Reflecting the timeless pattern of global power shifts favouring emerging powers over established ones, the current state of US-China relations corresponds to this trend. Academic consensus regards shifts since Trump's presidency and the pandemic as dominant factors worsening US-China relations. One of the implications of the US-China rivalry is that issues of global governance are increasingly falling under the purview of geopolitical undercurrents, undermining the ability of the Group of 20 (G20) to deliver global public goods (GPGs). Although embedded within institutions such as the Group of 7 (G7), the G20, and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), the supply of GPGs is an attribute of global leadership. Theoretical and empirical accounts indicate that the regular supply of GPGs is dependent upon either the hegemony of a single power or the level of cooperation among the multiple centres of power prevailing in the international system at a given point in time. The decline of US hegemony and the lack of US-China cooperation poses questions for the future of G20 leadership and the global supply of GPGs. Given the uncertainty, this article aims to answer the following research problem—can the G20 lead the process of global governance by offering GPGs under the constrained conditions produced by the US-China rivalry? Specifically, this article addresses the following research questions: why the US-China rivalry affects the G20’s ability to deliver GPGs; which actors have led the field of global governance in the past; whether these actors are still capable of leading under contemporary conditions; and what pathways stifle the leadership potential of varied actors inside the G20. The article argues that the leadership crisis of the G20 is a cumulative effect of the declined ability of the G7 to play its traditional leadership role, coupled with its newly developed willingness to counter China’s rise. Moreover, the leadership gap is augmented by the polarization-based strategic pulls faced by middle powers, compromising their customary ability to lead global governance.

This article was submitted 18.05.2024