Global Perspective: As extremists rise in G7 nations, leaders face troubled voters

By Hiroshi Nakanishi, Kyoto University Professor

The venue for the Group of Seven summit in Italy this June was a five-star resort on the Adriatic Sea. The leaders may have relaxed and enjoyed the spectacular views, but their political fortunes after the gathering seem far from promising. British Prime Minister Rishi Sunak has already resigned, while Japanese Prime Minister Fumio Kishida and United States President Joe Biden will leave office shortly. French President Emmanuel Macron and German Chancellor Olaf Scholz have suffered tough blows in parliamentary and local elections, and Canadian Prime Minister Justin Trudeau has also suffered low approval ratings. The only leader who is politically stable is the summit host, Italian Prime Minister Giorgia Meloni.

This situation is symbolic. The worldview of the leaders is seen by voters as distant from their own, just like the luxury hotel where the event was held.

However, the G7 leaders did seriously discuss the global situation. Their joint statement emphasized solidarity by expressing continued support for Ukraine against the Russian invasion and taking a tough posture against China for its economic support of Moscow.

That stance itself is not opposed by the public in many G7 countries, but it is far from what the people really expect from leaders. This is particularly evident in the U.S., where polls show that the economy, protection of democracy and immigration are the primary concerns of voters. In Europe and Japan, the focus is on the economy and pensions, and the level of interest in international issues is low.

Daily lives come before diplomacy

Indeed, this situation is nothing new, as voters tend to be more interested in issues that are directly related to their lives than foreign affairs. The problem now, however, is that leaders are seen as insensitive or not straightforward regarding peoples’ perception of foreign affairs being pursued at the expense of their livelihoods.

U.S. national security strategy released by the Trump administration in 2017 acknowledged the failure of the engagement policy pursued by previous administrations to attract China and Russia into the market economy and decided that the world had entered an era of great power competition. This basic worldview has been inherited by the Biden administration, but their policies have some differences. While the Trump administration advocated a self-centered “America First” policy, the Biden administration has been calling for the maintenance of a liberal international order led by the West. This has been welcomed by friendly governments, but it has not made clear how to best compete against China, the world’s second-largest economy, and Russia, which has vast territories and resources, without running the tab on citizens.

The main outcome of that competition is the global inflation we are facing. The cause is not just one. For instance, it can be pinned to large-scale fiscal spending in various countries and damage to supply chains during the COVID-19 pandemic. Western countries cannot be called leaders of free trade anymore, as the joint statement of the June G7 summit failed to mention “free trade” and instead used the term “free and fair trade.”

The main reasons for this situation are economic sanctions against Russia and China’s overproduction supported by government subsidies; behind these factors looms the so-called economic security theory, which is prompting concerns against the “weaponization of trade” in which authoritarian countries use trade for political purposes.

Such concerns, however, are not likely to justify the extremely high tariffs the West is imposing on Chinese electric vehicles (EVs). Nor can they support the continued refusal by the U.S. to appoint new judges to the World Trade Organization’s Appellate Body for dispute settlement. Whatever the reasons, the West is partly responsible for the fragmentation of the global economy, fueling inflation, hurting the middle- and low-income classes and increasing those groups’ dissatisfaction with their leaders.

Distrust of double standards

In addition, it cannot be denied that the double standards of mainstream leaders who say one thing and act differently is eroding their credibility. Western countries have expressed humanitarian concerns about the war in Gaza, which began last October and is estimated to have killed more than 40,000 people. But the West has failed to pressure the Netanyahu government in Israel to stop the fighting. When Russian President Vladimir Putin, who is named in an arrest warrant issued by the International Criminal Court (ICC), visited Mongolia, an ICC member, the U.S., a nonmember, condemned Mongolia’s failure to take steps to arrest Putin. Washington, however, opposed the court’s investigation of Israeli officials such as Netanyahu.

Of course, international politics is complex, and not everything works as it should. However, if the gap between pretense and reality widens, and if the leaders turn away from the problem and talk only about pretense, the legitimacy of the existing order will be weaker.

In the U.S. and Europe, extremist political forces are emerging against mainstream political parties, and the axis of political rearrangement is changing. The forces that have traditionally been called the far right and the far left have adopted a strategy called “de-demonization,” while the centrist forces are coming together, going beyond their normal confrontation, in a bid to suppress the extremists.

In Italy, Ms. Meloni, a symbol of de-demonization, has maintained a stable position, and in France, a left-wing and centrist coalition including the far left has joined forces to prevent the rise of the far-right National Rally (formerly the National Front). In the U.S., Democratic presidential candidate Vice President Harris has called on the centrists of the Republican Party to rally against Trump.

Burden of greater international roles

The situation in Japan is different, where extremism has, at present, no power. Yet, Tokyo’s dependence on foreign countries is increasing, with massive government debt and a significant labor shortage. This is illustrated by the fact that inbound tourism has become particularly important for local economies, and the real estate and stock markets are booming thanks to the inflow of foreign capital.

Since the end of World War II, Japan has been said to have benefited dearly from the free trade system established under the leadership of the U.S. In fact, its post-war economic surge would have been unthinkable without a free trade system. In recent years, as Europe and the U.S. have waned as international leaders, Japan has strengthened efforts to protect the very system it benefited from during the postwar period. As a result, Japan’s diplomacy over the past decade or so has been praised internationally.

As Japan’s own dependence on the outside world increases, expanding its role in the maintenance of the international order would naturally mean a greater burden on the Japanese people. Playing a greater international role while trying to ease public concerns about the associated cost will require Tokyo to make highly strategic decisions going forward.

…………………………………………………………………………………

Hiroshi Nakanishi

Born in 1962, Nakanishi assumed the role of associate professor at Kyoto University in 1991 and professor in 2002. He was the president of the Japan Association of International Relations from 2014 through 2016, and served as the dean of the university’s School of Government between 2016 and 2018. A specialist in international politics, he has authored many books on the subject, including “What international politics means” in 2003, which won the Yomiuri Yoshino Sakuzo Prize, and “Liberal international order in flux,” which he co-authored in 2024.