africa sent lower-level representatives. Critics blamed China’s influence for the low participation. They labelled the six-point consensus between China and Brazil on the Ukraine crisis as a skilful boycott against the West.