The G-8 summit in Italy has turned out to be more eventful than most meetings of this group. There is some movement forward on the two live global issues that have been the subjects of protracted negotiations (climate change since the late 1990s, and the Doha Round of trade talks from early in this decade), and a setback for India in the nuclear field. The broader message is that the need to enlarge the G-8, broadly recognised by most countries, has become more obvious than ever. The main topics discussed at the G-8 cannot be brought to any meaningful conclusion without the involvement of the G-5. After all, at least two economies in the G-5 (China and Brazil) are bigger than some who are in the G-8, and India is not far behind. China, Brazil and India also happen to be among the five most populous countries, and among the seven geographically largest.
The sub-text underpinning the main subjects discussed in Italy is the democratisation of global power, from a world that has passed in which both power and economic privilege were the virtual monopoly of a handful of countries with relatively small populations. Such power shifts have been achieved in the past only through a great deal of violence; today’s chosen method is peaceful negotiations, which by their very nature are protracted and imperfect, but which achieve progress nonetheless.
What India needs to recognise most urgently is that success in the different international fora depends on the actions taken at home. The Prime Minister told the meeting in Italy that, contrary to the general belief, India has an ambitious programme for dealing with greenhouse gas emissions. The truth, though, is that the “action plan” for dealing with climate change, with its eight missions, is more a statement of intent than a real plan for action, which will begin only now under an active environment minister. Similarly, success in trade hinges much more on the reforms undertaken to make India a successful trading nation rather than on the commas, qualifications and exceptions negotiated in Geneva. After all, a more liberal policy for the textiles trade was negotiated as a part of the Uruguay Round which concluded 13 years ago, but India has got little benefit from this. If there is to be a national trade agenda, it should have less to do with Doha and more to do with improving transport efficiencies, reducing the cost of electricity and developing cold chains at home.
As for the nuclear issue, the G-8 has caught India by surprise while agreeing to restrict the export of nuclear enrichment and reprocessing technologies to countries that do not accept the full non-proliferation agenda, including signing the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). There was no such condition or exclusion when the Nuclear Suppliers Group gave India a clean waiver last year. In its essence, the G-8 decision signals the fact that President Obama has a different approach to the non-proliferation issue, when compared to his predecessor in the White House. This will get the G-8 nowhere, of course, because countries like India are not “proliferators”, while the US and others are helpless in dealing with Iran and North Korea, both NPT signatories. Still, the message for India is that it will continue to face some nuclear shackles, and that the Indo-US civil nuclear agreement is not the harbinger of a transformed relationship with the United States. While critics will use this denouement to criticise the Manmohan Singh government, what is evident now even more than before is that India did well to seize the moment and clinch the civil nuclear agreement last year; no such agreement would have been available today.
