ABSTRACT
Dissension emerged within the G20 from 2010 onwards. As the crisis dissipated, in part because of the aggressive action in crisis management and the reform phases, the normal non-crisis dynamic of national diplomatic jockeying re-emerged, and centrifugal forces that fling actors apart took over from the crisis-induced centripetal forces. A dialectic of crisis management, reform and finally relapse into diplomatic dissension occurred. A G20 leaders’ forum, created in extremis as a response, began to show its limits. After 2010, there were increasing degrees of dissension and dispute in G20 summits. The election of Donald Trump as US president in 2016 heralded a much more contentious period for G20 summitry, as the nationalist president abandoned collective leadership and pursued America First. G20 summits from then on became increasingly acrimonious. Despite the dissension, the central banking epistemic community, the G20, continued to construct the re-regulatory paradigm, but more slowly now than in earlier periods. Faced with another crisis, this time the COVID-19 pandemic, the G20 would fail to live up to its earlier successes as a venue for economic crisis management and diplomacy.
