True, but G-8 can be altered in ways UNSC can't

ARTICLE: "Group of 8's summit has a hollow ring to it: World powers meet--with notable exceptions," by David J. Lynch, USA Today, 7 July 2008, p. 1B.

Complaints that G-8 is do-nothing organization right now. Fair enough.

Part of the problem is Bush, of course. He keeps pushing a war-of-survival mentality on those for whom it's not a war of survival.

Part of the problem is that the real war-of-survival crowd (the New Core) is by and large not represented at the G-8 (just Russia).

So yeah, the G-8 is, in some ways, as bad as the UN Security Council, but unlike the UNSC, this group can change it's membership at will, and such collusion, during a frontier-integrating age, is a very good thing.

Trick is getting the Euros to fold themselves into a single seat.

But remember this: the G-8 is the only summit venue out there, so work with what you got.

Comments

[Michael]

What about an S-10 format? The 5 permanent Security Council members plus 5 others picked for their dedication to open trade and their ability to contribute to leviathan and sysadmin (India, Brazil, the rest of the EU, Canada and Japan?).