Web articles

A radical revamp

By Priya Shankar

The recent G8 Summit in L'Aquila demonstrates that the grouping can not carry on as it is - and even the G20 is not an apt replacement.

As we start to sift through the headlines on the G8 Summit in L’Aquila, there is a lot that appears significant – a pledge to conclude a trade deal by the end of 2010, a 15 billion dollar fund for African farming, Chinese demands for a new international reserve currency, a failure to reach a clear consensus on climate change and so on. But, perhaps the most striking feature of this summit will be how it irrevocably demonstrated that the G8 has outlasted its purpose. 

While many have been saying that the G8 is an outdated body for several years, never was it as apparent as during this year’s summit. Following only a few months after the G20 Summit in London, the G8 gathering appeared but an appendage to the larger grouping, which is where the real business was done. This perception was aggravated by the chaos and confusion in the run up to the summit with the Italian leadership setting no clear agenda and other members partially taking over preparations. The summit, with the addition of the Outreach Five countries, and other members of the Major Economies Forum on climate change, African countries, and representatives of several international organisations, was not a meeting of eight pivotal countries, but a major spectacle with no clear aim or outcome.

As the G8 becomes less relevant, what could be the alternative? “G20” has become the latest buzzword and everyone seems to be jumping on the bandwagon. While the G20 is certainly playing a positive and crucial role in response to the financial crisis, there are complexities that need to be kept in mind. Large and representative groupings are very helpful when grappling with certain issues, but can become too unwieldy and difficult to coordinate. The financial crisis has affected all major economies, but some international challenges are more limited in their impact and scope. And, when it comes to widespread consensus, approval and legitimacy, there can be no substitute (and certainly not the G20) for the UN General Assembly. While the G20 has its purpose, a smaller grouping of the current pivotal players is also necessary.

Some have said that the G20 summit in London was but a backdrop for a meeting of the G2 (the United States and China).  Others have proposed a G3 forum including the US, China and the European Union. These are clearly the three most important economies in the world, but it is not so clear that they are the only three powers with great influence and significance. While the United States undoubtedly remains the world’s most influential country, and China appears all set to be the next great superpower, the world will not be bipolar or even tripolar (if we add Europe), but rather multipolar, with a number of significant actors, as the Foresight project investigates. The predominance of the United States is, in relative terms, diminishing. China’s rise is dependent on its internal stability, which, as recent events in the Xinjiang province demonstrate, is not quite certain. And, the European Union, until it is able to develop a more unified approach and foreign policy, will find it difficult to exert influence. In fact, the key problem with a G2 or G3 would be, not that the EU, the US or China are not crucial actors, but that there are other pivotal players who need to be given a seat at the international high-table in a world that is increasingly multi-polar.

The solution seems to be, not a G2 or G3, but rather a radically revamped G8. This new grouping would consist of the European Union, the United States, Russia, China, India, Brazil, South Africa and Egypt. While the significance of the EU, the US and China is self-evident, the others in this grouping can also play a critical role in tackling global challenges from the economic downturn to resource scarcity to international terrorism. 

Russia, after a period of collapse in the 1990’s, witnessed rapid recovery and started reasserting its historical role and position. Although it has been adversely affected by the current financial crisis, it still remains a key player on many fronts. India and Brazil, with their own paths of economic growth within a democratic framework, have emerged as champions of the developing world. Brazil, through its attempts at greater regional integration and cooperation in an area that has long been regarded as the backyard of the United States, is increasingly influential. And, India, with one-sixth of humanity, plays a moderating role in an unstable region.

Following the end of the apartheid regime, South Africa’s development has been one of the greatest success stories in postcolonial Africa and it is starting to play a leading role in the continent. Egypt, as one of the largest economies in the Middle East, and with its historical and cultural influence in the region, could be critical in helping bridge the gap with the Arab world.

Although revamping the G8 will be no easy process, the landscape of global power is rapidly changing, and the recent summit has demonstrated that the body can not continue as it is for much longer. Perhaps the most difficult step will be persuading the European members to agree to one-seat, but if Europe is able to evolve a more unified position, it will only be in its own interests – giving it greater clout and bargaining power. The idea of a new G8 might seem farfetched, but the winds of change are blowing – soon, there might even be a G8 Summit that takes place in Cape Town instead of Cologne.