July 11, 2000
Summary
The foreign ministers of the G-8 nations are to meet in Miyazaki, Japan, on July 12 to prepare the summit of G-8 leaders, one week later. U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright will not attend, so that she can instead take part in the Middle East peace summit at Camp David. Albright's absence will limit the Clinton administration's influence over the full summit, leaving Japan and Russia free to promote their own agendas. But neither is strong enough to lead. The G-8 is becoming what its critics contend: obsolete.
Analysis
On July 5, U.S. Secretary of State Madeleine Albright announced that she would not attend the G-8 foreign ministers' meeting. Her decision has been met with disappointment and even pique, particularly in Japan. Japanese Deputy Foreign Minister Yoshiji Nogami cautioned that it would be "difficult for U.S. opinions to be heard" without Albright in attendance, reported Japan's Kyodo News Service.
Nogami added, "If the U.S. thinks the presence of someone who is not a minister … is enough to secure its interests, that is its decision." Local officials in Miyazaki were similarly upset; they were to name a new, $47 million civic hall after Albright, in honor of her visit. The U.S. State Department has promised that Albright will visit the city at some other time.
However, while Washington is soothing the feelings of the Japanese, it has shown less concern for the summit itself. This marks the first time that Washington has failed to send a full delegation to the G-8 ministerial meeting; instead, Deputy Secretary of State Strobe Talbott will represent the United States. To a degree, the administration's decision reflects a declining interest in the organization that previous administrations have insisted upon leading – and multilateral organizations in general.
The G-7, as it was originally known, represented the seven largest industrialized democracies and was dominated by the United States. The inclusion of Russia and the growing regional focus of the individual members have mitigated U.S. interest in the organization. This fits a growing pattern, in which the United States is less inclined to take part in multinational organizations that it does not dominate. Examples of American indifference have been seen at recent meetings of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) meetings and the fact that the United States led NATO into action in Kosovo last year, without a U.N. mandate.
With U.S. interest in multinational bodies waning, the future of the organization is in question. Already, there are few pressing issues on the table at the G-8 summit. Japan has insisted that the summit focus on preventing and resolving conflict. For Tokyo, the summit presents an opportunity to demonstrate leadership of the world's industrialized nations. Japan also seeks to represent larger Asian interests, going so far as to unsuccessfully invite Chinese participation in an observer status.
Conflicts and prospects for peace in East Timor, the Middle East, the Korean peninsula and Cyprus are likely to be discussed. But conspicuously absent will be any debate on relations between China and Taiwan or Russia's involvement in Chechnya. The Japanese government is clearly seeking to mollify Moscow.
In part, the Mori government also wants to keep the summit from becoming a diplomatic battleground between the Russians and the Americans, over plans for a National Missile Defense (NMD). The Russian agenda includes asking for forgiveness of old loans as well as missile defense. Discussion of both the proposed NMD and modifications to the 1972 Anti-Ballistic Missile (ABM) treaty will likely dominate bilateral sideline meetings.
With the United States represented at a lower level during the foreign ministers' meeting, Japan and Russia have a greater opportunity to push their own agendas. However, Japan's domestic political and economic problems limit its ability to truly take the reins and Russia has yet to be fully integrated into the organization. With waning U.S. interest, the G-8 is becoming exactly what its critics have said: obsolete.
FAIR USE NOTICE: This page contains copyrighted material the use of which has not been specifically authorized by the copyright owner. Global Policy Forum distributes this material without profit to those who have expressed a prior interest in receiving the included information for research and educational purposes. We believe this constitutes a fair use of any such copyrighted material as provided for in 17 U.S.C íŸ 107. If you wish to use copyrighted material from this site for purposes of your own that go beyond fair use, you must obtain permission from the copyright owner.
