|
Issues in Focus:
G 8 Summit - unimpressive, ineffectual and disappointing
Jayatilleke de SILVA
The 34th Summit of the Group of Eight (G 8) comprising the United
States, Japan, the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Italy, Canada and
Russia, held last week in Toyako, Hokkaido, Japan was unimpressive
despite the pre-summit hype.
|
Japanese prime minister at the G8 summit held recently |
In terms of expenses the Hokkaido Summit exceeded all expectations.
The Japanese hosts have beaten all their predecessors in magnitude and
scale in preparing the Summit. Even the security was over done. It had
spent US$ 280 million on security, a figure more than double the US$ 130
million spent by Germany last years Summit in Heiligendamm.
Dinner
The Japanese hosts also treated the G 8 leaders with a six-course
lunch followed by an eight-course dinner on the first day, serving 24
dishes in all and this ironically in a summit deliberating on a world
food crisis where millions are starving!
Perhaps they would have taken a cue from Marie Antoinette, the 18th
Century French Queen who on the eve of the French Revolution asked the
masses to eat cake if bread was scarce.
Three main issues were on the agenda at the Summit, viz., the world
economy, climate change and environment and African development.
The G 8 failed to agree on any concrete measures to stimulate the
world economy suffering from the sub prime mortgage crisis and the
credit crunch in the United States and the rise in global fuel and food
prices.
All it could do was to express pious wishes or make ineffective
appeals. For example it called upon the oil producers to increase
production but how this call would bear fruit is not clear when the G 8
does not include most of the major oil producers.
As regards development all it could do was to call for further trade
liberalisation despite the fact that liberalised policies have failed to
deliver during the last three decades or so. Nor were the G 8 leaders
ready to assume responsibility for using corn for producing bio-fuel, a
factor promoting high food prices and shortages.
The main way out shown by the G 8 is to conclude the Doha Round of
negotiations on trade. Yet, they did not show any inclination to remove
protectionist measures in their countries or provide a level playing
field for developing country exports, which have become the stumbling
blocks hindering trade negotiations.
The intransigence of these powers, also in relation to the inclusion
of non-trade issues like investment in the trade negotiations is yet
another obstacle preventing the conclusion of the Doha Round of
negotiations.
Disappointing
The ineffective and disappointing nature of the Summit outcome is
better seen in relation to the subject of climate change and
environment. The best it could do was to call for halving Green House
Gas emissions by 2050. In the absence of a base year (1990, 2000, 2005?)
the call was meaningless and of no practical value.
There were no targets set for individual nations or for the world as
a whole. In the absence of mid-term targets no progress review could be
undertaken as to how far the world would have proceeded in the interim
period.
It also conveniently ignores the responsibility of the high energy
users who cause much of these emissions to commit to strict deadlines to
meet specified targets. It should be recalled that the United States had
consistently refrained from signing the Kyoto Protocol on reducing
carbon emissions.
Here the United States only agrees to take concerted efforts with
some 18 other countries who met on the sidelines of the Hokkaido Summit.
The African leaders who were invited for a luncheon meeting with the
G 8 expressed their dissatisfaction over the commitment of the G 8
towards African development. The Group of Eight leaders on Tuesday set a
five-year deadline to provide 60 billion dollars to fight disease in
Africa. However, the African leaders are a bit sceptical and they have
every reason to be so.
Global aid
Three years ago in Gleneagles, Scotland they promised to increase
global aid by US$ 50 billion a year by 2010 and raise aid to Africa by
US$ 25 billion. A monitoring report released last month by the
independent African Progress Panel showed the bloc of rich nations was
only 14 per cent of the way towards hitting its target.
The Summit also failed to arrive at a blueprint for a post-Kyoto
environmental protocol to be considered by the UN in its deliberations
for a new agreement to replace the Kyoto Protocol which ends in 2012.
On the political front to nothing more than mere declarations
resulted.
Importance
On the sidelines of the Summit G 8 leaders had discussions with the
outreach nations - China, India, Brazil, Mexico and South Africa - on
issues on the Summit agenda. This is a tacit acknowledgment of the
growing importance of these developing nations in the world economy.
Naturally, opinions differed.
The G 5, as the outreach nations are called, met separately and
called for a cooperative effort to address problems of the world
economy, climate change and development.
They have also pointed out the necessity of treating them on an equal
footing with the G 8.
The failure of the G 8 Summit shows once again the need for a new
world order of governance, an order without the hegemony imposed by the
developed states and multilateral institutions. |
