by Mykola Volkivskyi 

25 November 2025, Johannesburg, South Africa

The 2025 G20 Summit in Johannesburg was a turning point, both symbolically and substantively. For the first time, the leaders of the world’s major economies gathered on African soil, and this alone shaped the tone of the negotiations, the framing of global priorities, and the spirit of the final declaration. Observing the process directly in Johannesburg, I saw how the philosophy of Ubuntu—“I am because we are”—was not just a ceremonial reference but a political instrument used by the South African Presidency to push the G20 toward a more inclusive global majority perspective. This shift was visible in every line of the declaration, including the parts that mattered most for Ukraine.

The declaration balances three competing forces: the principles of the UN Charter, the geopolitical fragmentation of the world, and the insistence of African and Global South states on addressing structural inequalities. Within this context, the language on peace and conflict resolution became a delicate exercise in diplomatic engineering. The text reaffirms the territorial integrity and sovereignty of all states, condemns attacks on civilians and infrastructure, and emphasises the prohibition of territorial acquisition by force - an essential reference point aligned with Ukraine’s core positions. Yet, as expected, Russia is not explicitly named. Instead, Ukraine appears as one of several conflict zones - listed alongside Sudan, the DRC, and the Occupied Palestinian Territory - where the G20 supports a “just, comprehensive, and lasting peace.” While some may see this as dilution, the reality on the ground was different: despite the absence of explicit attribution of aggression, Ukraine remains firmly embedded in the global discussion on peace, sovereignty, and international law. The principles that matter most for Ukraine still form the backbone of the declaration, and Russia knowingly signed a text reaffirming those same principles.

The broader geopolitical context cannot be ignored. The G20 today is not the G20 of 2014 or even 2020. The influence of the Global South has grown, and many countries from Africa, Asia, and Latin America now approach the war in Ukraine through the prism of economic stability, food security, and energy affordability. In private conversations around the summit, it was clear that while most delegations recognise the illegality of Russia’s actions, they do not want global geopolitical confrontation to overshadow their domestic priorities. This shift has structural consequences: support for Ukraine depends not only on moral arguments but also on strategic engagement with these countries. The Johannesburg Declaration confirms this reality. Ukraine must work intensively not only with Western allies but equally with Nairobi, Pretoria, New Delhi, Jakarta, Riyadh, and Brasília.

The declaration’s economic content is deeply intertwined with Ukraine’s interests. The sections on food security explicitly condemn the use of starvation as a method of warfare - an implicit recognition of Russia’s weaponisation of food routes. African states, heavily dependent on grain imports, were among the strongest voices insisting that global food supply chains cannot be disrupted by geopolitical coercion. Similarly, the focus on energy security, critical minerals, and just transitions creates openings for Ukraine’s post-war reconstruction, which will rely on diversified sources of energy technology, investment, and value chains. The push for reform of the IMF, greater representation of developing countries, and increasing lending capacity of multilateral development banks directly affects the future architecture of Ukraine’s financial recovery. All of these elements connect to Ukraine’s strategic interest in being part of the new economic conversation, not only the security conversation.

Johannesburg also demonstrated that Africa is no longer a passive arena but an assertive actor in global governance. The Compact with Africa, the Africa Engagement Framework, and multiple references to supporting African-led development reflect a continent claiming its political and economic agency. For Ukraine, this means that diplomatic work across Africa cannot be symbolic; it must be systematic, strategic, and long-term. A single centre of power no longer shapes the world. It is shaped by networks of influence - and Ukraine must be present within them.

Despite the competing priorities, the declaration maintains a rare global consensus on foundational principles: territorial integrity, peaceful settlement of disputes, condemnation of attacks on civilians, commitment to the UN Charter, support for food and energy security, and the need for a just peace in Ukraine. This consensus matters. It demonstrates that even in an age of geopolitical fragmentation, there remains global agreement on the norms Russia has violated. And although the language is cautious, the legal and political foundations it reinforces continue to work in Ukraine’s favour.

The G20 in Johannesburg ultimately confirms that Ukraine’s diplomatic strategy must evolve in parallel with the world around it. The war is no longer perceived by many states as the single defining crisis of the international system, but the principles at stake—sovereignty, territorial integrity, and the prohibition of aggression—remain universally recognised and defended. The challenge for Ukraine is to translate these principles into deeper partnerships across the Global South, clearer communication of its peace vision, and active participation in shaping global development and security agendas.

The Johannesburg Summit was not merely another meeting. It was a signal: the world is reorganising itself, and Ukraine must position itself within this new landscape. The G20 Declaration offers a foundation - in language, in norms, and in political commitments - that Ukraine can work with. But the next steps depend on how effectively Ukraine engages a world that is more diverse, more assertive, and more multipolar than ever before.