“The Group of Eight” is so to say the inner club created in 1975. Initially it was the group of Six, then the Group of Seven, and later Russia also joined the club.
But is there still the sense for the leaders of eight countries to meet apart from showing their common touch towards each other? What are these summits for, at the time when the influence of the developed countries on the world economy is growing weaker?
This analyst considers the meetings of the Group of Twenty with the participation of the leaders of the large developing countries much more efficient.
“China, India, Brasil started to play more important role in the world economy and it is rather strange to see that these countries don’t participate in taking decisions as for some problems discussed here”, says Allan Aleksandroff.
It is true that the influence of the industrially developed countries slackens these days. In 1990 one fourth of the world economy was provided by the USA. As for Russia, China, India and Brazil, they provided only 10%. By the year 2014 the USA share will be reduced up to 20%, and as for the BRIC countries they will provide 25% of the world GDP.
After the crisis of 2008 which the Group of Eight was not able neither foresee nor stave off, the number of those who criticize it grew larger.
Does it mean that the future belongs to the group of Twenty comprising the largest developing economies, rich countries of the Persian Gulf and international organizations? This kind of meeting looks sounder, but it still was not able to prove its efficiency. As for the Group of Eight, it may have other goals.
Maybe it is worth considering to revise the Group of Eight’s tasks and giving it its initial functions having nothing in common with mass communiqué production or endless conferences. What is more important is to meet for better mutual understanding and for developing mutual trust” – thinks Patrick Uintur, the correspondent of The Guardian.
With each year it becomes clearer that this summit is the reason for bilateral talks. For some persons it is enough to justify the existence of such kind of summit, being the means for providing growing links between the countries at least at the political level.
The meeting of the Group of Eight in Evian for example let Chirac speak for once more to George Bush. It seems to be nonsense, but what is really important is the fact that so called senseless meetings give people opportunities to speak t each other”, states the correspondent from Le Monde Alain Fojas.
The ballyhoo about this event, thousands of negotiators and journalists, who came to cover it, the antiglobalists who came to protest, the policemen called up to keep order, are not able to hide the loss of the Group of Eight influence for the last years.