Recently, the G20 Foreign Ministers' Meeting was held in Johannesburg, South Africa. This marks the first time the foreign ministers' meeting has taken place in an African country, carrying significant symbolic importance. However, it is regrettable that U.S. Secretary of State Rubio was absent from this crucial meeting. Coincidentally, U.S. Treasury Secretary Scott Bassent later announced that he would not attend the subsequent Finance Ministers and Central Bank Governors' Meeting in Cape Town. The consecutive absence from two major meetings clearly indicates deliberate actions by the new U.S. administration.

What Are the Reasons for the Consecutive Absences? Regarding the reasons for absence, Besant stated unequivocally that "he was fulfilling his duties in Washington," while Rubio bluntly said, "the meeting in South Africa is anti-American," hence he would not attend. Overall, there are three main reasons for the U.S. consecutive absences.

U.S. Secretary of State Rubio's public criticism of the South African conference. American unilateralism at play. After the Trump administration took office, it quickly initiated a wave of "withdrawals," successively exiting multilateral frameworks such as the Paris Agreement, the World Health Organization, and the United Nations Human Rights Council, while also demanding a review of U.S. participation in organizations like UNESCO.

Trump, who adheres to the "America First" philosophy, is also highly critical of multilateral mechanisms. In his view, only international institutions that "generate profits for America" and "consolidate the U.S. global standing" are worth participating in—otherwise, they serve no purpose.

South Africa has adopted "unity, equality, and sustainability" as the thematic agenda for its presidency. However, from Trump's perspective, all three themes clash with his ideology: rather than emphasizing "unity," he prefers unilateral action; the U.S. has always considered itself superior to other nations, making "equality" irrelevant; as for "sustainability," it is merely a byproduct of the "hoax" of climate change. Moreover, the agenda items focusing on "development priorities of the Global South" and advancing "fairer and more rational global governance" run directly counter to Trump's unilateralist and isolationist policies. Viewed in this light, the Trump administration's repeated absence from the meetings is hardly surprising.

Affected by the strained U.S.-South Africa relations. In his "absence statement," Rubio accused "South Africa of doing very bad things," reflecting the prolonged tension in U.S.-South Africa relations over a period of time. Last year, South Africa took the lead in filing a lawsuit against Israel at the International Criminal Court, accusing Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu and former Defense Minister Gallant of "war crimes" and "crimes against humanity," alleging genocide in Gaza. The International Criminal Court recognized Israel's crimes and issued arrest warrants globally.

As a "close ally" of Netanyahu, Trump was extremely displeased with South Africa's move and even issued sanctions against the International Criminal Court after taking office. On [specific date] this year, South African President Ramaphosa officially signed the new Expropriation Bill, which clearly allows the government to expropriate land under conditions that serve the public interest, while also outlining procedures for negotiation and compensation with landowners in accordance with the country's constitution.

Trump's "first brother" Musk was born in South Africa but holds no affection for the country. Previously, his Starlink system failed to meet the South African government's requirements and thus could not enter the country's market. When the "Expropriation Bill" was introduced, Musk not only angrily criticized the South African government for "violating human rights" but also accused the authorities of systematically oppressing white people. Trump also attacked the bill, claiming it contained "anti-white racial discrimination" and that "confiscating white-owned land" would constitute a "massive human rights violation." Shortly after, he signed an executive order, stating that South Africa's "Expropriation Bill" involved "forced land seizures" and announced plans to "cut off all funding to South Africa."

Trump stated on social media, "South Africa is seizing land and treating certain groups of people very poorly." In response, South African President Ramaphosa clarified that the South African government has not confiscated any land and that the South African Constitution prohibits the arbitrary deprivation of property. The South African Department of International Relations and Cooperation also issued a statement, pointing out that the U.S. executive order "contains factual inaccuracies." However, the Trump administration paid no heed and continued to act unilaterally, quietly labeling South Africa as an "anti-American country." The consecutive absence of the U.S. is likely a form of "absence diplomacy" to pressure South Africa.

Making way for the U.S.-Russia deal. Compared to the meeting, the Trump administration clearly believes that resolving the Russia-Ukraine conflict and extracting massive profits from Ukraine are more important. Following a phone call between the U.S. and Russian foreign ministers on [specific date], senior officials from both sides held talks in Saudi Arabia on [specific date], officially kicking off negotiations led by the U.S. and Russia to end the Russia-Ukraine conflict. Recently, the focus of U.S. diplomacy has been on facilitating direct talks between U.S. and Russian leaders and pressuring Ukraine to accept a "treacherous agreement" to surrender [specific percentage] of its mineral resources. Rubio and Besant are indeed very busy—but not with fulfilling their duties in Washington. Instead, they are busy "exploiting Ukraine"!

The banner of multilateralism must stand tall! Issues such as climate change, debt crises, and the development of Global South countries require consensus among major powers. Yet, the United States, as the world's largest developed country, frequently stands aloof and even uses its absence from meetings as a tool to pressure other nations. This once again reveals to the world the true face of U.S. hegemonism and unilateralism. America's repeated "no-shows" not only expose its selfishness and diplomatic short-sightedness but also demonstrate the substantial decline of its global leadership.

The absence of the United States will not lead to a loss of control in the world order; instead, it will provide emerging economies with greater space for discourse. If the U.S. continues to be absent in the future, it may accelerate the evolution toward a "+" model, further highlighting the rise of emerging powers such as the BRICS nations.

In contrast to the isolation and absence of the United States, China's commitment to multilateralism remains unwavering. Through initiatives like the Belt and Road Initiative and the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP), China continues to expand its economic and trade ties with global partners. Despite the Trump administration's withdrawal from the Paris Agreement, China has steadfastly upheld its commitments in the field of climate change, actively collaborating with Global South countries to promote climate finance and technology transfer, thereby supporting developing nations in achieving green transformation.

In response to U.S. attempts to pressure developing countries into taking sides, China has supported the diplomatic diversification of Global South nations through platforms like the BRICS cooperation mechanism and the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation. In fields such as artificial intelligence and the digital economy, China has deepened collaboration with countries like Brazil and South Africa, helping them enhance technological autonomy. In the realm of food security, China has expanded agricultural investments in Latin America and Africa to mitigate the negative impacts of global food supply chain fluctuations.

In disputed areas such as the South China Sea and East China Sea, China has promoted the establishment of a rules-based multilateral security framework through consultations on the Code of Conduct in the South China Sea and dialogue mechanisms with ASEAN, thereby avoiding military conflicts. On issues like the Russia-Ukraine conflict and the Israel-Palestine conflict, China has consistently advocated for political resolutions and opposed bloc confrontations.

A just cause enjoys abundant support while an unjust one finds little. Unilateralism pursued for selfish interests, no matter how it is packaged in new rhetoric, is just putting old wine in new bottles. In the mighty trend of cooperation and win-win, unilateralism is doomed to unpopularity.