My latest Newsweek International column has some fun at the G8's expense: 
In the good old days, summit meetings were held in big cities—London, Tokyo, Venice, Toronto, Paris and so on. Ever since the 2001 meeting in Genoa, which attracted more than a quarter of a million protesters, the leaders of the Group of Eight have held their yearly confabs in ever-more remote locations. When leaders met in the resort town of Heiligendamm, Germany, last year, only 25,000 protesters showed up. This year's meeting, in Toyako on Hokkaido Island, has so far drawn far fewer. The resort strategy appears to be working. Of course, there might be another reason why fewer protestors are bothering with this year's G8 summit: It matters less. It's not hard to see why. Half of the leaders involved—Gordon Brown, George W. Bush, Yasuo Fukuda and Nikolas Sarkozy—are deeply unpopular at home. Beyond these individuals, however, the G8 countries are simply less powerful than they used to be. At this rate, a philosophical question might be in the offing: What if the great powers held a summit and no one cared?
Go check it out!

Posted By Daniel W. Drezner

Apparently the G8 leaders have pledged to reduce carbon emissions by 50% by 2050.  In making the pledge that does not need to be honored for 42 years, the G8 has learned its lesson from the 2005 Gleneagles summit.  While in Scotland, they pledged to double aid to sub-Saharan Africa by 2010.  As that date approaches, and skepticism mounts about whether they will achieve their target, suddenly the promise looks a little bit hollowEnvironmentalists are unimpressed with this pledge, but as a political scientist I find these long-range promises surprisingly rare.  Politicians should love making these kind of pledges, because, in theory, they can lock in preferences long after a leader has left the stage.  If nothing else, breaking this kind of promise does exact some modest cost on the future leader who has to make the reversal. Readers are hereby encouraged to submit a pledge that the G8 should promise to fulfill by the year 2100.  The pledge should be smart policy but such a dead-bang political loser that there is, literally, zero chance of it being implemented in our lifetime. I'll start:  the G8 should pledge to remove all migration restrictions -- regardless of the country of origin -- by the year 2100.

Daniel W. Drezner is professor of international politics at the Fletcher School of Law and Diplomacy at Tufts University.

Read More