G8

Summit 2009

2
 G8
Summit 2009

3
 Welcome Message from the President of L’Aquila

Sono davvero orgogliosa e onorata, come presidente della Provincia dell’Aquila, di poter ospitare nel
capoluogo di regione un evento di così grande importanza, come il G8.
La scelta di individuare L’Aquila, colpita dal terremoto dello scorso 6 aprile, sede del Summit mondiale,
a cui partecipano i Grandi della Terra, è indubbiamente un segnale d’attenzione forte per il nostro territorio.
Un’opportunità per continuare a tenere accesi i riflettori su una provincia devastata dal sisma, che tuttavia
ha tanta voglia di ripartire, di ricostruire, a cominciare dal tessuto produttivo, economico e sociale. Una provincia
che ha anche tanto da offrire, in termini di competenze, di professionalità, di cultura, di know how e di meraviglie
naturali e paesaggistiche.
Siamo da sempre e continueremo ad esserlo la provincia dell’innovazione e dell’accoglienza. Il nostro ter-
ritorio vanta la presenza di centri di formazione e di ricerca di fama internazionale, di imprese d’eccellenza nei settori
delle telecomunicazioni, del farmaceutico, dell’elettronica, di un tessuto dinamico di piccole e medie imprese, di un
polo universitario che continua ad essere punta di diamante del centro Italia.
Il terremoto ha distrutto le case, le sedi della scienza e della cultura, ma non le nostre menti, le nostre
professionalità, non le nostre competenze. Il sisma non ha intaccato le meraviglie naturali, paesaggistiche, storiche,
i parchi, le montagne i borghi antichi, le tradizioni secolari e l’ospitalità della nostra gente.
Il sisma non ha fatto crollare il know how, che il territorio è sempre stato in grado di offrire e che sapremo
mettere al servizio dei grandi temi, su cui si confronteranno i leader di tutto il mondo a L’Aquila.
Sviluppo eco-sostenibile, politica energetica intesa come promozione di fonti rinnovabili e tecniche di
risparmio; istruzione, cultura, lavoro, tutela dell’ambiente, sicurezza alimentare… Saranno queste le scelte da com-
piere per il futuro. Questi i nodi che il Summit è chiamato a sciogliere. Sono gli stessi temi che ci hanno appassion-
ato da sempre, temi su cui l’Ente e il territorio che rappresento hanno saputo svolgere un ruolo trainante.
Per questo ritengo che il G8 sia una grande opportunità per la nostra provincia.
Ai grandi della terra, a cui do’ il benvenuto e auguro un buon lavoro, chiederemo di aiutarci nella ricostru-
zione, di rimettere in piedi le strutture che il sisma ha devastato, affinché il grande patrimonio che abbiamo costruito
negli anni non vada disperso.

Stefania Pezzopane
Presidente della Provincia dell’Aquila

G8
Summit 2009

4
Russian Standard

G8
Summit 2009

5
 Welcome Message from the President of L’Aquila

It is a great honor and a pleasure for me, as the President of the Province of L’Aquila, to host in the capital
of the Abruzzo region the G8 Summit.
The choice of L’Aquila, so hard-hit by the earthquake of last April 6th, as the venue of the summit, is un-
doubtedly a clear sign of attention towards our territory.
This occasion represents to us the opportunity to keep on having the spotlight of the media on our prov-
ince, so deeply devastated by the quake, yet still strongly committed to restore itself and to rebuild its economic,
social, and productive fabric.
Our province has indeed much to offer in terms of culture, nature, know how, and skills.
We have been so far, and we still want to be, the province of innovation and hospitality.
Our territory boasts the presence of research and education centers internationally acclaimed, outstand-
ing telecommunication, pharmaceutical, and electronic companies, a dynamic fabric of small and mid-sized firms, a
renowned university which must continue to be our flagship.
Our houses, our art, culture, and science venues have been destroyed by the earthquake, but not our
minds or our passion. Still alive is our history, our natural beauties, our unique landscapes, mountains, parks, an-
cient villages, our centenary tradition, and our people’s great hospitality.
The quake did not destroy our skills and our local competencies, which our territory has offered so far and
which we want to put on to service of the great issues that the leaders of the world will debate in L’Aquila.
Sustainable development, energy policy meant as encouragement of renewable and more efficient
power source, education, culture, jobs, environmental conservation, and food security.
These are the pressing issues the summit is asked to tackle.
These are the challenge and the choices for the future.
These are crucial themes in which our administration has showed its committment since its establish-
ment. For those reasons I believe that the G8 summit will represent a unique opportunity to our province.
We therefore ask the world leaders, to whom we are proud to offer our warm-hearted welcome and our
wishes of a profitable meeting, to help us in the reconstruction, to restore all the structures the earthquake has
destroyed, to give new life to the great heritage that our territory built through the years. This is our greatest hope,
our utmost goal.

Stefania Pezzopane
President of the Province of L’Aquila

G8
Summit 2009

6
Forbes

G8
Summit 2009

7
 Welcome Message from the Director General of L’Aquila

Il summit dei rappresentanti degli otto paesi maggiormente industrializzati del mondo, in programma
a l’Aquila dall’8 al 10 luglio prossimi, rappresenta una grande occasione di rilancio dell’economia mondiale in un
momento di crisi che perdura da diverso tempo.
L’incontro ha grande risalto per essere il primo cui partecipa il nuovo presidente degli Stati Uniti Barack
Obama, che con la sua politica riformista ha dato avvio ad un nuovo corso di apertura dell’amministrazione ameri-
cana alle problematiche socio-economiche di tutto il mondo, ridando così nuova forza e fiducia all’immagine degli
Stati Uniti.
Per essere il G8 il luogo in cui si discutono gli scenari futuri di tutto il globo dal punto di vista politico eco-
nomico e sociale, si può comprendere che la scelta dell’Aquila come sede, soprattutto dopo il sisma del 6 aprile, è
occasione imperdibile per porre all’attenzione dei grandi della terra la ricostruzione di questo territorio, delle bellezze
artistico-ambientali e del tessuto economico sociale, costituito da una moltitudine di imprese e da numerosi uffici
pubblici, statali, regionali, provinciali comunali e da un’importante Università che erogano ai cittadini servizi essen-
ziali e che pertanto devono tornare ad operare efficacemente ed in breve tempo per ripristinare condizioni di vita
normali.
Tutta la struttura tecnica della Provincia dell’Aquila saluta gli organizzatori ed i partecipanti a questo
grande evento rivolgendo i migliori auguri di un proficuo lavoro.

Dott. Giovanni Di Pangrazio

Il Direttore Generale
Provincia dell’Aquila

The summit of the eight most industrialized countries in the world, organized in L’Aquila from July 8 to
10, 2009, represents a big occasion for world economy revival during a crisis period that continues for long time.
The meeting has great importance because it is the first with American President Barack Obama, who,
with his reform policy, has started a new era of opening the U.S. to the world’s socio-economic problems, giving a
new power and trust to the U.S. image.
After the earthquake of April 6th, 2009, the choice of L’Aquila as the seat of G8, where the members debate
about the world’s political, economic, and social issues, is a considerable occasion to direct the attention of the world
powers to reconstructing this land and preserving its artistic and environmental beauties, and the economic and so-
cial area made by a lot of enterprises and public national, regional, and local offices, and an important University, that
deliver essential services to citizens and therefore they must return to work effectively and as soon as possible to
restore normal life conditions.
The entire infrastructure of the Province of l’Aquila greets the members and organizers of this great event
and sends best wishes for successful work in the meeting.

Dott. Giovanni Di Pangrazio

General Director
Province of l’Aquila
G8
Summit 2009

8
 Publisher’s Note
Publisher
The CAT Company Inc
G8 summit Magazine Company Ltd
The CAT Company Inc
President
Chris Atkins
Advisory Board
Chris Atkins Peter Atkins
Chris Atkins
Jennifer Latchman
William Zimmer
Graphic Design and Art direction
Dear G8 Summit Readers, President
Henri de Baritault
I would like to take this opportunity to thank all Head of Sales
those involved for their dedication in helping to make Mark R Marshall
this a successful publication especially Ana Carcani Sales Executives
Rold from the Diplomatic Courier and Kirk Jowers Di- Chris Atkins
rector of the Hinckley Institute of Politics. John Armeni
Peter Scott
Ralph Windsor
The CAT Company is the only publishing com- Veronique Madsen
pany that has been involved with the past thirteen G8 International Sales office Japan
Summits and is continuing to get great recognition as Sun Monde Inc
its foremost publisher, including being awarded the Eriya Unten
status of “exclusive” publication for many of the past Seiko Ogushi
Takashi Fukunaga
G8 Summits. Kunio Toma
Takeshi Noguchi
As the publisher of the award winning G8 Sum-
Diplomatic Courier
mit magazine and in keeping with one of this year’s Publisher, Editor in Chief
themes, environmental sustainability, the CAT Com- Ana Carcani Rold
pany is doing its part for the environment by proudly Hinckley Institute of Politics - University of Utah
offering this publication in E-book format, brought Director
to you by E-OCTAVO, a subsidiary of the CAT Com- Kirk Jowers
pany. The E-book version of this magazine will reach Intern Manager
Courtney McBeth
19 million companies across Europe and the Unit-
ed States of America, with the help from the Euro S.J. Quinney Law School – University of Utah
Chambers and our link on Forbes.com. If you would Dean and Professor
Hiram Chodosh
like to visit and peruse this magazine online, please Director of external Relations
visit: www.thecatcompanyinc.com Barry Scholl
Special Thanks To
I hope you enjoy our magazine and we will see Diplomatic Courier
you in Canada for 2010. Hinckley Institute of Politics
S.J. Quinney Law School
Verso Paper
Yours Sincerely DHL
Hudson Printing
CRI
Intro 60
Roll Call
Provincia L’Aquila
Stefania Pezzopane
Chris Atkins Presidente della Provincia dell ‘Aquila
Publisher and Founder, CAT Company Inc. Il Direttore Generale
Provincia dell’ Aquila – Dott. Giovanni Di Pangrazio

G8
Summit 2009

10
Cat Ad

G8
Summit 2009

11
 EDITORIAL
EXECUTIVE EDITORS
Ana Carcani Rold
Kirk L. Jowers
Barry Scholl
Courtney H. McBeth

CONTRIBUTORS
Tyler Anderson, Hinckley Institute of Politics, University of Utah
Dr. Raymond Baker, Global Financial Integrity
John Bavoso, Diplomatic Courier Magazine
Michelle Bernard, Independent Women’s Forum
Ambassador John Bruton, EU Delegation to the U.S.
Hiram E. Chodosh, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
Lincoln Davies, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
Brian J. Forest, Diplomatic Courier Magazine
Dustin Gardiner, Hinckley Institute of Politics, University of Utah
Erika George, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
Amos N. Guiora, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
Ryan Harding, Diplomatic Courier Magazine
Andrew Jensen, Hinckley Institute of Politics, University of Utah
Christian Johnson, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
Dr. Joseph S. Joseph, University of Cyprus
C.S. Eliot Kang, Bureau of International Security and Nonproliferation, U.S. Department of State
Minister Hala Lattouf, Jordan’s Ministry of Social Development
Secretary Michael O. Leavitt, U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Chibli Mallat, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
Christopher Peterson, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
Dr. Maria Rost Rublee, University of Auckland
Rami Turayhi, Diplomatic Courier Magazine
Joseph M. Vandette, Jr., Hinckley Institute of Politics, University of Utah
Chris Whytock, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law

LEGAL
The G8 Summit magazine is a yearly publication independent of political affiliations or agendas published by
The CAT Company. The articles in the G8 Summit Magazine represent the views of their authors and do not neces-
sarily reflect those of the editors and the publishers. While the editors assume responsibility for the selection of the
articles, the authors are responsible for the facts and interpretations of their articles. Authors retain all legal and copy
rights to their articles. None of the articles can be reproduced without the permission of the editors and the authors.

PERMISSIONS
For permissions please email the editors at G8aquila09@gmail.com with your requests.
G8
Summit 2009

12
 G8
Summit 2009

13
 Table of Contents

Welcome Message from the President of L’Aquila, Italian 4 A Prescription for Development:
Welcome Message from the President of L’Aquila, English 6 Curing What Ails Foreign Aid to Africa
Welcome Message from the Director General of L’Aquila 8 By Erika George, Professor, of Law,
Publisher’s Note By Chris Atkins 10 University of Utah S.J. Quinney College Of Law 60
EDITORIAL 12 Mugabe’s Zimbabwe:
EDITORS’ Note - Return of the Summits A State’s Decline from Fragile Democracy to
By Ana Carcani Rold and Kirk L. Jowers, Executive Editors 21 Electoral Authoritarianism
All Roads Lead to Rome By Dustin Gardiner, Hinckley Scholar, University of Utah,
By Brian J. Forest, Correspondent – Diplomatic Courier Magazine28 Hinckley Institute of Politics 64
Addressing the Global Shadow Financial System European Union Enlargement and the Islamic Challenge
By Raymond Baker – Director of Global Financial Integrity (GFI) 30 By Dr. Joseph S. Joseph, Jean Monnet Chair in European
Global Economic Crisis and EU’s Response Foreign Policy and Security Policy, University of Cyprus 66
to Protectionism Between the Justice of Islam and the Injustice of Tradition
By Ambassador John Bruton – Ambassador of the Delegation By the Honorable Hala Bsaisu Lattouf,
of the European Commission to the United States 32 Minister of Social Development, Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan  70
Bank Capital and the Credit Crisis Pakistan, Afghanistan, India:
By Christian Johnson, Professor of Law, Report on the State of Conflict
University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law 34 By Amos N. Guiora, Professor of Law,
Can Sovereign Wealth Funds University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law 72
Be the Unlikely Saviors of Renewable Energy? From Zero-sum Conflicts to Federalism:
By Rami Turayhi, Senior Contributor – The Road Forward
Diplomatic Courier Magazine 38 By Hiram E. Chodosh, Dean and Professor, and Chibli Mallat,
Drafting a Carbon Emission Regulation Professor, S.J. Quinney College of Law 74
System for the U.S: Insight Provided by a Carbon Tax An International Agenda at a Time of Crisis
By Joseph Vandette, Hinckley Scholar, University of Utah Hinckley By Michelle Bernard, President and CEO Independent
Institute of Politics 42 Women’s Forum and MSNBC Political Analyst 76
Finding Security in Climate Change Mercantilism or Meeting Demand?
By Lincoln Davies, Associate Professor of Law, China’s National Oil Companies
University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law 46 and Multilateral Diplomacy
The G-8 Global Partnership By Tyler Anderson, Hinckley Scholar,
By Dr. C.S. Eliot Kang, ISN Acting Assistant Secretary – University of Utah Hinckley Institute of Politics 80
U.S. Department of State 48 Harmful Transnational Activity:
The Most Dangerous Threat Principles for Coordinated Domestic Legal Responses
By David Irvine, Retired Brigadier General – U.S. Army 50 By Chris Whytock, Associate Professor,
Encouraging Nuclear Nonproliferation & Disarmament: University of Utah S.J. College of Law 82
Lessons from Social Psychology Foreclosing on American Leadership
By Dr. Maria Rost Rublee – University of Auckland 52 By Christopher Peterson, Professor,
On Combating Global Terrorism University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law 84
By Ryan Harding, Correspondent - Diplomatic Courier Magazine 54 Pandemic Flu:
Democracy Promotion: Productive Long-term Preparedness in a Changing World
Strategy, Not Counterterrorism Answer By Secretary Michael O. Leavitt – Former Governor of Utah,
By Andrew Jensen, Hinckley Scholar, Administrator of Environmental Protection Agency, and 
University of Utah Hinckley Institute of Politics 56 Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services 86
China’s Investment in Africa: Interview with His Excellency Klaus Scharioth of Germany 88
Development or Neo-Colonialism? Interview with His Excellency Pierre Vimont of France 90
By John Bavoso, Correspondent – Diplomatic Courier Magazine 58 Interview with His Excellency Ichiro Fujisaki of Japan 92

Copyright©2009 The G8 Summit Magazine Company Ltd. and The Cat Company Inc. All rights reserved. No part of this
publication can be reproduced without written consent of the publisher. All trademarks that appear in this publication are the
property of their respective owners. The G8 Summit Magazine is published independently of any government entity, and does
not claim any official status for the 2009 G8 summit in L’Aquila Italy, and no representations have been made as such. Any
and all companies featured in this publication are contracted by The Cat Company INC. to provide advertising and/or ser-
vices. Every effort has been made to ensure the accuracy of information in this publication however the G8 Summit Magazine
Company Ltd. and The Cat Company Inc. make no warranties, express or implied as regards the information, and disclaim all

G8 liability for any loss, damages, errors or omissions

Summit 2009

14
 G8
Summit 2009

15
 G8
Summit 2009
 G8
Summit 2009

18
 G8
Summit 2009

19
 G8
Summit 2009

20
EDITORS’ NOTE
Return of the Summits
By Ana Carcani Rold and Kirk L. Jowers
Executive Editors

When assessing the year 2009, historians will undoubtedly dub this the year of the return of grand summits.
The G20, the NATO 60th Anniversary Summit, the 5th Summit of the Americas, and the culmination of all summits:
the G8, hosted this year by the rotating presidency of the Republic of Italy. All of them were grand in their own
respects and the issues they sought to tackle, even bigger.

2009 may also be remembered as the year all countries turned to multilateralism and unilateralism both at the
same time. How is it possible?

The challenges of the global financial crisis called for unilateral protectionist measures by most countries in the
world. Naturally, when the economy is tough, nations will look to protect their own workforces and markets. At
the same time, the scope of the financial crisis is global and interconnected. It demands for a bigger and more
inclusive group of nations to work out their problems multilaterally. Thus the G20 became the biggest and most
important gathering this past spring, even overshadowing, for that moment, the G8.

Yet the G8 is itself becoming more inclusive, both in agenda and in membership. Historically, the G8 was one
of the most exclusive clubs in the world of grand summits. However, since the first meeting took place in 1975 at
the Château de Rambouillet, just outside Paris, much has changed.

At the time, the G6 of the major industrialized democracies gathered to informally discuss the economic crisis
plaguing the world in the early seventies. It may feel as though not much has changed since then. Indeed, the G8
still gets together every year to discuss mainly economic matters, but the gathering has become more formal and
much more important, and the agenda has become steadily more ambitious.

This year, besides the economic crisis, the G8 will be tackling four other significant issues affecting nations
globally: non-proliferation and terrorism, climate change and energy security, regional crises such as Pakistan and
Afghanistan, and development in Africa. These are the five priorities that the Italian presidency put forward but
recent and upcoming events may yet force themselves on to the G8’s crowded lineup.

A renewed discussion on a new form of world governance, based on an enhanced and structured form of dia-
logue with the major emerging economies has also been the focal point of the Italian presidency for this year’s G8
Summit. Coupled with the invitation of the BRIC countries and several other regional representatives from around
the world at this year’s G8 meeting testifies to the fact that the culmination of this year’s grand summits will be a
striking balance in which the G20 and the G8 will meet somewhere in the middle to better represent the world’s
economies and challenges toward a better future.

What will be the future of the G8? Will it be the G13 the next time around? Perhaps. As it stands, the summit of
all summits is already including more observer nations at the table. And perhaps the G8 will move completely away
from the informal discussions of yester years to an official assembly befitting the world order of today. Until then,
however, we will undoubtedly remember this year’s G8 Summit as the one that changed the course of history of all
subsequent summits.

Ana Carcani Rold Kirk L. Jowers

Executive Editors

G8
Summit 2009

21
 G8
Summit 2009

22
 G8
Summit 2009

23
 G8
Summit 2009

24
 G8
Summit 2009

25
 GE

G8
Summit 2009

26
 G8
Summit 2009

27
 All Roads Lead to Rome
By Brian J. Forest, Correspondent – Diplomatic Courier Magazine

As President Barack Obama seeks to improve ties

with Russia and Iran, he may find an ally in Italy’s Prime
Minister, Silvio Berlusconi.

Italy has a distinctive reputation in Europe for forging

close ties with the United States as well as the nations
with which it has had the rockiest relations—namely
Iran and Russia. Berlusconi was one of former Presi-
dent George W. Bush’s strongest allies throughout his
presidency, contributing troops to the missions in Af-
ghanistan and Iraq against strong opposition at home.
He was one of the few world leaders Bush invited to give
a joint speech before the U.S. Congress, addressing the
body in 2006.

With Bush back at his ranch in Texas and a new

administration in power in the U.S., Italy is now seeking
to serve as a conduit between the United States and
some of its most cantankerous adversaries. President
Obama has openly talked of thawing relations with Iran’s
hard-line leadership and declared, “If countries like Iran
are willing to unclench their fists, they will find an ex-
tended hand from us.” He spoke of a “new beginning”
in a video message distributed to Iranian news agencies
in March, offering, “The United States wants the Islamic
Republic of Iran to take its rightful place in the commu-
nity of nations.”

Yet, the Obama administration has so far seen its

limited outreach to the Islamic republic rebuffed. Presi-
dent Mahmoud Ahmadinejad and Supreme Leader
Ayatollah Khamenei have openly criticized the new
administration. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton’s claim
of a dialogue between her envoy and Iran’s deputy for-
eign minister at a summit in March was met with a “cat-
egorical” denial from the foreign ministry.

Improving relations with Russia—which grew cool

under the Bush presidency—has also proven chal-
lenging. Disputes over pro-democracy movements in
Ukraine and Georgia, Kosovo’s independence, human
rights, and the war in Iraq led to a steady decline in rela-
tions between the two countries during the Bush years.
While the Obama administration has received a more
positive reception in Moscow than its predecessor,
Russian leaders have not forgotten candidate Obama’s
criticism over the conflict in Georgia, or his implicit
threat to block Russia’s bid to join the WTO.

Italy’s U.S. Ambassador, Giovanni Castellaneta, has

recently been promoting his nation’s “special relation-
ship” with Russia and has spoken of the need to in-
clude additional participants in nuclear talks with Iran—
G8 presumably his own country.
Summit 2009

28
 Cover Story

Referring to the talks between Iran and the P5—

U.S., Britain, France, Russia, China—and Germany,
Castellaneta told the Washington Times, “The ‘P5 plus
1’ approach didn’t give us the results we hoped for.” He
suggested adding additional countries to the negotia-
tions, including, “Japan, India, even the (Persian) Gulf
states and Canada.”

Castellaneta served as Italy’s ambassador to Iran

from 1992-1995.

Italy has long had unique ties with Iran, dating back
to Marco Polo’s treks through Persian lands on his way
to China. Today, Italy is Iran’s largest European trading
partner and the two countries have more than doubled
their volume of bilateral trade over the past five years.
Berlusconi offered to help President Bush solve the
Iran nuclear issue on a farewell visit to Rome in
2008, offering to share his country’s knowledge of the
Islamic republic “from the inside” if it would help resolve
the dispute.

With Italy in charge of the rotating G8 presidency

this year, Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini has also
invited his Iranian counterpart to take part in a June G8
summit on Afghanistan. ANSA news agency quoted
Frattini as saying, “Iran could play a positive role and
with the Americans we are discussing how to involve
them, not whether to involve them.”

He added, “America wants us to talk with Iran be-

cause Italy is in a position to speak with Tehran.”

Berlusconi has also forged close commercial and

political ties with Russia, and is known to have a deep
personal friendship with Prime Minister Vladimir Putin.
He was one of the only pro-U.S. European leaders to
refrain from criticizing Russia over its military actions in
Georgia. Berlusconi has also publicly called for Russian
entry in the European Union, telling Italian reporters that
he considers Russia, “to be a western nation.”

As part of its G8 presidency, Italy hosted a confer-

ence titled “Overcoming Nuclear Dangers” in April. At
the conference, former U.S. secretaries of state con-
ferred with Mikhail Gorbachev and Franco Frattini on
global nuclear challenges, including Iran. April’s confer-
ence followed an agreement between Barack Obama
and Russian President Dmitri Medvedev to begin work
on an arms reduction treaty. Frattini applauded the
accord as “very important in reviving U.S.-Russian rela-
tions,” and American and Russian diplomats have been
working out the details of the agreement in Rome.

Brian J. Forest is a Senior Correspondent for the

Diplomatic Courier magazine where he covers global G8
elections, Japan, and Canada. Summit 2009

29
 Addressing the Global Shadow Financial System
By Raymond Baker – Director of Global Financial Integrity (GFI)
The G8 has an extraordinary opportunity to begin
reshaping the international economy around principles
of legitimacy and equity.
The outstanding issue that needs to be addressed
is the global shadow financial system. Working in uni-
son are tax havens, secrecy jurisdictions, disguised
corporations, anonymous trust accounts, fake founda-
tions, transfer pricing arrangements, and money laun-
dering techniques that move cumulatively trillions of
dollars of illicit money across borders. This system equal-
ly facilitates shifts of the proceeds of bribery and theft
by foreign government officials, criminal activity such
G8 as drug trading and racketeering, terrorist financing,
Summit 2009 and commercial tax evasion. Some estimates suggest
30
that perhaps half of global trade and capital transactions
pass through this shadow financial system somewhere
between origination and completion.
These illicit financial flows damage both the devel-
oping countries and the industrialized economies of
the G8. For developing countries, it drains hard curren-
cy reserves, heightens inflation, reduces tax collection,
worsens income gaps, cancels investment, hurts com-
petition, and undermines trade. In G8 economies it
reduces tax collection, worsens income gaps, and shifts
tax burdens off of capital and onto labor. Affecting
all countries, it contributes to the culture of opacity
that lies at the heart of the current financial crisis.

Global Financial Integrity (GFI) recently complet-
ed an analysis of illicit financial flows out of develop-
ing countries, utilizing in part the World Bank Re-
sidual Method and IMF Direction of Trade Statistics.
This is the first study to take these models and apply
them to the whole of the developing world. We show
that somewhere between $850 billion to more than
$1 trillion a year of illicit money passes out of devel-
oping countries. Or put another way, for every $1 of
aid generously given to developing countries, some
$10 of illicit money flows out, passing through the
shadow financial system and ultimately into our west-
ern economies. This is the most damaging economic
condition hurting the global poor.
Part of what is so difficult about the current crisis is
that no one knows how big it is. We have no idea how
much bad paper in the form of subprime mortgages,
credit default swaps, and derivatives contracts is hidden
away in tax havens and secrecy jurisdictions, in hedge
funds and offshore banks and special purpose vehicles.
Interbank lending has dried up because one bank does
not know the quality of assets in another bank. As a
result, other forms of lending have been pulled down
as well—corporate, trade, home, consumer, and more.
The culture of opacity, so evident in this crisis, driven in
good part by the global shadow financial system, has
been hurting the developing countries for decades and
now has brought this harm home to industrialized econ-
omies as well.
What can countries do? The goal should be to cur-
tail the flow of tax evading and other illicit money across
borders, not to try to stop it. Stopping it would re-
quire draconian steps. Substantially curtailing it can be
achieved with a few broadly adopted and implemented
measures. Some people assert that this is extremely
complex and technically difficult. Not correct; it is a mat-
ter of political will.
There are four measures that leaders of the G8 can
take now that will substantially curtail the problem.
First, exchange of tax information should be
automatic rather than by request. G8 leaders should
make a commitment to automatic exchange of tax
information across borders and place a target date
on its implementation. This would signal that we are
dead serious about resolving this financial crisis and
preventing future such crises.
Second, beneficial ownership must be addressed.
All financial institutions around the world should be re-
quired to know the beneficial owners of entities with
which they do business. It is inexcusable in this age
of terrorism and crime for any financial institution not
Global Financial Crisis
to know with whom it is doing business. A Wall Street
banker recently asked, “Do you have any idea how
much it would cost us to determine the beneficial own-
ers of all our accounts?” The answer is it costs nothing.
Banks should simply require the account holder to tell
them who are the flesh and blood owners or the listed
company that is the owner of the account, in the ab-
sence of which the account is closed.
Third, countries cooperating with the Financial
Action Task Force in Paris should harmonize predicate
offenses under anti-money laundering laws and add to
such predicate offenses knowingly handling the proceeds
of tax evasion. It is unacceptable that many countries
remain open to a wide range of criminal money and
equally unacceptable that many countries actively seek
the proceeds of commercial tax evasion.
Fourth, country-by-country reporting of sales, profits,
and taxes paid by multinational corporations should be
agreed. Currently, corporations compile this information
for internal purposes but do not provide disaggregated
data in annual reports. Hence we see tens of billions in
stated profits and little or nothing paid in taxes. Country-
by-country reporting has a number of very significant
advantages, including generating additional tax revenues
for countries, accomplished without large regulatory
burdens on either governments or businesses. It also
reverses the shift over recent decades of tax burdens
increasingly onto labor, and in doing so it reverses the
growing inequality between rich and poor.
There is a grand bargain between democracy and
capitalism. Democracy offers to its people an equal mea-
sure of political liberty. Capitalism is expected to offer to
its people a fair measure of economic opportunity and
economic prosperity. Across recent decades, capitalism
has not been holding up its end of the grand bargain. It has
not been doing a satisfactory job of spreading the ben-
efits of growth and prosperity to all people, either within
countries or between countries. As a consequence, the
spread of democracy itself has been stagnating since the
mid 1990s and indeed slipping backwards in a number
of countries. There is now substantial risk that this trend
may continue. Within the democratic-capitalist system,
it is capitalism that needs to move closer to the ideals of
democracy, closer to transparency, equity, and justice.
And it is the G8 that needs to lead toward these goals.
Raymond W. Baker, Director of Global Financial
Integrity, is author of Capitalism’s Achilles Heel: Dirty
Money and How to Renew the Free-Market System
(John Wiley & Sons, 2005)
G8
Summit 2009
31
 Global Economic Crisis and
EU’s Response to Protectionism
By Ambassador John Bruton – Ambassador of the Delegation of the European Commission to the United States
In every crisis, there are opportunities that might oth-
erwise be postponed. There is no question that we are
living in difficult times. The economic crisis is affecting
all of us—big countries and small, the wealthy and the
not-so-wealthy. Climate change is a reality; the Wilkins
Ice Shelf, which is the size of Connecticut, is breaking
away from the Antarctic Peninsula.
In many cases, these problems could have been
averted, or at least mitigated, if we had addressed the
underlying causes sooner. But now, the arguments for
taking action are more compelling—in fact, we are rap-
idly running out of choices.
The EU—like the United States—has already tak-
en forceful and coordinated steps to end the financial
crisis and build a stronger, more sustainable, more sta-
ble economy for the future. We were the first to act on
credit rating agencies, capital requirements, and deposit
guarantees, and we are working together to imple-
ment a fiscal stimulus of at least 3.3 percent and up
to four percent of GDP in 2009-2010, or more than
400 billion.
By dealing with impaired assets in a European
framework, we are rebuilding confidence and stimulating
lending, and we are supporting industry where neces-
sary while rejecting protectionism and preventing a de-
structive subsidy race.
But we haven’t stopped there. We have also mapped
out a route toward sustainable long-term prosperity. By
investing in the sectors of the future and in intensify-
ing—not reducing—the fight against climate change,
repairing financial markets, and strengthening financial
regulation and supervision, we are ensuring stability for
ourselves as well as for future generations.
The coordinated EU strategy currently being imple-
mented would be a remarkable achievement even for
a single national government. For 27 Member States
and 500 million people, it is unprecedented. While it is
true that circumstances differ widely across the EU as a
whole, there is no two-speed Europe or new iron curtain.
We all prospered in the good times, and we all are suf-
fering in the bad times, though to different degrees. But
because every economy is different, we have adapted
our instruments to the different national circumstances.
The EU has been providing funds to stimulate our
G8 individual national economies in accordance with the in-
Summit 2009
32
dividual room for fiscal maneuvering that each country
has. We have also, in conjunction with the IMF, been
providing funds to assist some EU Member States, as
well as some European non-members, who have gotten
into particular difficulties.
Of course, not everyone always immediately agrees
on every detail. Each nation around the world wants
to invest in its economy, in its industries and workers,
in the way that seems best and most productive in its
individual situation. You could even call this “protec-
tion” against a volatile economic situation, in the broad-
est sense of the word. But that is entirely different from
protectionism.
Open markets deliver huge economic benefits, in
terms of both supply and demand—they offer opportu-
nities for our businesses and greater choice for our con-
sumers. But defending open markets is also important
politically, because they shape the future of international
trade in a way that fosters a more just and prosperous
world for all. Retreating to the safety of our own domes-
tic markets would be a huge mistake—it is what tipped
recession into depression in the 1930s and what could
turn a downturn into our downfall today.
The G8 Summit offers us the opportunity not only
to continue the worldwide coordination of fiscal stimulus
programs and reform of the financial markets, but also
to find ways to deliver on our climate change and devel-
opment goals.
The fight against climate change must not be
delayed by the economic crisis. By implementing mea-
sures to green our economies, we can tackle the two
issues simultaneously. The stimulus packages that will
get our economies moving again are creating green
jobs for our citizens by accelerating investment in build-
ing a lower-carbon economy that is vital for beating
climate change.
As much as the EU is doing to fight climate change,
we cannot go it alone. Developed parts of the world,
like Europe and the United States, have contributed
and continue to contribute disproportionately to climate
change. With only 12 percent of the world’s population,
the EU and U.S. together account for 40 percent of
all global emissions.
Since we have played such a major role in creating
this global crisis, we must now take the lead in finding a

solution. It is only fair that those of us who have already
put the most CO2 into the atmosphere make propor-
tionately the biggest contribution to fixing the problem.
Industrialized countries can and must lead through ex-
ample, by putting a market price on carbon emissions,
by investing in new technologies, and by helping others
develop wisely.
We also need to look at how we can best reform
the institutions governing the global economy to allow
emerging economies to take their rightful place at the
table. To truly deliver on our commitment, we need to
complete the Doha Round of world trade talks. This
agreement would add hundreds of billions of dollars to
the world economy every year, and allow the develop-
ing world to continue to lift its citizens out of poverty
through their own labor and their own ideas.
Doha is also an insurance policy against protection-
ism. A recent study shows that if tariffs were raised to
levels still allowed under current WTO ceilings, global
Global Financial Crisis
income could be reduced by at least 500 billion dollars.
That’s a large chunk of the fiscal stimulus—gone.
This summer’s G8 meeting offers us the opportunity
to tackle these issues in a coordinated forum, through
what our European Commissioner for External Relations
and European Neighborhood Policy Benita Ferrero-
Waldner has called “effective multilateralism.”
In reality, multilateralism is the only effective ap-
proach, not only for the financial and economic issues
which dominate the agenda today, but for all issues
which affect the future of our planet. The EU is deter-
mined to play our part in encouraging open and positive
debate. We will continue to engage with partners from
all over the world, to better understand their concerns,
and see how we can advance together.
His Excellency John Bruton is Ambassador of the
Delegation of the European Commission to the U.S.
G8
Summit 2009
33
 Bank Capital and the Credit Crisis
By Christian Johnson, Professor of Law, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
Starting in 2007, the world began slipping into an
intractable credit crisis resulting in financial institutions
of all types unwilling to lend to even their most credit-
worthy customers. In spite of enormous efforts by the
Federal Reserve in the United States to increase liquidity
in the credit markets, the problem has proven remark-
ably difficult to resolve the problem. Because financial
Figure 1
Assets
Performing Assets US$850,000,000
Troubled Assets 150,000,000
Totals US$1,000,000,000
institutions such as banks are highly leveraged (i.e. they
hold only a minimal amount of capital), when banks suf-
fer losses, they find themselves either having to raise
additional capital or reduce their total assets in order
to meet regulatory capital requirements and investors’
expectations. These concerns are some of the chief
reasons why lending has effectively ground to a halt.
A simple example using a bank’s balance sheet may
help explain the difficulties in resolving the crisis. A fi-
nancial institution (“ABC Bank”) is required by its regu-
lator to maintain a capital ratio of 10 percent (capital/
assets), which represents the shareholder’s invest-
ment in the institution. Losses are first offset against
the shareholder’s investment. If losses exceed a bank’s
capital, the creditors would then suffer losses and
the bank would be insolvent. Assume that ABC Bank
has $850 million of performing assets and $150 million
G8
Summit 2009
34
of nonperforming assets, such as mortgage-backed
securities or commercial real estate loans that may be
nonperforming. The balance sheet for ABC Bank as of
1/1/2009 would be as follows: (See figure 1.)
During 2009, ABC Bank is required to write-down
its troubled assets by US$70 million due to defaults
Liabilities & Capital
Deposits US$900,000,000
Capital 100,000,000
US$1,000,000,000
on its troubled assets. A write-down of the troubled
assets generates a corresponding loss that reduces
ABC Bank’s capital. Assuming that ABC Bank otherwise
had no operating net income, ABC Bank’s balance sheet
at 12/31/2009 would be the following: (See figure 2.)
Because of the loss, ABC Bank no longer meets the
10 percent regulatory capital requirement. ABC Bank
now has a capital ratio of 3.22 percent (30,000,000/
930,000,000). Both from a regulatory and a safety and
soundness perspective, ABC Bank will need to raise its
capital ratio back up to ten percent or it will need to
reduce its total assets.
Given the current economic climate, ABC Bank’s
problems become obvious. If ABC Bank suffered losses
of $70,000,000 on its troubled assets, but wants to main-
tain its current asset portfolio, ABC Bank will need to raise
additional capital either from current or new investors.
However, as the stock prices of banks have deteriorat-
ed, there is little, if any, interest on the part of investors
to put in new money in the form of capital into banks.
Recently, it has become almost impossible to raise capi-
tal without direct governmental investment.
If a bank is unable to raise capital, it can also sell
assets in order to get its capital ratios in compliance. In
the above example, however, due to the effect of lever-
age, ABC Bank would need to shrink its assets down
to $300 million, requiring ABC Bank to sell $630 million
in assets before its capital of $30 million would equal
ten percent of its assets. Asset sales are as problematic
as raising capital, however, because other banks at this
time are not interested in purchasing these types of as-
sets. Even if ABC Bank were to find a buyer for these
Bondurant

G8
Summit 2009

35

assets, ABC Bank would typically have to sell them at a
discount, generating additional losses.
A major reason for the current credit crisis stems
from this problem. In the event they suffer losses,
banks are currently unable to either raise capital or
sell assets to improve their capital ratios. As a result,
they have stopped lending and taking risk. Banks are
Figure 2
Assets
Performing Assets US$850,000,000
Troubled Assets 150,000,000
Write off (70,000,000)
Net Troubled Assets 80,000,000
Totals US$930,000,000
literally paralyzed by the fear of additional losses that
would further erode their capital. Instead of looking
for opportunities to lend, banks are instead trying to
avoid incurring additional losses until they can rebuild
their capital. The effect of this is that banks are invest-
ing in “riskless” assets such as bank balances at the
Federal Reserve, U.S. government securities, repo
transactions (which are fully collateralized) and other
high credit quality assets as opposed to traditional lend-
ing to businesses and consumers. In contrast to these
current conservative investments where transactions
continue, commercial real estate lending, for example,
has virtually halted.
As capital has dwindled in the financial markets and
the credit markets have seized up, the U.S. (as well as
other governments across the globe) has engaged in
two different approaches to the above problem. The
U.S. responded in October of 2008 with the passage
of the Emergency Economic Stabilization Act of 2008
(commonly referred to as “TARP” for the Troubled Asset
Relief Program) in which the U.S. Congress authorized
the U.S. Treasury to spend up to US$700 billion to re-
solve the credit crisis. The U.S. Treasury could do this
either (i) by purchasing troubled assets from banks, or
(ii) by making equity investments directly in them. From
October 2008 through March 2009, the U.S. invested
approximately US$300 billion through TARP principally
through purchases of equity.
G8
Summit 2009
36
Global Financial Crisis
The U.S. Congress believed that because of the
TARP equity investments, a bank would be more will-
ing to lend because it had more capital. Commentators,
however, generally do not believe that much additional
lending has occurred because of TARP. This may be
because banks still fear additional losses from new lend-
ing. It may also be because the banks that received
capital were in worse shape than anticipated. The TARP
Liabilities & Capital
Deposits US$900,000,000
Capital 100,000,000
Loss (70,000,000)
Net Capital 30,000,000
US$930,000,000
investments may very well have simply stabilized a pre-
cariously weaker than understood banking system.
The U.S. Treasury Department, under the Obama ad-
ministration, appears to be moving away from the equity
investment approach, and is instead devising programs
to purchase troubled assets directly from the banks. It
is believed that getting the troubled assets off of the
banks’ balance sheets will reduce the possibility of fu-
ture write-downs that would further impair capital. Un-
fortunately, the concept has yet to be tested under cur-
rent market stresses.
The success of the U.S. Treasury and the Federal
Reserve in reversing the credit crisis through TARP and
other actions still remain to be seen. It will take months
before the effects of equity investments and purchases
by the U.S. government will have any effect on U.S.
credit markets. In order to preserve its banking system,
however, the U.S. appears to have little choice but to try
and strengthen the capital held by its banks.
Professor Christian Johnson teaches corporate fi-
nance and banking at the University of Utah S.J. Quin-
ney College of Law and has written four books and
over three dozen articles on the subject. Professor
Johnson lectures both in the U.S. and abroad on the
financial crisis.
Knowlegis

G8
Summit 2009

37
 Can Sovereign Wealth Funds Be the
Unlikely Saviors of Renewable Energy?
By Rami Turayhi, Senior Contributor – Diplomatic Courier Magazine
Low-hanging fruit almost always trumps its brethren
higher up the tree. With so many of today’s green en-
ergy pundits focused on developing the next generation
of renewable energy technologies, policymakers have
missed some potentially easy solutions that are immedi-
ately available to help spur investment and development
in this heretofore undercapitalized industry. One such
proposal combines the financial capital of the East with
the human capital of the West, and could play a signifi-
cant role in promoting green energy investment during
this financial crisis. The proposed solution: use regulato-
ry and tax incentives to promote sovereign wealth fund
investment in renewable energy companies.
For simplicity’s sake, this analysis is limited to Arab
Gulf sovereign wealth funds (“SWFs”) and American re-
newable energy companies, but the same basic con-
cept applies to any large state-owned fund and recipient
country company. The proposal is straightforward and
seeks to find common economic ground where it ought
to already exist.
The economic and political power of SWFs has in-
creased quite substantially over the past decade; the
largest fund in the Gulf today maintains over half a tril-
lion dollars in assets, and most of the smaller ones hold
at least a few tens of billions in capital. These funds
have sought to lessen their dependence on highly un-
stable oil prices by diversifying their investment strategy
and seeking out financially lucrative investment returns
around the world. Host governments—largely demo-
cratic—have sought to assure an often suspicious pub-
lic that these funds seek to do no harm, especially with
regards to sensitive technologies and industries. The
United States has even set up a Committee on Foreign
Investment in the United States (“CFIUS”), in order to
better regulate large investments by SWFs. Meanwhile,
SWFs insist—and practice has largely affirmed their re-
peated assurances—that they are simply seeking finan-
cial returns and nothing more.
Moving on to the other side of the equation, the
election of President Barack Obama has recently fo-
cused a great deal of spotlight on renewable energy. The
President has made a compelling case for using “green”
technologies to help lift the United States out of reces-
sion on sustainable and politically responsible terms.
A robust renewable energy-fed grid would help wean
the United States off of foreign oil and gas, allow firms to
project more stable long-term energy costs, and assist
G8 the United States in tackling global warming, perhaps
Summit 2009 within the rubric of a cap-and-trade or carbon tax sys-
38
tem that is enforced by global agreement. Arguments
on behalf of renewable energy make it abundantly clear
that, notwithstanding cost, green technologies are a net
positive for the United States. The question, however,
becomes more difficult when it comes time to determine
exactly who is going to bear the brunt of the costs as-
sociated with this renewable energy revolution in the
United States.
That is where the SWFs come in. While the United
States will certainly have to bear the lion’s share of the
costs associated with renewable energy production, it
should seek to offset at least some, if not a significant
portion, of these costs by promoting SWF investment in
the renewable energy industry. Doing so would at once
provide badly-needed capital to this fragile industry
during a time of curtailed lending in the United States,
while also diverting SWF investment away from other
industries where national security concerns might hold
greater sway.
The United States could seek to promote green en-
ergy investment by using a variety of means, but two
that appear to be promising are regulatory and tax in-
centives. Any significant investment in U.S. companies
by SWFs is subject to the relatively harsh and oftentimes
humiliating rigors of the CFIUS oversight process. SWFs
tend to desire privacy at all cost—they have little appetite
for being subjected to any intense scrutiny by the Ameri-
can public, especially after the Dubai Ports debacle of
2006. One way to help target SWF investment in renew-
ables, therefore, would be by allowing SWFs to proceed
through a “fast track” CFIUS process. Given that the
products of this investment are largely stationary—wind
and solar farms are firmly rooted to the ground—there
is little concern that SWFs would use their positions as
major shareholders or lenders to affect nefarious de-
signs. Quite the opposite could occur: SWF investors
might use their clout to help disseminate technological
know-how to other parts of the world—a net plus for the
struggling international climate change regime.
Taxes could also be restructured to help promote SWF
investment in renewables. While SWFs currently pay little
or no taxes as a result of their “sovereign” status, there
are ways in which additional tax incentives could help fo-
cus investment in renewables. A tax credit, for instance,
could be granted to SWFs that invest in renewables.
This tax credit could be used to help offset other in-
vestments in less environmentally-friendly industries, or
could be traded to polluters for cash. The latter proposal
would be most effective within the confines of a carbon

cap-and-trade system, a regime whose prospects for
implementation in the near future look likelier by the day.
Even in the absence of a cap-and-trade regime, tax in-
centives could largely mirror those within the Obama
stimulus plan. The idea would be, in effect, to use some
government money to bring in even greater amounts of
capital—in this case foreign—to shore up an industry
that most Americans want to see succeed.
These two ideas—regulatory and tax incentives—are
but a couple of suggestions that seek to achieve one com-
mon aim: increased SWF investment in the renewable
energy industry. To the extent that other proposals com-
plement these ideas or promote investment by SWFs
more efficiently, they should also be pursued. The main
point is that something ought to be done to put this
excess SWF capital to work promoting renewables. The
timing could not be better: SWFs have lost billions in re-
cent months on account of losses sustained in the finan-
cial industry where much of their investment capital was
located. They are thus sitting on their cash reserves, hold-
ing out for a sure bet. With the proper U.S. government
incentives in place, a financially-lucrative renewable en-
ergy investment scheme could be exactly what these
funds are looking for right now.
One can foresee two major objections to any pro-
posed incentive regime, but these can be either miti-
gated or dismissed by reframing the argument. The first
objection was alluded to earlier: this notion that were
SWFs to become major shareholders in renewable
energy companies, they could potentially wreak havoc
with U.S. energy infrastructure or disseminate sensi-
tive technologies. Historic practice suggests otherwise.
SWFs have not been the activist investors that naysay-
ers predicted they would be; in fact, they may not be
activist enough, but that is a topic for another day. Even
assuming that these funds would seek to take ac-
tions that were potentially harmful to renewable energy
companies for some political purpose, ample legal au-
thority exists within both state and federal law to limit the
ability of shareholders and lenders, even major ones, from
acting in ways that harm companies and minority share-
holders. If this does not allay concerns, an alternative
proposal recently floated by legal scholars Ronald
Gilson and Curtis Milhaupt could do the trick: suspend
SWF shares’ voting rights, at least until they are sold
to third-party investors. This regime would effectively
mitigate any explicit negative influence that a SWF
investor would have on a company’s Board of Directors,
while at the same time allowing the fund to reap the
financial benefits inherent in company ownership.
The second and more substantive objection can
actually be turned on its head to argue vociferously
for increased SWF investment in renewable energy.
Climate Change & Energy Security
Skeptics argue that these SWFs, especially those from
energy-producing countries, have little incentive to
promote an industry that effectively diminishes the need
for their own greatest source of capital—oil and gas—in
the long-term. While the long-term effects of increased
renewable energy production will indeed likely hurt the
oil and gas industries, a number of factors suggest that
SWFs will still choose to invest in renewables, so long as
sufficient financial incentives are in place.
For starters, the fact that these SWFs even exist
confirms the notion that capital-rich countries are seek-
ing to diversify their own assets away from just oil and
gas. These funds would not exist if oil and gas produc-
ers did not want to start planning for a future where
other revenue streams besides carbon-based ones start
contributing to the countries’ fiscal stability. In addition,
many of these countries, especially those in the Gulf,
are seeking major image makeovers. This is evidenced
by the recent surge in enthusiasm for green energy in
the Gulf: Abu Dhabi is investing in a $20 billion carbon-
free city, Dubai and Qatar have both recently announced
massive investments in solar power plants, and green
energy conferences are sprouting up throughout the re-
gion. Simply put, the Gulf—which maintains by far the
largest SWFs in existence today—is on board with re-
newable energy. Indeed, it is in their interest to promote
solar power in particular—the Middle East has a com-
parative advantage in promoting this technology, as the
sun is their greatest underutilized asset.
This proposal is as simple as it is novel. Use incen-
tives, whether regulatory, tax, or something even more
efficient, to promote renewable energy investment in the
United States by capital-rich SWFs. It is hard to find a
true loser in this proposal, as each major player seems
to take at least something significant away from this
grand bargain. The benefits of this scheme are many:
the U.S. receives sorely-needed capital to boost its re-
newable energy sector, a revitalized labor-intensive re-
newable industry helps create millions of “green” jobs,
the environment benefits without as much U.S.-led in-
vestment, green technologies would be spread to the
Arab Gulf and other parts of the developing world, and,
best of all, the United States would effectively be us-
ing the money it spends on dirty, foreign-sourced fuels,
namely oil and gas, to subsidize and promote the do-
mestic renewable energy sector. The irony is almost too
wonderful for words.
Rami Turayhi is a senior contributor with the
Diplomatic Courier magazine where he reports on ener-
gy security and the Middle East. Mr. Turayhi is currently
pursuing a JD at Columbia Law School in New York.
G8
Summit 2009
39
 G8
Summit 2009

40
 G8
Summit 2009

41
 Drafting a Carbon Emission
Regulation System for the United States:
Insight Provided by a Carbon Tax
By Joseph Vandette, Hinckley Scholar, University of Utah Hinckley Institute of Politics
Once deemed a viable alternative to reduce carbon
emissions in the United States, a national carbon tax has
seen dwindling support. Momentum in favor of a market-
based cap-and-trade system has been growing steadily
in the United States Congress, where draft bills of carbon
emissions cap-and-trade programs have outnumbered
national carbon tax proposals by a large margin. The
establishment of the European Union Emission Trading
System (EU-ETS) and other regional cap-and-trade ini-
tiatives in the United States has furthered the justifica-
tion for a similar nationwide system in the United States.
Moreover, President Obama’s 2010 budget has called
for a cap-and-trade program to simultaneously generate
revenues and reduce carbon emissions in the coming
years. Though a national carbon emissions tax currently
seems to be an unlikely candidate for regulating carbon
emissions in the United States, the unique advantages of a
national carbon tax should be considered when drafting
a carbon emission reduction program.
Under either carbon emission reduction program,
the potential exists for the program’s effectiveness to be
undercut by political bargaining and manipulation that
results in certain industries gaining exemptions from the
regulations. As exemplified in the EU-ETS, free carbon
emission permits were allocated to energy producers
in attempt to decrease financial burdens for these car-
bon emission-intensive industries. This practice was
partially responsible for the “windfall” profits realized
by energy companies1; energy producers passed on
“implied” increased market costs to consumers2. The
Obama administration has expressed interest in allo-
cating all carbon emissions permits through an auction
process, enabling a more equitable distribution. How-
ever, in recent draft cap-and-trade bills Congress has
utilized free emission allowances as a ploy to gain bi-
partisan and businesses support3. In contrast, a carbon
tax has the potential to be all-inclusive and non-bias by
including bylaws that prohibit tax exemptions, though
the tax could be rendered ineffective if some industries
are successful in gaining exemptions. To ensure signifi-
cant emissions reductions are achieved and to prevent
“windfall” profits, draft carbon emission cap-and-trade
bills should strive to employ only auction-based permit
allocation schemes.
Energy price volatility, recognized as one fault in
the EU-ETS4, should be a principal concern when draft-
ing United States carbon emission regulation bills. As a
G8 priced-based approach to regulate carbon emissions,
Summit 2009 a carbon tax would eliminate price volatility concerns.
42
A carbon tax level is predetermined and this additional
fixed cost attributed to energy prices will allow both en-
ergy producers and energy users to more easily deter-
mine their cost structures. Although price certainty ex-
ists under this scenario, carbon taxes do forfeit the ability
to guarantee an exact quantity of emission reduction.
Contrarily, under a cap-and-trade scheme, a limited
supply of emission permits are distributed, which guar-
antees the total carbon emission levels can be reduced.
The cost of emitting carbon in a cap-and-trade program,
however, is determined by the demand for the emis-
sion permits, which correlates with factors such as the
level of economic activity, seasonal demand for energy,
price speculation surrounding tradable permits, and gen-
eral energy prices. Because these factors are in constant
flux, energy consumers under a cap-and-trade system
are likely to pay inconsistent prices for energy, which
is burdensome for businesses trying to manage and
forecast costs. Draft carbon emissions cap-and-trade
bills will likely be effective in reducing specific levels of
carbon emissions, but the program should also incor-
porate a form of price regulation to ensure cost stability
for consumers.
The urgency of the climate issue is grounds for
swift implementation of a United States emission re-
duction program. A national carbon emissions tax has
the potential to be instituted relatively quickly via
the existing tax code by utilizing the time-tested
structure and collection mechanisms of the Internal
Revenue Service5. In contrast, the creation of a carbon
emissions cap-and-trade market may require the
formation of a corresponding regulating agency to
mentor the new commodity market, which could delay
emission reductions.
The recent failure of the under-regulated and convo-
luted financial markets would likely necessitate a great
deal of transparency in a cap-and-trade program—a
difficult feat for a complex system. A national carbon
tax would be administratively simplistic and structur-
ally transparent in comparison. A synergistic linkage of
different cap-and-trade systems throughout the world
may further delay implementation of such a system. A
carbo tax, however, would likely be more easily adapted
internationally because goods imported from countries
without carbon emission regulations could simply be
taxed at the border. U.S. lawmakers should consider
transparency and expediency top priorities when drafting
carbon emission reduction legislation.
The Noble Group

G8
Summit 2009

43
 Climate Change & Energy Security

Though the momentum surrounding an impend-

ing United States carbon emissions cap-and-trade 1 Ellerman, A. E., & Joskow, P.L. (2008). The European Union’s

market may have overwhelmed the possibility of
a national carbon tax 6, the comparative advantages
of a tax should be incorporated into draft carbon
emissions cap-and-trade programs. Relative price
certainty should be a priority in a cap-and-trade
program, which can be achieved by setting price
ceilings for emission permits or by establishing other
cost-containment mechanisms as insurance against
drastic increases in price. While essentially serving the
function of a complicated carbon tax, a modified
cap-and-trade system may prove more politically
emission trading system in perspective. Washington, DC: PEW
Center on Global Climate Change. Retrieved February 1, 2008,
from http://www.pewclimate.org/docUploads/EU-ETS-In-Per-
spective-Report.pdf
2 Houser, T., Bradley, R., Childs, B., Werksman, J., & Heilmayr,
R. (2008). Leveling the carbon playing field: International compe-
tition and US climate policy design. Washington: Peterson.
3 Ibid.
4 Ellerman, A. E., & Joskow, P.L. (2008).
5 Metcalf, G.E. (2007). A proposal for U.S. carbon tax swap: An

palatable than an outright tax. The Obama admin-
istration’s call for an auction-based distribution of
permits should be considered a valuable appeal and
political manipulation of this component of a cap-
and-trade program should be limited. Moreover,
given the recent failures in the financial market, trans-
parency should be paramount in a United States
cap-and-trade program.
equitable tax reform to address global climate change. (Discus-
sion Paper 2007-12). Washington, DC: Brookings Institution.
Retrieved February 1, 2009, from http://www.brookings.edu/~/
media/Files/rc/papers/2007/10carbontax_metcalf/ 10_carbon-
tax_metcalf.pdf
6 Metcalf, G. E. (2008, December). Analysis of a carbon tax. A
National Carbon Tax: Another Option for Carbon Pricing. Lecture
at the Environmental and Energy Study Institute Congressional
Briefing, Rayburn House, Washington, DC.

Joseph Vandette graduated with a B.S. in Envi-

ronmental Studies and Marketing from the University
of Utah and completed a Hinckley Institute of Politics
internship in Washington, DC with the Department
of Energy.

G8
Summit 2009

44
The Noble Group

G8
Summit 2009

45
 Finding Security in Climate Change
By Lincoln Davies, Associate Professor of Law, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law

It is easy to chronicle the ills of climate change. The

phenomenon threatens species, ecosystems, the very
fabric of the natural world. It endangers our economy,
the way in which agriculture now provides for us, the
water supplies we rely on. It imperils global security,
political stability, existing migration and disease pat-
terns. Climate change could, as one multi-expert report
recently concluded, “destabilize virtually every aspect of
modern life.” It is, quite simply, the most daunting chal-
lenge we now face.

Despite the near-certainty of climate change’s many

detriments, its emergence is not cause only for pessi-
mism. There is at least one silver lining in the looming
cloud of global warming.

Ecological protection often is maligned as forcing a

choice between “jobs or nature,” “the economy or the
environment.” For decades, naysayers have used this
false dichotomy as a foil to defeat environmental poli-
cies. Even now, as the United States Congress takes up
the climate change question in earnest for the first time,
advocates of the short-term point to the current global
economic crisis as cause for even further delay. What
such critics fail to recognize, however, is that climate
change does not present an either-or choice. As schol-
ars have long noted, acting to forestall climate change
promises an economic opportunity for which every na-
tion strives: energy security.

Preventing climate change, indeed, demands chang-

ing course on energy policy. Energy use and climate
change are inextricably intertwined. By far, the largest
source of greenhouse gas emissions comes from the
consumption of fossil fuels—the cars we drive, the elec-
tricity we produce. By the same token, the source of our
energy insecurity can be found in a virtually identical lo-
cus—the reliance on scarce fossil fuels controlled by for-
eign nations and uncontrollable cartels. Thus, fixing one
problem naturally profits the other. Sufficiently reducing
fossil fuel consumption will eliminate the climate change
risk. Shifting from fossil fuels to other energy sources
likewise will moderate the political and economic risks
engendered by energy insecurity.
Different nations have different resources, and thus,
carry different visions of how to reach their own ener-
gy security. For the United States, electricity increas-
ingly appears the most ready substitute for petroleum
consumption, at least in the transportation sector. But
the United States’ current electricity mix is roughly 50%
coal, 20% natural gas, and 20% nuclear. Consequently,
G8 simply switching from oil to electricity in the United States
Summit 2009 would solve neither the climate change problem nor the
46
nation’s energy insecurity quandary. Coal and natural gas
contribute heavily to greenhouse gas emissions, though
the former much more than the latter. Natural gas also
poses security risks, particularly in transportation. Nu-
clear fission technologies long have presented their own
national security and environmental concerns, from the
risk of proliferation to the dilemma that no nation has yet
solved: how to safely store nuclear waste.
As governments face these tradeoffs, a clear path
has emerged. Renewable energies such as wind, water,
and solar power offer a clean solution to both climate
change and energy insecurity. The modern mantra
of environmentalism is “sustainability,” the notion that
sound policy should simultaneously protect the environ-
ment, foster economic development, and ensure equity
for the long-term. These renewables offer progress on
all three fronts. By reducing pollution, including green-
house gas emissions, renewables are far more environ-
mentally sound than traditional fossil and nuclear fuels.
By offering the possibility of new technological progress
 Climate Change & Energy Security

and infrastructure overhauls, renewables hold immense

promise economically. And by shifting consumption
away from limited resources—oil, coal, and nuclear—
to those that virtually every nation already has—sun,
wind, and water—increased reliance on renewables
is likely to make health and wealth distribution much
more equitable.

Renewables do not come without limitations. Their

on-and-off availability throughout any given day means
that, currently, they can only supplement other tradi-
tional electricity production resources. Their nascence
means that the technologies for harnessing their power
are not nearly as efficient as they someday will be.
Moreover, the fact that there presently is no realistic
technology available for storing electricity en masse
means that a full transition to renewables likely remains
decades away.

But the limits of today should not cabin our vision of

what tomorrow can be. Simply because the path to a fully
secure, sustainable, and energy-independent society is
a long one does not mean we should not take the jour-
ney’s first steps.

Many nations already have begun. A majority of

European states have adopted “feed-in tariffs” that en-
sure renewable energy projects a preference price on
their power. Other European nations and, importantly,
more than two-thirds of the United States have adopted
“renewable portfolio standards” that obligate electric
utilities to acquire a given percentage of their power
from renewable resources by a date certain. Adoption
of any of these policies—or a combination of them—
can help spur the transition away from climate change
and energy dependence and toward sustainability and
energy security.

Increasingly, our tendency as a society is to focus

on the myriad ills that climate change, if unchecked,
may deliver. If this will yield action that prevents the
disaster of climate change from transpiring, so be it.

Perhaps, however, that view is too narrow. Perhaps

we should see in climate change not just a burden to be
lifted, but also an opportunity to rise up to. If we do, we
might just find in climate change a kind of security we
have never before enjoyed.

Lincoln Davies is an Associate Professor of Law at

the S.J. Quinney College of Law, University of Utah. He
teaches and researches on energy and environmental
law, administrative law, and civil procedure. G8
Summit 2009

47
 The G-8 Global Partnership
By Dr. C.S. Eliot Kang, ISN Acting Assistant Secretary – U.S. Department of State
The proliferation of weapons and related materials
remains a concern for all of us in the international com-
munity, and President Barack Obama and Secretary
of State Hillary Clinton have made plain that combat-
ing this threat worldwide is among the United States’
highest international security priorities.
The G8 Global Partnership against the Spread
of Weapons and Materials of Mass Destruction (GP)
serves as the primary multilateral financial commitment
to implement and coordinate chemical, biological, radio-
logical, and nuclear (CBRN) threat reduction activities
worldwide.1 At Kananaskis, G8 leaders undertook a far-
reaching and global commitment “to prevent terrorists,
or those that harbor them, from acquiring or developing
nuclear, chemical, radiological and biological weapons;
missiles; and related materials, equipment and technology.”
While GP activities have been focused in Russia and
the former Soviet Union (FSU) since the formation of the
GP in 2002, implementation of GP geographic expan-
sion to combat CBRN proliferation and terrorism threats
worldwide is now underway.
The U.S. Government re-
mains focused on fulfilling its
GP commitments in Russia and
the FSU, while at the same time
working to implement the decla-
ration made by G8 leaders at the
2008 G8 Summit in Hokkaido
Toyako to begin GP geographic
expansion to combat 21st cen-
tury threats. Going forward, the
GP can serve as a mechanism to
secure critical financial support
for concrete activities to combat
global CBRN terrorism and pro-
liferation threats.
Current Successes: Meeting Commit-
ments in Russia and the FSU by 2012
The U.S. has committed over $1 billion per year un-
der the Global Partnership, and is on target to meet its
pledge of $10 billion over ten years by June 2012.
Initial GP priorities identified at Kananaskis—the
destruction of chemical weapons, the dismantlement of
decommissioned nuclear submarines, the disposition
of fissile materials, and the employment of former
weapons scientists—remain critical initiatives, and
the U.S. continues to honor its commitments made in
these areas.
G8
Summit 2009
48
The U.S. Department of Defense continues invest-
ing resources in close partnership with the Russian
Federation and other international partners to complete
the Shchuch’ye Chemical Weapons Destruction Facility
to eliminate the most dangerous type of chemical weap-
on—nerve agent—by 2012.
In another area of success, the United States funds
the elimination of one Russian strategic nuclear subma-
rine per year, which has been budgeted through 2012,
depending on turnover of submarines for elimination.
The program is also eliminating one Typhoon vessel and
will shortly award a contract to eliminate a Delta III sub-
marine. Over the same period, funding is also budgeted
to help eliminate intercontinental and submarine ballistic
missile launchers at least through 2012.
Key interim goals were also met at the end of 2008 with
respect to the U.S.-Russia Bratislava Nuclear Security
Initiative, including the completion of material protection,
control and accounting upgrades at all sites as defined
in the Initiative.
On scientist engagement, the
United States and other GP mem-
bers have also made great progress
through the International Science and
Technology Center (ISTC) in Moscow
and the Science and Technology
Center in Ukraine (STCU). Dual-use
expertise that could be at-risk for
diversion is a global threat, and les-
sons learned through the ISTC and
STCU can be applied worldwide to
address the global threat posed
by terrorists and proliferant states
seeking weapons and applicable
expertise. There is a growing con-
sensus that the ISTC in Moscow
must be transformed to address emerging global sci-
entific, nonproliferation, and security needs recognized
by ISTC Parties. We look forward to working closely as
partners with the Russian Federation to accomplish this.
Overall, the United States has made great strides
and is on target to meet GP commitments by 2012. That
said, further progress must be made in turning Kanan-
askis pledges into concrete projects and activities. As
the global financial crisis continues, it will be imperative
to allocate funds precisely and to cooperatively develop
plans to meet these critical commitments.
The Future of the Global Partnership (GP)
Expansion of the G8 GP is now a reality, and every
effort must be made to make that expansion a success.
The 2008 Hokkaido Toyako Summit leaders’ statement
endorsed the expansion by stating, “We also recognize
that the GP must evolve further to address new, emerg-
ing risks worldwide if we are to prevent terrorists or
those that harbour them from acquiring chemical, bio-
logical, radiological, nuclear weapons and/or missiles.” 2
The United States believes successful GP expan-
sion will involve three elements: geographic expansion
of GP projects into countries beyond Russia and the
FSU; expansion of GP membership to include new part-
ners (both donors and recipients) from different regions
throughout the world; and implementation of new con-
crete global threat reduction projects in priority interna-
tional security areas that GP members can support.
In addition to the $1 billion allocated per year
for threat reduction activities previously mentioned, the
U.S. obligated more than $380 million in fiscal year 2008
to reduce the CBRN threat in nations outside the FSU.
The focus for that global funding has been ensuring that
dangerous materials, technology, and expertise are safe
and secure in regions with high risk of terrorism, improving
export controls and border security, and engaging
former weapons scientists in Iraq and Libya.
To further implement expansion, the GP is also
considering outreach to new members to provide new
resources, both financial and technical, to further the
goals of the GP and to aid in its geographic expansion.
In terms of new project areas, the United States
maintains flexibility in its authorities to maximize funding
opportunities across all areas of CBRN and missile
threat reduction. Developing specific focus areas for
global threat reduction projects could help other G8 and
GP members gain financial support for new projects
now and beyond 2012.
On April 5, 2009, President Obama outlined his strat-
egy for nuclear security in a speech in Prague, Czech
Republic that stressed the importance of keeping nucle-
ar weapons out of the hands of terrorists. Efforts will be
directed to implement President Obama’s call to se-
cure all vulnerable nuclear materials around the world
within four years, and this goal will require the coordina-
tion and support of our international partners, especially
within the Global Partnership mechanism.
In addition, the United States believes the GP is an
excellent venue to implement partnerships on meet-
ing international commitments such as United Nations
Security Council Resolution 1540, the Global Initiative
to Combat Nuclear Terrorism, and the Biological and
Chemical Weapons Conventions.
Going forward and beyond 2012, the United States
remains committed to expanding global threat reduction
efforts worldwide in partnership with the G8, the entire
GP, and new potential members. G8 leadership on non-
proliferation and global threat reduction will be critical
to combat the threats we collectively face from terrorists
and proliferant states seeking to acquire weapons and
related materials, technology, and expertise. The coop-
erative spirit of CBRN threat reduction established under
the GP is critical to achieving this objective, and the U.S.
looks forward to continued close cooperation with the
Global Partnership in the years ahead.
C. S. Eliot Kang, Ph.D., became the Acting Assis-
tant Secretary for the Bureau of International Security
and Nonproliferation on 20 January 2009. Previously,
he served as the Deputy Assistant Secretary for Threat
Reduction, Export Controls, and Negotiations and
served, concurrently, as Special Adviser for North
Korean Denuclearization.
1 The G8 GP is a $20 billion commitment over 10 years, estab-
lished in 2002 at the Kananaskis Summit in Canada, and of which
the U.S. has pledged $10 billion by 2012. There are currently
22 member nations (including the G8) plus the European Union
in the GP. See: http://www.canadainternational.gc.ca/g8/index.
aspx?lang=eng
2 Report on the G8 Global Partnership: http://www.mofa.go.jp/
policy/economy/summit/2008/doc/pdf/0708_12_en.pdf
G8
Summit 2009
49
 The Most Dangerous Threat
By David Irvine, Retired Brigadier General – U.S. Army
The changes in American life and our politics wrought
by 9/11 have been profound, but they would pale to in-
significance should a terrorist nuclear attack take place
in New York, Washington, or, for that matter, anywhere
in the world. It is highly probable that among the victims
would be the Bill of Rights, with all that would imply for
our system of democratic government. Nuclear terror-
ism from non-state actors and nuclear proliferation are
the most dangerous threats we face and have the great-
est likelihood of occurring.
While we know where most of the world’s store of
warheads and fissionable material is likely to be, we have
no way of knowing where all may be hidden away. Part
of the problem is of our own creation. For decades, the
U.S. has transferred enriched uranium to more than 40
nations, which, if misused, could construct more than
1,000 weapons; however, little has been recovered,
even though it was supposed to have been returned as
spent fuel.
The importance of recovering that material cannot
be ignored, but the most urgent focus of our attention
should be the risk of theft or unauthorized transfer of
weapons or weapons grade material from Pakistan and
North Korea, and the emerging Iranian uranium enrich-
ment program which threatens the Middle East tinder-
box like nothing else ever has. No challenge the Obama
administration faces during the next four or eight years
is of greater significance to American security than what
happens with these nations, and in each instance, this
president begins his term badly hobbled by the ap-
G8 proach of his predecessor to all three. Eight years were
Summit 2009
50
frittered away with North Korea and Iran by the refusal of
President Bush to apply Churchill’s maxim: “Jaw-jaw is
better than war-war.”
As for Pakistan, we seem to have fallen back on
hope as our plan: we hope that the government has full
control of its nuclear weapons; we hope that the intel-
ligence services are loyal to President Zardari, and we
hope that Abdul Khan is not shipping atomic secrets
and material to North Korea, Iran, or bin Laden.
With each of these three nations, unless the fis-
sionable cat is already out of the bag, our ability to en-
sure that loose nukes, nascent nukes, and new nuclear
weapons remain secured or undeveloped—Graham Al-
lison’s three priorities for preventing nuclear terrorism—
will depend, not on our military strength, but on the
vitality of American diplomacy and economic strength.
These necessary tools cannot be deployed without di-
rect negotiation. To be successful with North Korea and
Iran, President Obama, personally, will have to refurbish
old alliances and work to create new ones. It isn’t so
much a challenge of structuring new architecture that
will operate with greater effect, as it is getting more in-
ternational commitment to and putting enough resourc-
es into Cooperative Threat Reduction, the International
Atomic Energy Agency, the Nuclear Proliferation Treaty,
and the Nuclear Suppliers Group—to enable existing
programs to function as they were intended.
The full cooperation of Russia, India, Pakistan, Is-
rael, and China are indispensable to a global nuclear se-
curity effort that must come to grips with the danger of

a nuclear-armed North Korea and Iran—and a Pakistan
teetering on the verge of chaos. The world cannot af-
ford to allow Pakistan’s weapons and technology to go
astray. It is to the Obama administration’s credit that it
is rethinking the U.S. presence in Afghanistan with more
of an eye to Pakistan’s security and stability. Whatever
may be the definition of the military mission at the mo-
ment, we are perceived by the Iraqis, Afghans, and Pak-
istanis as occupiers at best and imperialists at worst.
Foreign occupation breeds resentment and hatred, and
our presence and cross-border operations become
threats to the stability of the very governments we seek
to assist. We can’t deal with Iran without meaningful
Russian help. We might have had more of that had we
been less eager to offer NATO membership to former
Soviet states. We can’t view (or treat) every Muslim as
a potential terrorist.
The irrationality of our current national security strate-
gy becomes quickly evident when we compare resource
commitment and attention focus to threat ranking.
Nuclear terrorism is our most dangerous threat, yet over
the last 15 years; we have only committed $7 billion to
the Cooperative Threat Reduction program, which has
made a good start (but not much more) with former USSR
stockpiles. Neither Iraq or Afghanistan poses a nuclear
threat to us, but those wars are being financed on a
national credit card at a cost to date (depending on whose
numbers are used) of $1.6 trillion. If the real focus of those
wars is al Qaeda, the cost per potential terrorist killed
to date is ridiculous. We are spending unsustainable
sums of borrowed money in an attempt to kill off a terror
delivery system that can regenerate itself exponentially
faster than we can field combat battalions.
Non Proliferation & Terrorism
The focal point for defeating nuclear terrorism is
where the weapons and weapons grade material are
stored. The Bush administration’s most glaring failure
was its mismatch of national resources to what and
where the real threat is. A quantity of enriched ura-
nium sufficient to construct a nuclear bomb is, in vol-
ume no larger than a six-pack; the necessary plutonium
would equal a couple of cans. Lead shielding would
add size and weight, but it would substantially reduce
the probability of detection. In view of that, the detec-
tion challenge cannot even be framed in the needle-
in-a-haystack comparison, because the linear scale of
porous geographic borders to the size of the object of
any search defies imagination. We cannot successfully
interdict even the hundreds of tons of illegal drugs which
find their way into the U.S. every year.
If the Obama administration is seeking an on-
the-shelf set of excellent policy recommendations, it
need only look to “Securing the Bomb 2008,” a com-
prehensive study commissioned by the Nuclear Threat
Initiative, headed by former Senator Sam Nunn. Much
time and money have been wasted, the task to be
accomplished is very, very difficult, but the price of
failure beggars description.
Mr. Irvine is an attorney in private practice in Salt Lake
City. He was commissioned as a strategic intelligence
officer in the Army Reserve in 1967 and retired as a brig-
adier general. He is a graduate of the Army War College,
and maintained a faculty assignment for 18 years with
the Sixth Army Intelligence School.
G8
Summit 2009
51
 Encouraging Nuclear Nonproliferation & Disarmament:
Lessons from Social Psychology
By Dr. Maria Rost Rublee – University of Auckland
With continuing nuclear crises in the Middle East
and East Asia, the question of how to promote nonpro-
liferation and disarmament is more important than ever.
Recent social psychology research highlights multiple
ways to encourage countries, organizations and even
individuals to help stop the spread of nuclear weapons.
Strengthening the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Regime
The Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty (NPT) and as-
sociated agreements—known as the nuclear nonpro-
liferation regime—are more important than ever. The
regime embodies the nuclear nonproliferation norm—
that is, it provides the normative foundation for saying
“civilized states don’t seek nuclear weapons.” Before
the NPT, acquiring nuclear weapons was an act of
national pride; after, it became an “act of international
outlawry,” noted U.S. Ambassador Thomas Graham.
But the NPT does more than just draw a line in the
sand. It also creates social mechanisms that can influ-
ence how policymakers think about the value of nuclear
weapons. For example, social psychology has found
that the need to appear consistent is a powerful motiva-
tor of human behaviour. States that have signed and rati-
fied the NPT, as well as participated in treaty review con-
ferences and other associated activities, are less likely
to later withdraw from the NPT and/or covertly seek
nuclear weapons. This is true not only because individu-
als feel a need to act consistently but also, because, over
time, a bureaucracy dedicated to the goals of the NPT
grows within the state, gaining influence and leverage.
Such a bureaucratic establishment makes it harder to
reverse course—a form of institutional consistency.
Another social mechanism embedded in the NPT is
what psychologists call a “descriptive norm”—that is,
people notice what we do at least as much as what we
say. The more people who do X, the more everyone else
thinks that X is the right thing to do. In this way, the NPT
creates a clear descriptive norm that shapes how policy-
makers view those who do and do not adhere to it. Almost
every state in the world is a member of the NPT, and
almost all of those states adhere to their treaty com-
mitments. So the NPT is about more than words and
lectures—it’s also about overwhelming global compli-
ance, which helps to influence how elites conceptualize
nuclear weapons. Indeed, few countries are lining up to
G8 become the next “rogue” state.
Summit 2009
52
Social psychology also helps us understand how
the NPT changes the social cost-benefit equation of
nuclear decision-making. Some states support nuclear
nonproliferation because they are persuaded that nu-
clear weapons are not in their best interest. However,
other states refrain from nuclear weapons because they
are conforming; that is, they may wish to develop nucle-
ar armaments, but consider the social costs too high.
Without the NPT, the cost-benefit equation changes
dramatically for these states, and not in favor of nuclear
nonproliferation.
These normative benefits would disappear if the
NPT were weakened or if the treaty collapsed. In that
case, the normative costs of going nuclear would drop,
and states around the world may reconsider their nu-
clear restraint. The policy conclusion is to maintain and
strengthen the NPT so that embedded social mecha-
nisms remain robust.
Rethinking Our Approach to “Rogue”
States
Another relevant lesson from social psychology is
from the “in-group vs. out-group” literature. People are
more likely to accept normative pressure from those they
like, while normative pressure from the “disliked” tends
to backfire—think of rebels who gain status by breaking
the rules. For this reason, a rogue state is unlikely to
respond well to lectures from the country benefiting
most from the status quo, which is why normative pres-
sure from the U.S. usually adds fuel to the fire.
A better way to approach problem states is through
countries and experts considered neutral. Libya, which
gave up its nuclear weapons program in 2003, would
be an especially good choice. The Libyans can argue
from experience about the benefits of abiding by the
NPT, including increased global economic integration
and greatly reduced concerns about state security.
Another good choice is China, whose experts can talk
about the value of focusing on economic development
from the point of view of a developing country. Other
neutral states that will not be seen as mouthpieces of
Washington are also better positioned to make effective
normative arguments.
Social psychology also tells us that creating con-
flict destroys the fertile ground necessary for normative
influence. Conflict polarizes people, leading them to shut

Atomic Bomb Dome in Hiroshima
off normative messages from “enemies.” The policy les-
son here is if we are negotiating to end a nuclear weapons
program, we should avoid creating new points of conflict
in other areas, thus increasing the likelihood that prob-
lem state will comply. This does not mean that we should
avoid conflict over the issue of nuclear proliferation. Rath-
er, if stopping nuclear proliferation is our highest priority,
we need to place all other conflicts on the back burner
until the issue is solved. Whether this is realistic or not
is a judgment call for policymakers. The point is that in-
troducing new areas of conflict will likely undermine ex-
isting normative influence we have on the nuclear issue.
Supporting Peace NGOs
A recent study showed that in three different
democracies, peace nongovernmental organizations
(NGOs) helped keep the countries non-nuclear by
making the political costs of going nuclear prohibitive.
So while conservative elites may have preferred the
nuclear option, they instead decided to stay in power
and settle on other ways to manage insecurity, such as
accepting a security guarantee from another country.
While peace NGOs perform many tasks, activities
that attract media attention are particularly helpful in
influencing government policy. By focusing public aware-
ness on the nuclear issue, peace NGOs make it harder
for governments to craft policy undermining either
nuclear nonproliferation or disarmament. Some peace
NGOs are becoming increasingly effective in leveraging
Non Proliferation & Terrorism
media coverage. For example, Peace Depot in Japan is a
small NGO with big impact. The group publishes reports
that outline the Japanese government’s promises on
nuclear issues, and then grades the government based
on their action (or inaction) that year. The Japanese me-
dia report extensively on Peace Depot materials, ampli-
fying their influence.
Peace groups are also acting creatively—and on
shoe-string budgets. For example, the New Zealand-
based Parliamentary Network for Nuclear Disarmament
(PNND) facilitates cooperation and information sharing
among anti-nuclear parliamentarians around the world.
If members in one country find a particular tactic effec-
tive, they can share it world-wide with other members,
who can then adopt the strategy for use at home.
Because they can leverage their influence and
adapt tactics to their local situation, peace NGOs are
a low-cost yet effective way to promote the twin norms
of nuclear nonproliferation and disarmament.
Small, Steady Steps on Disarmament
Recent events have heartened supporters of nucle-
ar disarmament—from U.S. President Barak Obama’s
speech in Prague to the Russian nod to further re-
duce nuclear stocks. What can we do to continue the
momentum toward nuclear disarmament? Social
psychology might advise, “Small, steady steps.” When
asked to make big sacrifices, people often refuse. But
people find it easier to make small sacrifices and will of-
ten agree to do so, which makes them much more likely
to consent to larger sacrifices for the same cause later
on. This is because “commitments grow their own legs,”
as psychology Robert Cialdini argues. Once a small
commitment is made and kept, people often internalize
the commitment, making bigger sacrifices more likely.
So instead of pressuring nuclear weapons states to
move toward disarmament immediately, a better meth-
od is to ask for small but sure steps in that direction,
such as ratification of the Comprehensive Test Ban Trea-
ty, negotiations for a Fissile Material Cut-Off Treaty and,
of course, further reductions in nuclear stocks. By getting
the ball rolling, these incremental efforts will likely lead
to internalized commitment to nuclear disarmament,
making the ultimate goal more likely.
Maria Rost Rublee is a lecturer at the University of
Auckland and author of the recently published Nonpro-
liferation Norms: Why States Choose Nuclear Restraint
(Athens: University of Georgia Press, 2009).
G8
Summit 2009
53
 On Combating Global Terrorism
By Ryan Harding, Correspondent - Diplomatic Courier Magazine
Since September 11, 2001, discussions about ter-
rorism have centered largely on the state of al-Qaeda,
its membership, and its systematic circumscription.
With some success, pressure has been placed on main
arteries providing al-Qaeda and other like-minded and
like-willed organizations with material support, leaving
those organizations ischemic and depleted of financial
support. Yet, despite this attention, terrorism persists.
Now, America’s eye has shifted away from Iraq to Af-
ghanistan and Pakistan, the latter of which was recently
labeled “terrorism’s epicenter.” With fresh attacks occur-
ring in Mumbai, Lahore, and elsewhere in the region, the
challenges facing South Asia (particularly Pakistan) will
be difficult to surmount. However, preceding this great
shift of attention and resources, it would be a beneficial
exercise to take stock and consider the current state of
global terrorism both as an idea and a phenomenon.
Defining Terrorism
Discursively, terrorism has come to take on many
different meanings and has been cast in numerous
lights. If there is one thing that can be said about the
body of literature that exists on the subject of terrorism,
it is that there is a complete lack of consensus about not
only how “terrorism” should be countered strategically,
but its meaning as an idea; what, as a term, it implies
and to whom it refers; and how it is currently manifesting
itself. The issue is certainly semantic at its heart: without
international agreement about the meaning of terrorism,
there can be no reconciliation between views. Nonethe-
less, in order to come to grips with the issue of global
terrorism, the definition of terrorism must be somewhat
flushed out.
The idea that 9/11—or even the decades preced-
ing it—ushered in a new era of terrorism has pervaded
political discussions on terrorism and media coverage
of terrorism. Making taxonomical sense of this new spe-
cies of terrorism, it was deemed that this new form of
terrorism—typified by violent militant Islamic groups—
was different from earlier forms in terms of, among
many things, its objective (seemingly nonpolitical and
religiously motivated), method (indiscriminate, nonstra-
tegic killing of bystanders), and scope (global, instead of
regional or local).
Antonoy Field of the University of Warwick, howev-
er, points out that idea of a “new terrorism falls short of
a useful analytical concept” insofar as by segregating
contemporary examples of terrorism from past examples
G8 we obscure, and obviate the need to thoughtfully con-
Summit 2009 sider, history. Field points out that while there are indeed
54
differences, the “shift in the nature of terrorism has been
exaggerated” inasmuch as “traditional terrorism” and
“new terrorism” have in common those very things used
to divide them; their method, objective, and scope. In ad-
dition to this, because terrorists have been described as
an amorphous enemy whose demands are incapable of
being met, terrorism is seen as something seemingly in-
surmountable, leaving us often to forget that “[t]he attacks
of 11 September 2001 by al-Qa’eda were not simply a
form of cathartic punishment; they also served a broader
strategic purpose with the aim of coercing the govern-
ment of the United States to change its foreign policy.”
The question, therefore, is, if indeed conquering terrorism
is not an insurmountable goal (keeping in mind, however,
that the threat of terrorism should not be underestimat-
ed), what is the appropriate response to terrorism?
Is Terrorism Losing Ground?
Patrick Porter, in his aptly titled article “Long war
and long telegrams: Containing Al-Qaeda,” rehabilitates
George Kennan’s Cold War strategy of containment.
Porter develops, with great efficacy, a narrative about
terrorism which runs counter to most. Citing success in
disrupting the flow of capital to terrorist organizations, in
addition to “restricting the movements of militants and
tracking down principal leaders,” the U.S. could embark
on a policy of containment. Porter’s idea of containment
is also predicated on the idea that al-Qaeda and like
organizations will continue to alienate former supporters
and offend most Muslims.
While attacks have not ceased and are becoming
more visible (with attacks targeting high profile targets
such as Sri Lanka’s cricket team), movements against
violent extremist brands of Islam also have not ceased.
In Algeria, the organization known as the Salafi Group
for Call and Combat (GSPC) has experienced difficulty
recruiting, one of which reasons is that “the GSPC no longer
have the support within the population” due to a draw-
down of tensions in Iraq and a decline in Al-Qaeda
activity. In Bhubaneswar, Muslims from across India
united at an anti-terrorism conference in condemna-
tion of terrorism. In Pakistan, an opinion poll taken by
Terror Free Tomorrow, shows that Osama bin Laden’s
popularity has declined steeply, from 33 percent in
August 2007 to 18 percent in January 2008, and
in the northwest territory, it has fallen from 70 percent
in August 2007 to 4 percent in January 2008. Al-
Qaeda and linked cells of support have overplayed
their hand with the local population, systematically
alienating many of their supporters. Instead of being
“the knight of Islam… [Al-Qaeda] persecutes and impov-
erishes Muslims.”

Nonetheless, terrorism continues to be a problem.
In November 2008 the world watched as terrorists killed
over 170 people in Mumbai, harming an already strained
relationship between Pakistan and India. Pakistan has
currently taken five of the nine “alleged collaborators” in
custody as it continues to experience strained relations
with India. Pakistan has seen multiple terrorist attacks
in Lahore recently, one of which—perpetrated by the
Taliban—was directed at the Sri Lankan cricket team
and left five Pakistani policemen dead and seven play-
ers injured.
While terrorism has persisted elsewhere, with insur-
gents representing the group al-Shabab firing mortars
at a plane carrying a U.S. congressman out of Mogadi-
shu, Pakistan has grabbed America’s attention. Unable
to effectively govern much of its tribal frontier territory,
policymakers worry about it being used as a staging
ground for terrorist organizations. Also of concern is
the interconnection between unrest in the northwest
of Pakistan, and the country bordering it, Afghanistan.
However, in designing policy meant to combat this ter-
rorism, somewhat of a shift in thinking is required.
While the idea that the germ of the modern phe-
nomenon of terrorism is socio-economically related
is hotly contested on both sides, the support terrorist
groups receive among local populations should not be
Nuclear Non Proliferation & Terrorism
overestimated nor should the West’s ability to gain favor
in the eyes of those in the Middle East who are thought
to look upon the West unfavorably. After the earthquake
in Pakistan in 2005 “Pakistanis with positive views of
the United States” went up “from 23 per cent to 46 per
cent.” And, after the Tsumani, the United States gained
ground in opinion polls, including in Indonesia.
When tailoring policies in response to terrorism
it might help to look at the War on Terror through a
constructivist lens: it might be that perhaps the lan-
guage of the War on Terror has circumscribed America’s
response to terrorism to primarily military action, and the
prospect of a “new terrorism” has obscured the way in
which terrorism is approached and countered.
Projecting a positive image through humanitarian
work is one of the most effective ways of undermining
terrorist support and “undercut[ting] the image of Amer-
ica” as “the imperialist predator.” Even though terrorism
persists, it might be that America has overlooked the
greatest weapon in its arsenal: humanitarian aid.
Ryan M. Harding reports on International Organi-
zations, Global Governance, and Latin America for the
Diplomatic Courier magazine in Washington, DC.
G8
Summit 2009
55
 Democracy Promotion: Productive Long-term
Strategy, Not Counterterrorism Answer1
By Andrew Jensen, Hinckley Scholar, University of Utah Hinckley Institute of Politics
Democracy promotion has been a fundamental prin-
ciple of U.S. foreign policy since the end of the Cold War
and has been used to prevent political extremism and
transnational terrorist violence in the war on terrorism.
According to this strategy, when democratic standards
are infused in a state’s political structure, the occurrence
or probability of terrorist acts will decline. Yet the empiri-
cal data and case studies on the causes of transnational
terrorist violence demonstrate this assumption moder-
ately inaccurate in many vital respects.
The correlational studies literature on democracy
and transnational terrorism illustrates that the presence
of democracy—notably during its weak and untried
stages—often provides an unpredictable environment
where terrorism is able to flourish. Even more advanced
democracies, like India, are susceptible to terrorist acts
due to other significant variables, such as social and re-
ligious division, multipartism, and the tendency toward
extremism2. On the other hand, more authoritarian
states, such as China, with excessive rule of law often
preempt terrorist groups from organizing and carrying
out violent political acts.
Theoretical Interpretations of Events
Data 2007, if deaths caused by terrorism in Iraq and Afghani-
Although the arguments concerning terrorism and
democracy seem to have reached a watershed in their
primary focus on failed, failing, and weak democratic
states as most susceptible to terrorist violence, there
are still many states that have/do not fit into these ide-
al types. Using various methodologies, scholars have
shown that terrorists hailed most often from democratic
countries in the past; that historically, terrorist attacks
occurred more often in democratic countries; and that
transnational terrorism transpired more often in states
experiencing regime change.3 The story has been nar-
rowed further by using the ITERATE4 to determine that
established democracies are less prone to terrorist activ-
ity than non-democracies, but a causal relationship was
also drawn between new democracies and frequency of
terrorist acts5. As was later shown, most terrorist vio-
lence has been committed by individuals of the same
nationality as their victims and most often in (frequently
mature) democratic states.6
Other less quantitative, contributory factors were
later accounted for to fill in some of the existing gaps
in the literature. One scholar maintains that a more accu-
G8 rate indicator needs to be developed, so instead of look-
Summit 2009 ing solely at regime type in the aggregate, main causal
56
factors within democracies should be isolated.7 James
Piazza first takes on the so-called “rooted-in-poverty
hypothesis” that argues terrorism is the result of socio-
economic discontent. He points out that only three of the
top ten countries experiencing terrorism-related casual-
ties had low socioeconomic development and the top
ten cases with “intense” terrorist violence were all “medi-
um to high” on the scale of socioeconomic development.
Additionally, the case-study analyses on relative depriva-
tion are rooted in the 1970s and the authors are too loose
with their definitions, often interchanging civil conflict and
domestic insurgency with terrorist activity. Indicators
based on “social cleavage theory”— particularly social
and religious division, multipartism, and the tendency
toward extremism—more accurately predict if a country
is prone to terrorism.8
Indian Heterogeneity
India serves as an important example to demonstrate
the inaccuracies surrounding many U.S. leaders’ insis-
tence that democracy and development are solutions to
the problem of terrorism. In 2003, India accounted for
75% of terrorist incidents among countries classified as
“free” with most attacks originating from Pakistan.9 In
stan are factored out, 1,093 of 7,113 (or 15%) of global
fatalities happened in India.10
The social cleavage model seems to be more pre-
cise in documenting the complexities of the Indian case.
India is one of the most diverse countries in South Asia,
encompassing copious ethnic factions and political par-
ties. Significant caste and religious rifts divide the coun-
try along provincial and linguistic lines. Although Hindi is
the official and dominant language, its use is consigned
primarily to the northern part of the country.11
On the national level, these social and religious
fissures prove detrimental. Lok Sabha—India’s lower
house of parliament—had thirty-eight different parties
from 1999-2004 and the dominant party of Bharatiya
Janaata only constituted 23.7% of total seats during
this time.12 The uncertain political party structure with
numerous ethnic and religious cleavages contributes to
the precariousness of the situation and the persistence
of tension, often ending in terrorist violence
Chinese Homogeneity
From 2000-03, 203 international terrorist attacks
were recorded in India and zero in China. From 1976

to 2004, 400 incidents occurred in India and only 18 in
China. As Gregory Gause points out, even if China is
underreporting and the number increases ten times, it
still falls significantly short of the number of transnational
terrorist incidents occurring in India.13
China offers a striking contrast to the diverse cul-
tural, religious, and linguistic climate in India. The mostly
homogenous Chinese Communist Party (CCP) gov-
erns and maintains complete military control over all
the provinces and allows relatively little opposition. The
National People’s Congress is a unicameral legislative
branch that acts according to demands of the Party and
Politburo.14 Over 90 percent of the Chinese population
is Han and most minority and political opposition groups
have been alienated, integrated forcefully, and/or brand-
ed as dissidents.
Religion in China consists mainly of observing lo-
cal customs and traditional beliefs, though practice is
limited by the pervasive atheist political convention of
the ruling Socialist leadership. Derived from mixtures of
Buddhism, Confucianism, and Taoism, this “religious
pluralism” evokes a more amiable atmosphere than
the Middle East and South Asia primarily because it is
practiced by similar people with the same ideals of “har-
mony” and “unity”.15
Lastly, political extremism that followed the consid-
erable social and economic disruption after the Cold
War—notably in the Soviet Union—was likely curbed by
CCP limits on political transparency and democratizing
forces.16 China did experience significant growth as a
result of semi-free market policies and partial decentral-
ization, but its leaders have maintained significant con-
trol over political processes and groups.
Democracy Promotion Not Enough stitute for National Strategic Studies Symposium, Ft. McNair, April
Democracy promotion is a worthy strategy and
should remain one of the pillars of U.S. foreign policy, but
should not be seen as the crucial solution to the prob-
lem of transnational terrorism. Instead, the focus should
be on policies that promote rule of law, education and
assimilation, and that heal deep social and religious
divides, rather than the unrelated focus of advancing
free and fair elections, socioeconomic development, and
reductions in economic disparity. The Indian and Chinese
cases viewed through the social cleavage model dem-
onstrate that a more nuanced and rigorous approach is
essential for the U.S. to develop an effective interna-
tional counterterrorism policy.
Utah with an Honor B.S. in Political Science in 2009.,
and served a Hinckley internship in Washington, DC
with the House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
Nuclear Non Proliferation & Terrorism
1 This essay is based on a previous paper I wrote (to be published)
entitled, “Terrorism via Democracy? Assessing Democracy Promo-
tion as a Security Rationale,” Hinckley Journal of Politics, Vol. 10
(forthcoming).
2 James Piazza, “Rooted in Poverty? Terrorism, Poor Economic
Development, and Social Cleavages,” Terrorism and Political
Violence, Vol. 18, No. 1 (2006), pp. 159-177.
3 William Eubank and Leonard Weinberg, “Does Democracy En-
courage Terrorism?” Terrorism and Political Violence, Vol. 6, No. 4
(Winter 1994), pp. 417-443. See also Eubank and Weinberg, Ter-
rorism and Democracy: What Recent Events Disclose,” Terrorism
and Political Violence, Vol. 10, No. 1 (1998), pp. 108-18.
4 ITERATE: International Terrorism: Attributes of Terrorist Events.
See James Piazza, “Do Democracy and Free Markets Protect Us
From Terrorism?” International Politics, Vol. 45, No. 1 (2008), pp.
72-91.
5 JoeEyerman, “Terrorism and Democratic States: Soft Targets
or Accessible Systems,” International Interactions, Vol. 24, No. 2
(1998), pp. 151-70.
6 Weinberg and Eubank, “Terrorism and Democracy: Perpetra-
tors and Victims,” Terrorism and Political Violence, Vol. 13, No. 1
(2001) pp. 155-64.
7 Piazza, “Rooted in Poverty?”
8 Ibid.
9 SouthAsia Terrorism Portal, “India Assessment – 2007,” Ac-
cessed 6/2/2008, http://satp.org/satporgtp/countries/india/index.
html.
10 National Counterterrorism Center, “2006 Report on Terrorism,”
http://wits.nctc.gov/reports/crot2006nctcannexfinal.pdf; Also,
“2007 Report on Terrorism,” http://www.terrorisminfo.mipt.org/
pdf/NCTC-2007-Report-on-Terrorism.pdf
11 Piazza, “Rooted in Poverty?”
12 Ibid.
13 Gregory Gause, “Assessing Middle East Security Prospects,” In-
20-21, 2005, http://www.ndu.edu/inss/symposia/topical2005/
gausepaper.pdf.
14 BBC News, “Inside China’s Ruling Party,” http://news.bbc.
co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/asia_pac/02/china_party_congress/china_
ruling_party/html/default.stm.
15 ZhibinXie. Religious Diversity and Public Religion in China
(Great Britain: Ashgate, 2006).
16 Kishore Mahbubani, “Understanding China” Foreign Affairs, Vol.
84, No. 5 (Sep/Oct 2005), pp. 49-60.
Andrew Jensen graduated from the University of
G8
Summit 2009
57
 China’s Investment in Africa:
Development or Neo-Colonialism?
By John Bavoso, Africa Correspondent – Diplomatic Courier Magazine
Driving down any given road in the United States,
one has very little occasion to contemplate who
constructed said thruway or where the funds for its
completion originated. Travel down a newly paved road
in a country like Liberia in West Africa or a reconstructed
railway in Angola, in the continent’s southern region,
and consideration of the origins of such infrastructure
projects results in delving into complex relationships
involving the international community and issues such
as paternalism, accountability, resource dependence,
human rights, and neo-colonialism.
Such far-reaching associations are due to the
fact that the struggle between the West and China
has found a new ground-zero in the last decade: sub-
Saharan Africa.
Foreign aid makes up much of the national budget
of many sub-Saharan African countries, and for decades
most of this aid has been coming from Western coun-
tries and international organizations such as the Inter-
national Monetary Fund (IMF) and the World Bank (WB).
One of the downsides of this aid, from the perspec-
tive of many African leaders, is that these funds come
with strings attached: conditions, such as the creation
of anti-corruption and poverty-reduction plans and
the privatization of public services, are attached to loans,
debt relief, and bilateral aid provided for sub-Saharan
African countries.
Economically emerging countries within the interna-
tional system have taken note of how resentful of many
of these conditions many sub-Saharan African states
have become, considering them the height of West-
ern paternalism. This has led to the rise in popularity
in recent years of a phenomenon sometimes referred to
as “south-south cooperation,” a concept which posits
that developing countries, which comprise the “Global
South,” are turning to other developing countries for
assistance and trade rather than more developed
countries. The most striking example of this has been
China’s prodigious interest in sub-Saharan Africa and
the natural resources and opportunities for energy
creation it offers.
China’s growing population is known for being one
of the most energy-hungry in the world, leading the
Chinese government to constantly search for reliable
sources of natural resources to power its continued de-
velopment. Tense relations with the West over issues such
G8 as human rights and political ideology have resulted in
Summit 2009 the country looking to other areas of the world to meet
58
its needs. Sub-Saharan Africa, with its vast stores of
natural resources like oil, platinum, and copper, lack of
infrastructures in many areas, staggering levels of
debt and increasing disdain for Western interference in
economic matters, has presented China with an oppor-
tunity to meet its economic goals while also expanding
its global influence.
Upwards of 85 percent of China’s oil imports now
come from five different African countries: Angola,
Equatorial Guinea, Nigeria, the Republic of Congo, and
Sudan. The Asian giant also receives large amounts of
other resources such as diamonds, timber, and copper
from the region. This has shot China into the position
of being Africa’s second biggest trading partner—be-
hind the United States, but ahead of the countries of
Western Europe. On the African side, individual coun-
tries have been given impressive amounts of funds for
projects such as road and railway reconstruction meant
to boost infrastructure. China has agreed to forgive
large amounts of African debt, refuses to put condi-
tions on money going to countries on the continent,
and practices a policy of non-interference in terms
of domestic issues such as governance and human
rights protection. When asked, many Africans indi-
cate that they appreciate the fact that, unlike dealing
with the IMF, the World Bank, or many Western do-
nor countries, dealing with China is a positive experi-
ence because the Chinese “treat Africans like adults,”
rather than children in need of disciplining and oversight.
The West has been quick to point out that China’s
interest in the region, despite its rhetoric, is less than
altruistic and that, despite its claims, the influx of cash
flooding the region is doing more harm than good.
Many parties in the international community see the
country’s role in the region as more exploitative and par-
asitic than beneficial. For instance, while funds from Chi-
na go towards many infrastructure improvements, the
actual projects are, more often than not, completed by
Chinese nationals who are brought in for the purpose,
taking viable and much-needed jobs away from local Af-
rican workers. Also, China’s policy of non-intervention
means that it pumps money into non-democratic re-
gimes and, in the case of the Sudan and Zimbabwe,
for instance, keep human rights abusing governments
afloat despite condemnation and criticism from much of
the rest of the world.
While it’s interesting to see so much renewed inter-
est in an otherwise neglected region of the world, as with
many other issues in the international community, the
voices of Africans tend to get lost in the shuffle. While
both sides of the issue argue that they have sub-Saha-
ran Africa’s best interests in mind, this current round of
debate is reminiscent of the Cold War era, where Africa
was a battlefield upon which the conflicting interests
of the world’s superpowers could unfold, much to the
detriment of Africans.
Within sub-Saharan Africa, a debate rages as well.
Many Africans appreciate the idea that they are “treated
like adults” by the Chinese and they feel that this new
source of funds may be the impetus needed to help pull
the continent out of decades of poverty. Others, howev-
er, have expressed concerns about what China gets in
exchange for its raw materials: a market for its low-cost
consumer goods. The influx of foreign goods, taken to-
gether with the Chinese insistence on using their own
laborers rather than the local workforce, leaves many
Africans worried about the future of domestic industries
and jobs. There is also a fear that, as the world’s natural
resources begin to become scarcer, a new “scramble”
for Africa, this time between the West and China, will
once again overtake the continent.
With all of these competing interests, ideas and nar-
ratives, is there any way to develop a strategy which
benefits all parties and minimizes damage to the Afri-
cans who are often caught in the middle?
From the Western perspective, in order for the U.S.
and its allies to have any credibility in decrying China’s
non-interference and tacit support of human rights
abusers, they will have to reevaluate support of coun-
tries like Saudi Arabia, which provide steady oil supplies
but have seriously questionable human rights policies.
The U.S., and the rest of the West, should also in-
crease their diplomatic presence in sub-Saharan Africa
if they hope to balance China’s influence. The interna-
tional community doesn’t have a great track record in
terms of helping Africa when the region needs it the
most when its own interests aren’t threatened, and a
greater interest in the area may go a long way towards
increasing credibility.
There are also other avenues which Africans can ex-
plore. The “south-south cooperation” model doesn’t just
apply to countries outside of the region. South Africa, for
instance, is the only sub-Saharan African country to be
included in the ranks of G8+5 and G20 countries, and
this offers an alternative opportunity for funding, which
is closer to home and represents a country with more of
a stake in the prosperity and stability of the region.
However the international community chooses to
proceed in the future, it is important to pause and con-
sider the fact that the lives of everyday Africans are
very much at stake when such economic decisions
are made. There is a very real risk that sub-Saharan
Africa may once again become the victim of economic
colonization, but there also exists an equal potential
that renewed interest in the region may lead to lasting
development. Greater inclusion of African voices this
time around may just help to avoid some of history’s
worst pitfalls.
John Bavoso is a graduate student at the School
of International Service at American University focusing
on issues related to human rights, gender and sexu-
al equality, and sub-Saharan Africa at the Diplomatic G8
Courier magazine. Summit 2009
59
 A Prescription for Development:
Curing What Ails Foreign Aid to Africa
By Erika George, Professor, of Law, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College Of Law

Far too often images emerging from Africa depict There are multiple motivations for offering aid. For
poverty, disaster, conflict, and suffering. With increasing example, a 2006 U.S. AID published primer illustrates a
regularity industrialized nations express their intentions perceived role for aid to play in promoting national security
to provide additional development aid to assist Africa and waging the “War on Terror.” Along with defense and
with ameliorating the poverty responsible for much of diplomacy, development is advanced as supporting U.S.
the suffering experienced by so many on the Con- geostrategic interests central to combating terrorism and
tinent. Despite the best intentions on the part of do- strengthening American security at home and abroad.
nor countries, efforts to uplift debtor nations frequently Aid is then an investment against instability, a “leverag-
fail to meet or fall far short of articulated expectations. ing instrument,” a device for perception management to
At the 2005 Summit, G8 members answered former British counter anti-American propaganda.
Prime Minister Tony Blair’s call for increasing aid to Africa
and pledged to commit additional resources to develop-
ment aid. Today however these pledged goals have not
been reached. In the current climate of global economic
downturn Africa’s actual receipt of these pledged re-
sources appears to be increasingly remote. In the mean-
time, images of African misery and suffering continue to
capture the public imagination.

The Diagnosis: What Ails Aid?

Sharp differences persist in the public debate over

the ability of foreign development aid to change and
improve the images coming out of Africa. Does foreign
aid promote or prevent development in Africa? Develop-
ment assistance has committed devotees who maintain
that aid, when responsibly distributed, has been suc-
cessful in saving and improving lives by increasing food
production, promoting disease control, and providing
safe drinking water among other things. Increasingly,
however, development assistance has detractors who
charge that aid has failed to accomplish its aims. Some
argue that aid actually perpetuates poverty.

Economist Jeffery Sachs advocates more rapid and

increased levels of aid for Africa in his book The End
of Poverty. According to African author and economist
Dambisa Moyo’s Dead Aid, aid to Africa needs to end
entirely and immediately. Those critical of aid can point
to instances of failure. They argue that aid distorts incen-
tives and promotes dependency. Those who champion
aid can point to some successes. They assert that lives
can be saved for as little as a dollar a day. Even if such Besides perceived self-interest, pity appears to play
assistance does not directly result in economic growth, a motivating role for some aid donors. A significant and
some forms of aid still remain effective. perhaps underexplored problem with aid concerns how
many see Africa—more as a charity case than a coop-
Although the debate is currently characterized by erative venture partner. Were the motivating intention
a sharp division over whether assistance is effective or animating interaction with Africa to invest in a future
whether it kills the kind of entrepreneurship imperative partner instead of self promotion or pity the incentive
for elevating people out of poverty, there appears to be structures in the aid enterprise could arguably look quite
G8 some emerging consensus that intervention is urgently different perhaps with benefits accruing to those within
Summit 2009 needed. But what ails aid? and outside of Africa.
60
 G8
Summit 2009

61
 Development in Africa

In addition to perception problems with respect to
Africa in particular and the aid enterprise more gener-
ally, there are more practical difficulties with aid delivery.
One problem has been the demand by some donors
that in return for assistance aid recipients must use and
source goods from the donor nation. Restricting the re-
cipient from sourcing locally or finding better bargains
can leave a recipient country in a circumstance of al-
ways paying back and not investing forward. Complex
reporting requirements for recipient countries present
another problem by generating additional administra-
tive costs which in some instances diminish the benefits
of aid significantly. Most significant, however, is the
unfortunate fact that recipients—the poor people in
debtor countries—have virtually no voice in the aid
determination and delivery process.
A Prescription:
An Antidote in Mutual Accountability
There are competing and contradictory claims over
aid’s efficacy. Evidence seems inconclusive, so argu-
ments over how best to better the lot of the Continent’s
poorest are unlikely to end soon. Certainly, the world’s
“bottom billion” cannot wait for a consensus to build.
Interventions to improve aid must include a mechanism for
accountability to the intended beneficiaries of aid.
Much of the attention in the public debate over the
efficacy of development aid to Africa has centered on
conditions in the recipient country. Donors and aid agen-
cies have identified corruption and poor governance as
barriers to development and appropriately are demand-
ing more responsible management of aid resources
received. While these concerns are appropriate, less
attention has been paid to responsible resource man-
agement on the part of aid agencies in donor countries.
mutual monitoring mechanism may serve to yield better
mutual outcomes and could potentially set the stage for
better understanding and adjusting incentives towards a
form of aid that is invested in and accountable to those
most in need.
Accountability could be advanced by a mutual
monitoring mechanism with sufficient independence
and transparency to permit a place for the voice of the
neediest recipient to be heard and an opportunity for the
donor to listen and learn. A mutual monitoring mech-
anism must also promote the development of a more
constructive reciprocal relationship between nations
engaged in the aid exchange. Such a relationship may
cure the imbalances afflicting the current aid system by
better ensuring that what is offered is aligned with the
interests of those in need.
Erika George is a Professor of Law at the Univer-
sity of Utah’s S.J. Quinney College of Law where she
teaches international human rights and humanitarian
law, international environmental law, constitutional law,
and civil procedure. Professor George graduated from
Harvard Law School. She completed a M.A. in Interna-
tional Relations and earned her B.A. in Politics Econom-
ics Rhetoric and Law with honors both from University
of Chicago. She continues to conduct human rights ad-
vocacy and outreach projects, she is also a frequent
lecturer and writer on issues of women’s human rights
and international human rights. Her human rights work
has been covered by BBC, The Economist, NBC News,
CCN, and the Christian Science Monitor.
Acknowledgements: Ben Lear and John Mbaku

Economist William Easterly has observed that aid

agencies are typically not accountable to their intended
beneficiaries. As a result, there are no incentives to de-
liver to intended beneficiaries. Moyo suggests that many
African governments have no incentives to help their
people and aid further exacerbates the lack of account-
ability and impunity already enjoyed by those in power.
The question then becomes—how better to set incen-
tives such that someone will accountable to the bot-
tom billion? Collectively, G8 member states should work
to design such an incentive structure. Donors and de-
velopment aid recipients together should consider the
design of mechanisms to mutually monitor aid resources.

Easterly has proposed that donors create “interna-

tional independent evaluation groups” separate from
G8 government but including nationals from the stakehold-
Summit 2009 er nations involved in aid. Some form of independent
62
 G8
Summit 2009

63
 Mugabe’s Zimbabwe: A State’s Decline from
Fragile Democracy to Electoral Authoritarianism
By Dustin Gardiner, Hinckley Scholar, University of Utah Hinckley Institute of Politics
If the outcome of Zimbabwe’s last presidential
election is an indication, President Robert Mugabe’s
strong foundation for authoritarian rule is beginning
to crumble.
Although Mugabe has maintained his decades-long
grip on the presidency even after he lost the March
2008 election by most accounts, he has since ceded to
international pressure and formed a unity government
with opposition leader Morgan Tsvangiari, who is acting
as prime minister.1
The move comes after a humanitarian and econom-
ic crisis paralyzed the country last fall when Mugabe re-
fused to sign off on a final power-sharing agreement with
Tsvangiari. As Mugabe’s government fell into disarray,
basic services, such as access to clean water, deterio-
rated, resulting in a cholera outbreak and widespread
food shortages.2 The humanitarian crisis coupled with
ongoing political disputes and violence led to a crash in
the value of the Zimbabwean currency, causing a mass
exodus of capital and people from the country. The pan-
ic sent the economy further into a downward spiral.
Seeing the growing crisis and Mugabe’s unwillingness
to engage in power sharing talks, international leaders,
including several of Mugabe’s former allies, intensified
their criticism and sanctions against Mugabe’s admin-
istration. Kenyan Prime Minister Raila Odinga led the
charge, calling for international military intervention to re-
move Mugabe and end the Cholera outbreak.3 Mugabe
eventually succumbed to the pressure and growing need
for international aid.
However, despite the formation of a unity govern-
ment, which gave Tsvangiari authority over day-to-day
G8 governing and calls for the creation of a new constitu-
Summit 2009 tion4, Mugabe still retains much of the power that he
64
has accumulated in nearly thirty years as the country’s
leader. In the absence of an embarrassing and grow-
ing humanitarian crisis that drew the attention of many
foreign leaders, Mugabe might have been able to avoid
forming a unity government entirely.
In short, Mugabe maintains much of the foundation
for authoritarian rule that has enabled his power-grab and
Zimbabwe’s decline from a fragile democracy to electoral
authoritarianism, though his basis of power is weakening.
The term electoral authoritarianism is used to describe
regimes that present an “illusion of multi-party democ-
racy at the local and national levels while effectively
stripping elections of efficacy.”5 While elections are held
often, the state is not considered democratic because
the ruling leader or party uses government institutions
and informal powers to manipulate vote counts or
strip the opposition of its ability to effectively compete
against the incumbent regime. Unlike a fragile democ-
racy where elections are mostly free, fair and provide a
chance for real competition despite the existence of weak
institutions, elections in electoral authoritarian states
don’t allow any chance for real electoral competition.6
Mugabe’s stranglehold on power is perhaps most
apparent in his ability to maintain the presidency even
after numerous international observers have discredited
the results of the March 2008 presidential election as
fraudulent.7 The nation nearly descended into anarchy
when Mugabe refused to release the results of the hotly
contested election and ordered the violent suppression
of protesters supporting Tsvangirai’s Movement for
Democratic Change.7
After delaying for over a month and committing
numerous human rights violations, Mugabe released
fraudulent numbers showing Tsvangirai had beaten him
by a six percent margin, but failed to win a majority and
to avoid a run-off election. Mugabe stalled again by
extending the date of the run off election until late
June. Tsvangiari agreed to the runoff but withdrew and
fled the country after it became clear Mugabe’s govern-
ment would continue to use violent means to secure
a victory. Following the results of the election, there
were nearly 90 reported killings that resulted from
political violence, and members of Mugabe’s ZANU-PF
Party were primarily responsible for the deaths.9 Many
more were injured and imprisoned. The intimidation
techniques even focused on MDC presidential candi-
date Tsvangirai, who was arbitrarily arrested, beaten
and later released without being charged on five
separate instances.9

Underlying Mugabe’s basis for electoral authori-
tarian rule is his position in Zimbabwe’s deep-seated
military culture and a network of patronal relationships
with elites. Violence and military intervention in political
campaigns has been an ongoing problem in Zimbabwe,
particularly with the ZANU-PF. Mugabe, who is well-know
as a leader of the liberation forces that fought the British
and white colonists for independence, first used the mil-
itary to wage war against the forces of a major political
opponent shortly after Zimbabwe gained independence
in 1980.10 The 2008 election is just the latest example
of his using the military to intimidate and suppress
opposition protesters to secure a victory.
Mugabe’s ability to remain in office despite wide-
spread support for the opposition and international con-
demnation of his tactics is also reflective of his ability
to build a network of patronal relationship with political
elites, including military leaders, bureaucrats, and key
members of the ZANU-PF. The relationships generally
involve the trading of presidential favors in exchange for
political support from elites. Because the elite tend to
support political leaders who serve their self-interest, a
willing president like Mugabe can yield a heavy amount
of informal influence.11
Mugabe seems to have gained a considerable amount
of leverage over elites through his re-appropriation of mil-
lions of acres of farmland seized from white plantation
owners without compensation. He seized most white land
holdings saying they would be given to rural blacks in ret-
ribution for the fertile lands that were taken from natives
by colonial settlers. However, much of the land was given
out to top government and military officials to secure their
loyalty.12 The unwillingness of elites to defect from Mugabe
after the 2008 election is a testament to the strength of his
patronal network.
While much of Mugabe’s foundation for authoritar-
ian rule remains intact, the formation of a unity govern-
ment has provided an opportunity for Tsvangirai and
the opposition to erode his power base. With the next
presidential election several years away and a new con-
stitution on the table, the opposition must work to re-
store the rule of law and prevent another sham election
that simply reinstates Mugabe’s power.
Regional Crises
1“Mugabe swears in rival Tsvangirai as Zimbabwe PM”. (2009,
February 11). The Guardian. Retrieved April 8, 2009, from http://
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/11/tsvangirai-zimbabwe-
prime-minister-mugabe.
2 “Cholera epidemic is still ‘out of control’”. (2008, December 28).
The Associated Press. Retrieved April 8, 2009, from
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2008/dec/28/zimbabwe-chol-
era-epidemic-child-malnutrition.
3 Mudzwiti, M. (2008, December 8). “Mugabe buys more time”.
The Times of South Africa. Retrieved December 8, 2008, from
http://www.google.com/search?q=zimbabwe+us&ie=UTF-
8&oe=UTF-8.
4McGreal, C. (2009, February 10). “Tsvangirai to be sworn in
as Zimbabwe prime minister”. The Guardian. Retrieved April 10,
2009, from http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2009/feb/10/zimba-
bwe-coalition-tsvangirai.
5Tlemcani, R. (2007, May 24-30). “Electoral Authoritarianism”. Al
Ahram Weekly Retrieved December 6, 2008, from Carnegie En-
dowment for International Peace Web site:http://www.carnegieen-
dowment.org/publications/index.cfm?fa=view&id=19176&prog=z
gp&proj=zdrl,zme.
6 Waterbury, J. (1999). “Chapter 12: Fortuitous Byproducts”. In
Anderson, L. (Ed.), Transitions to Democracy. New York: Columbia
University Press. Retrieved December 7, 2008, from http://www.
ciaonet.org.tproxy01.lib.utah.edu/book/anderson/anderson12.
html.
7“MDC seeks new Zimbabwe election”. (2008, October 21.) BBC
News. Retrieved November 17, 2008, from http://news.bbc.
co.uk/2/hi/africa/7681468.stm.
8 Whitaker, R. (2008). “Zimbabwe election violence spreads to
Harare.” The New Zealand Herald. Retrieved November 14,
2008, from http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_
id=2&objectid=10517688.
9 “Tsvangirai arrested in Zimbabwe”. (2008, June 4). United
Press International. Retrieved November 19, 2008, from
http://www.nzherald.co.nz/world/news/article.cfm?c_
id=2&objectid=10517688.
10 Lyman, P. N. (2007). “Zimbabwe: The Limits of Influence”. In
Lyman, P. N. & Dorff, P. (Eds.), Beyond Humanitarianism (89-100).
New York: Council on Foreign Relations.
11 Transparency International. (2008). “Corruption Perceptions
Index.” Retrieved November 17, 2008, from http://www.transpar-
ency.org/news_room/in_focus/2008/cpi2008/cpi_2008_table.
12 Human Rights Watch. (2008). “Our Hands Are Tied”: Erosion
of the Rule of Law in Zimbabwe. Johannesburg: Human Rights
Watch Africa Division. Retrieved December 7, 2008, from Ciao Net
online database: http://www.ciaonet.org.tproxy01.lib.utah.edu/
book/anderson/anderson12.html.
Dustin Gardiner graduated from the University of
Utah with B.S. degrees in Political Science and Mass
Communications and was the editor of the university G8
campus paper, the Daily Utah Chronicle. Summit 2009
65
 European Union Enlargement
and the Islamic Challenge
By Dr. Joseph S. Joseph, Jean Monnet Chair in European Foreign Policy and Security Policy, University of Cyprus

The geographic expansion of the European Union

poses challenges and presents opportunities to the EU
itself, but also to the member states and the candidate
countries. It also affects the deepening of the Union
and its efforts for institutional reform, which is not an
easy task, as the failure of the constitutional treaty and
the difficulties faced by the Lisbon treaty have shown.
As of January 2009, there are three candidate coun-
tries: Turkey and Croatia, which started accession ne-
gotiations in 2005, and the Former Yugoslav Republic of
Macedonia (FYROM) which has been granted the status
of a candidate country, but has not yet started acces-
sion negotiations. There are also five potential candidate
countries: Albania, Bosnia and Herzegovina, Montene-
gro, Serbia, and Kosovo under Security Council Reso-
lution 1244. These countries have been promised the
prospect of EU membership as and when they are ready.

While accession talks and preparations are under way,

the debate over Turkey’s European prospects and iden-
tity is heating up and a variety of perspectives, positions,
opinions and arguments are put forward. The former pres-
ident of the European Commission, Romano Prodi, while
arguing for the commencement of accession negotia-
tions back in 2005 asked Turkey to show “determination
in pursuing further reforms and wisely conduct an acces-
sion process which, like all the others, will display both
periods of progress and moments of tension and
unavoidabledifficulties.” He also appealed to the mem-
ber states and the European public to demonstrate
equal perseverance, as “Europe has nothing to fear from
Turkey’s accession.”

After three years of accession negotiations, dif-
ficulties and Turco-skepticism are growing over Tur-
key’s membership prospects. Europe’s confusion and
ambivalence about Turkey is not a new phenomenon,
although recently it has been becoming more visible.
For example, in March 2007, Turkey’s government
was not invited to the Berlin Summit which marked
the 50th anniversary of the Treaties of Rome, causing
disappointment in Ankara.
A few years ago, the fear of many Europe-
ans about Turkish accession were expressed and
stirred up by the former French President and
head of the European constitutional convention,
Valery Giscard d’Estaing, who in a blunt manner
declared that Turkey was “not a European coun-
try” and that its inclusion in the EU “would be the
G8 end of Europe.” In a similar vein, echoing Turco-
Summit 2009 skepticism, a European Commissioner brought back
66
memories of the Ottoman siege of Vienna by stat-
ing that “the liberation of 1683 would have been
in vain” if Turkey joins the EU.
On the other hand, there are strong voices arguing
that Turkey can play the role of “a cultural and physical
bridge between the East and West [and] become one
of Europe’s most prized additions.” Across the Atlantic,
the United States has a clear pro-Turkish position that
cannot be ignored. In June 2004, during the NATO sum-
mit in Istanbul, the American President George W. Bush
underlined the position and called on Europe to prove
that it “is not the exclusive club of a single religion” and
that “as a European power, Turkey belongs in the EU.”
The increasingly polarized discussion over Turkey’s
position and role in Europe will continue for years to come
at various levels. The debate may even outlast the pro-
tracted period of accession negotiations during which

not only negotiations on the acquis chapters will be
conducted, but also a lot of diplomatic maneuvering and
political twisting will take place. Throughout this period,
the Christian and Islamic worlds will have to show
that they can accommodate each other and prove false
Samuel Huntington’s argument about “the clash of civi-
lizations” and the reconfiguration of the political world
“along cultural lines”. Both Europe and Turkey will find
out what they expect from each other and whether they
can share a common future that will reconcile their dif-
ferent pasts. The real question will be whether the inter-
nal sociopolitical dynamics and external orientations of
Turkey can be compatible with the changing dynamics
of European integration, which aims at deepening the
solidarity among peoples “while respecting their history,
their culture and their traditions”, and creating “firm bas-
es for the construction of the future Europe”.
Regional Crises
In the long run and in a broader sense, the challenge
for the EU will be to develop a forward-looking world-
view based on a multicultural civilization that has ample
room for different religions including Islam. In a shrink-
ing world of increasing interdependence and a new
European order of deepening and widening integration,
this may no longer be a political option, but an urgent
imperative. After all European integration is a process
of building unity through diversity. In a few years, not
only Turkey, but also the Balkan enlargement, which
will include more countries with Moslem populations,
will pose the same challenge. In light of these develop-
ments, Turkey is not a test case, but a turning point.
Dr. Joseph S. Joseph is Professor of Internation-
al Relations and European Affairs and Director of the
Jean Monnet Centre of Excellence at the University of
Cyprus. He is also a member of the Editorial Advisory G8
Board of the Diplomatic Courier magazine. Summit 2009
67
 The message of European businesses to the G8
Short term priorities are crucial… but
Europe should look at longer-term too!
The meeting of the G8 certainly represents an op-
portunity for world leaders to work on a coherent in-
ternational response to the crisis and to get the global
economy back on a pathway to growth. No doubt this
is the main priority for the short term.
The European business community, however, urges
decision-makers not to forget about the longer term
perspective. They are concerned that, even when the
economic downturn is over, Europe will still be lagging
behind its international partners.
EUROCHAMBRES’ most recent “Time-Distance
Study” supports this vision. This unique report com-
pares the European economy with the USA and the
BRIC countries (Brazil, Russia, India and China) using
several different key economic indicators…in terms of
years. Based on ‘what-if’ scenarios, the study shows
how many years the EU would need to catch up with its
competitors, as well as the conditions for growth that
developing countries would need to bridge the time dis-
tance gap.
G8
Summit 2009
68
Europe remains decades behind the US...
As the graphic left shows, the EU27 is lagging be-
hind the United States for all key economic indicators
(GDP per capita, productivity, investment in R&D) by an
average of 24 years. This means that the EU’s current
performance on these indicators was already reached
by the US in the 1980s!
Investment in R&D is the worst indicator, with the
current level of European investment in research and
development having been attained by the United States
30 years ago.
…and BRICs are catching up fast
The chart also shows that the EU remains well
ahead of all BRIC countries for every economic indica-
tor, although to varying degrees.
Russia stands on average 35 years behind the EU,
Brazil nearly 40, China just over 40 years and India 68
years. Yet high growth rates – which remain well above
the EU’s growth even in times of crisis – are allowing
these countries to close the gap.
Russia is the closest to catching up with the EU27
GDP per capita value, followed by Brazil and China. If
the current differential between EU and Chinese growth
remains around 10%, China could reach the current lev-
el of EU GDP in 2020, as illustrated in the graph below.
Commenting on these findings, Arnaldo Abruzzini,
Secretary General of EUROCHAMBRES, said: “These
figures tell us that if the EU is to maintain and enhance
its global competitiveness, it must put in place not only a
short term strategy to exit the recession, but also long-
term structural reforms. Time is not on our side…we
cannot afford to delay any longer the much needed in-

vestment in R&D and skills. Policy makers must provide
businesses with the right framework conditions to drive
Europe’s recovery and future growth.”
A healthy and growing global market – including A
stronger Europe, as well as a healthy and growing glob-
al market, is beneficial to businesses the world over; it
is to no-one’s advantage to pursue a larger slice of the
cake if the cake itself is getting smaller. To this end, EU-
ROCHAMBRES has consistently advocated more open
international markets and continues to push policy mak-
ers to take measures to reduce trade barriers, minimise
the risk of unfair practices and, especially in the current
climate, to resist protectionism. The European Chamber
network looks to the G8 leaders to further these aims.
A rnaldo A bruzzini , EUROCHAMBRES’ S ecretary G eneral
How Europe can close the gap
1) The business environment
The current crisis necessitates measures to enhance
access to finance for businesses, to reduce administra-
tive burdens and to promote entrepreneurship. Busi-
nesses need quicker and simpler access to credit on
realistic terms and improvements in payment terms and
times from public and private sector clients. The reduc-
tion of administrative burdens should be accelerated to
further improve the business environment, with the me-
dium term focus on meeting the target of 25% red tape
reduction at EU and national level by 2012. Promoting
entrepreneurship is important in times of economic cri-
sis, as entrepreneurs are the true wealth creators and
are thus essential to re-launching the economy and
generating sustainable growth.
Sponsored Article
2) People
Europe needs a highly skilled workforce to compete
on the global market. One of the key priorities in the
current crisis is thus to safeguard employment and to
prepare the workforce for the upswing after the crisis.
Education systems should be adapted to the needs of
European enterprises, eliminating skills mismatches and
creating a closer cooperation between academia and
businesses.
3) Infrastructure and energy
The emergency measures proposed in response
to the crisis, namely improving the energy efficiency
of buildings and modernising different infrastructures
related to energy, ICT and transport, constitute an im-
portant step in the right direction. It is important that
the measures are translated into action rapidly, laying
the foundations for a more energy efficient Europe. At
the same time, research efforts for the development and
widespread use of renewable energies should be con-
siderably increased.
4) R&D and Innovation
Investment in research and development and the
conversion of this into innovative initiatives are key el-
ements in Europe’s competitiveness. During past cri-
ses, these elements have often been the first victims of
budget cuts. It is imperative that this trend is avoided
during the current crisis. Both public and private sector
investment in research needs to increase significantly.
EUROCHAMBRES is the Association of European Chambers of
Commerce and Industry. It represents over 19 million enterprises in
Europe – 96% of which are SMEs – through members in 45 coun-
tries and a European network of 2000 regional and local Cham-
bers. The 2009 edition of EUROCHAMBRES’ Time-Distance Study
can be downloaded from www.eurochambres.eu/content/default.
asp?PageID=1&DocID=1792
G8
Summit 2009
69
 Between the Justice of Islam
and the Injustice of Tradition
By the Honorable Hala Bsaisu Lattouf, Minister of Social Development Kingdom of Jordan
If you search for the words “Women in Islam” on the
internet you are likely to find two things: commentary
suggesting Islam is derogatory to women, and attempts
to debunk this myth. Unfortunately, the image of Mus-
lim women in the world is that of rigid obedience and
supplication to men. In reality, we reflect the customs,
practices and socially ascribed religious beliefs of our
culture. In preparing this paper a number of topics ran
through my mind. Poverty or democracy in Islam would
have been fitting subjects due to my current service as
Minister of Social Development. Yet, as a woman from
Jordan, I see women in Islam often being misrepresent-
ed and misjudged.
The other day my daughter told me she heard Mus-
lim women could not be leaders in government. As a
woman working in government, this statement took
me back. I wondered where she heard this idea. Here
in Jordan, we have been progressive in enhancing the
rights of women. His Majesty King Abdullah II is a tire-
less advocate for women and children, and has de-
scribed crimes against them as “sabotage” against the
community. We have also increased women’s partici-
pation in public life. The present Cabinet, Senate and
the Lower House of Parliament have a much greater
number of women than in times past. Jordan was even
the first Middle Eastern country to have a female gar-
bage truck and taxi driver. Surprisingly, 24 percent of
Jordanian youth who participated in a survey analyzing
morals and values believed women were more suitable
than men as political leaders. Ten percent of these
were young men. This is significant because it shows
a male population who would put their political future in
the hands of women.
However, a recent survey of over five thousand Jor-
danian women contained some more intuitive statistics.
According to the study, 81.4 percent of these women
felt they were being treated unjustly due to existing
traditions and customs. In contrast, only 14.2 percent
held Islam responsible for discrimination. I interpret this
to mean the cultural norms need adjustment, not the
Islamic faith.
Although a practicing Muslim, I have never con-
sidered myself solely a “Muslim” woman per se,
rather a Jordanian-Arab Muslim. However, since
9/11 I have come to identify myself with these wom-
en more than simply by nationality. I find myself of-
ten, if not always, “randomly selected” and searched
G8 by airport security just as frequently as other Mus-
Summit 2009 lim women. I am portrayed in the media alongside
70
them as part of a discriminated gender, despite the
situational differences between women across Muslim
countries. Some may think it odd for a woman born and
raised in the heart of the Middle East to not experience
gender stereotyping. My parents made every effort to
raise me as a strong human being, with a very enlight-
ened belief of Islam. I never felt inferior to men. Now,
with children of my own, I try to instill the same sense of
equality I experienced growing up. I realize they do not live
in a vacuum, and that society and cultural values play an
important role in influencing how they think.
Many Muslim women live happy and fulfilling lives
in their home countries. Why then, do I continually see
reports in the media suggesting acts of abuse and in-
tolerance are committed in the name of Islam? The Is-
lam I practice and read about in the Holy Quran does
not condone these actions. However, tradition, much
which comes from pre-Islamic societies, perpetuates
this image. Some of these customs have led to cruel
injustices. Sadly, many try to justify harmful traditions
through their faith. This gives power and legitimacy to
their actions.
Having said this, not all of these traditions are bad.
Drinking Arabic coffee during marriage proposals, help-
ing strangers who have lost their homes and providing
generous hospitality for guests are some of the many
positive traditions in the Arab culture.
When I married my husband we signed a marriage
contract in accordance with Islamic teachings. This doc-
ument promotes equality, prevents abuse and is similar
to a prenuptial agreement. In it, I could specify condi-
tions my husband must legally meet. Such conditions
may include the right of divorce, the ability to deny him
additional wives, entitlement to servants, or the location
of our future home. Women can even require payment
for cooking and cleaning if they choose to do so, I per-
sonally prefer to do neither. Unfortunately, some women
feel they cannot take advantage of these rights either for
fear of being denied marriage or because their cultural
upbringing, under the guise of religion, has led them to
believe women are not equal to men.
Furthermore, Islam grants women exclusive finan-
cial independence. Not only do I have the opportunity to
list the “cans” and “cannots” in my marriage, but any
money I bring into the relationship remains mine. Any
wages I earn after I am married are also mine to spend as I
wish. While Islam requires a man to pay and support
the needs of his family, the woman is exempt from this

responsibility. Yet tradition in some families requires
girls to pass their inheritance on to their brothers,
something we are working hard to change.
Islam provides women with an extensive array of
political rights. Early Muslim women gave a mone-
tary pledge of allegiance to the Prophet Muhammad
(peace be upon him). According to the Hadith, Ca-
liph Omar consulted both men and women as to who
should be his successor. The Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh) was even employed by his future wife, Khadija.
Additionally, the first convert to Islam, the first tor-
tured and killed for their beliefs in Islam, and the first
Muslim judge were all women.
Comparatively speaking, many women in modern
Islamic societies have made advances much faster
than in Europe or the United States. Various heads
of government such as Megawati Sukarnoputri, for-
mer President of Indonesia have served in Muslim
states. The office of Prime Minister has also been
held numerous times by women such as Khaleda Zia
in Bangladesh, Tansu Ciller in Turkey, and the late
Benazir Bhutto in Pakistan. The United States has yet
to elect a female president, while Europe has made
some progress with female leaders such as Marga-
ret Thatcher and Angela Merkel. In addition, Turkey
and Sri Lanka were among the first to grant women
the right to vote, while Switzerland waited until 1971.
Undoubtedly, Muslim women have made substantial
advances in Islamic nations.
Despite this political progress, harmful social tradi-
tions exist which do not follow the council of Islam. Honor
killings, for example, are violent acts which find no root
in the Muslim faith. It is an abhorrent tradition handed
down from pre-Islamic times. Jordan has recognized its
existence and has spoken out against it. Under Islamic
law, adultery is nearly impossible to prove. To eliminate
honor killings, we need to change the cultural mindset
to understand that these murders are a crime in Islam
Regional Crises
and society. In all offenses Islamic law punishes men
and women equally, and our secular laws attempt to do
the same.
The Shehada, or testimony, is also widely ques-
tioned. It is often thought that this means two women
are needed to testify before a court of law in the place of
one man. This is actually only limited to situations when
women were not directly involved. They are, however,
still allowed to testify, whereas men were prohibited
from testifying in cases pertaining specifically to women,
such as a woman’s virtue.
I often hear other human rights activists discussing
how they can rescue Muslim women from the presumed
horrors men afflict on their lives. This confuses me
because I am certainly not the only woman who loves and
treasures her father, brother, and son. I most certainly will
nor be the last. I come from a culture with many positive
traditions. It is a culture where immediate and extend-
ed family ties are strong. It is a culture where a mother
can choose to work as a homemaker if she so desires.
Homemaking is viewed as a respectable career and
not demeaning servitude. I come from a culture which
knows its neighbors and cares for their well being just as
if they were their own family.
The Prophet Muhammad (pbuh) instructed us, “God
enjoins you to treat women well, for they are your moth-
ers, daughters, aunts.” Although these words were spo-
ken centuries ago, they hold true for all people today.
As Muslim women, we are caught between the justice
of Islam which provides protection and equal rights, and
the injustice of certain traditions which subject some to
abuse. Muslim women are not alone in this struggle.
We, as an international community, must do more to
guarantee equality among both men and women and
overcome the negative aspects of our respective cul-
tures. Otherwise, we stand to lose our humanity.
Hala Bseisu Lattouf is Jordan’s Minister of Social
Development. Minister Lattouf earned a Masters Degree
in Financial Management and later served as Executive
Director of World Links Arab Region making commend-
able achievements in the education of Arab youth. She
has also held important positions in the Office of Her
Majesty Queen Rania Al-Abdullah. Currently, she resides
in Amman, Jordan with her husband and two children.
Acknowledgment to Maranda Skoubye.
G8
Summit 2009
71
 Pakistan, Afghanistan, India:
Report on the State of Conflict
By Amos N. Guiora, Professor of Law, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
In the immediate aftermath of Benazir Bhutto’s
assassination1 many commentators asked the appropri-
ate question: who is guarding Pakistan’s nuclear war-
heads. Although it is beyond the scope of this essay to
examine the development of Pakistani nuclear capability,
suffice it to say that the combination of Pakistani nuclear
capability along with troubling instability presents
enormous potential for regional and international conflict.
It may be the single greatest potential source of interna-
tional instability.
President Obama’s decision to continue former
President Bush’s policy of conducing aggressive at-
tacks against Bin-Laden in Pakistan is manifestation of
the widely agreed upon consensus of the international
intelligence community that al-Qaeda’s leader is hiding
in Western Pakistan. Similarly, it is the working assump-
tion of British radicalization experts that Pakistan is criti-
cal to the radicalization of British Muslim youth. Further-
more, according to Indian intelligence, the overwhelming
majority of terrorist attacks inside India are initiated
by Pakistan.
Although Pakistan is a sovereign nation and a U.S.
ally, America has conducted targeted killing attacks in-
side that country2. The targets have been terrorists asso-
ciated either with al-Qaeda or the Taliban; nevertheless,
the violation of sovereignty cannot be ignored for it
G8 speaks volumes about the nature of the U.S.-Pakistani
Summit 2009
72
relationship. Simply put, an international law analysis sug-
gests the U.S. is violating Pakistani sovereignty. Whether
that is justified---in the context of anticipatory self-de-
fense—depends on an interpretation of the Bush Doctrine3
which establishes that nations harboring terrorists are le-
gitimate targets. Pakistan must be viewed as presenting
a tripartite threat—regional (India), terrorism (“hot-bed”
for radicalization) and nuclear. Whether that justifies
preemptively attacking Pakistan depends on the degree
of threat posed by Pakistan and to whom. From a geo-
political perspective, Pakistan may well represent the
most complicated—and dangerous—threat.
On the face of it, President Obama has adopted the
Bush doctrine. That said, the Pakistan dilemma requires
decision makers, policy makers and commanders to de-
termine the limits of self-defense with respect to multiple
threats posed by one country.
The nuclear threat posed by Iran has been much
discussed and analyzed4. Nuclear physicists and intel-
ligence experts suggest a “window of opportunity” ex-
ists to exert diplomatic and economic pressure on the
Iranian regime to cancel the program. If the Iranians re-
ject sanctions, then the critical question is when would
a potentially “impacted” nation-state act in accordance
with the principles of anticipatory self-defense? Whether
it is the U.S., Israel, a combination of the two, or a third
nation-state is a matter of enormous speculation.

While the Caroline Doctrine5 and Article 51 of the
United Nations Charter6 articulate restrictive applications
of self-defense I would suggest the Iranian dilemma
wilbring to the fore application of anticipatory self-de-
fense in its broadest sense. While there is, obviously,
enormous uncertainty regarding “who, what, why, where
and when,” an attack on Iran would not be beyond the
realm of the possible.
In the realm of the “unknown”, obviously, is the pos-
sible Iranian response to such an attack. The essence
of geo-politics is weighing legal, political, policy and
military considerations regarding both operational
actions and possible responses.
Afghanistan’s importance is manifested both in the
continued presence of American forces and the resur-
gence of the Taliban which has clear regional implica-
tions. Admittedly there are many “ifs” in the Afghanistan
discussion; it is perhaps the most “forward-looking”
of the threats addressed in this essay. Because of
its geographic reality—situated between Pakistan and
Iran—Western leaders may determine that it is of such
Regional Crises
strategic importance that “losing Afghanistan” is “be-
yond the conceivable.”
This potential reality, then, raises significant ques-
tions regarding the “limits of power.” How far foreign
governments can (or will) go in protecting their inter-
ests—whether ill or well-defined—is the essence of the
Afghanistan question. Afghanistan does not present the
immediate threat Iraq did. Rather, Afghanistan is more
appropriately categorized as a perceived threat sug-
gesting clear operational limits.
That said, if any of the above mentioned threats be-
come “palpable” then decision makers would determine
whether their respective national interest are at stake.
The answer to that question would determine how the
limits of self-defense are applied.
Professor Amos Guiora teaches Criminal Law, Crim-
inal Procedure, International Law, Global Perspectives
on Counter-terrorism, and Religion and Terrorism. He is
a Research Fellow at the International Institute on Coun-
ter-Terrorism, The Interndisciplinary Center, Herzeliya, Is-
rael; a Corresponding Member, The Netherlands School
of Human Rights Research, University of Utrecht School
of Law and Has been awarded a Senior Specialist
Fulbright Fellowship for The Netherlands in 2008.
Guiora has published extensively both in the U.S. and
Europe on issue related to national security, limits of
interrogation, religion and terrorism and the limits of
power. Prof Guiora is the author of Global Perspectives
on Counterterrorism, Fundamentals of Counterterror-
ism, Constitutional Limits on Coercive Interrogation and
Freedom from Religion. He served for 19 years in the
Israel Defense Forces Judge Advocate General’s Corps
(Lt. Col. Ret.).
1 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/south_asia/7161590.stm,
2 See “Guess Who’s Coming to Dinner” Martha Minow and Amos
Guiora, Boston Globe, January 21, 2006, http://www.boston.com/
news/globe/editorial_opinion/oped/articles/2006/01/21/guess_
whos_coming_to_dinner/
3 http://www.whitehouse.gov/nsc/nss.pdf
4 As examples see http://www.cfr.org/publication/8830/, http://
www.state.gov/t/us/rm/60254.htm, lhttp://www.time.com/time/
world/article/0,8599,430649,00.html
5 See http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_m1282/is_12_54/
ai_87130362,
6 http://www.un.org/aboutun/charter/,
G8
Summit 2009
73
 From Zero-sum Conflicts to Federalism:
The Road Forward
By Hiram E. Chodosh, Dean and Professor, and Chibli Mallat, Professor, S.J. Quinney College of Law
From Gujarat to Quebec, from Johannesburg to Je-
rusalem, from Kashmir to Kirkuk, our civilization faces a
crossroads of historic magnitude. As a common, uni-
versal, social condition, we live in close proximity with
peoples of diverse language, culture, religion, power
over resources, and identity, often shaped by powerful
historical narrative or recent experience of victimization
by the other. We gain a sense of inspiration, place,
and purpose from these identities; however, they also
carry a zero-sum logic in which the mightier wins, and
in which empathy for the other is viewed as a betrayal
of oneself and one’s own kind.
What are our options?
Conquest through Violence
Historically, conflicts create justifications for the
elimination of one people by another. Lemkin coined
a phrase for this after WWII: genocide. Even though
we have achieved normative agreement that genocide
is a crime against our common humanity, legal com-
mitments are weak against the underlying grammar of
deep-seated conflict that has no political outlet or con-
structive form of expression through a shared political
system. Without the creation of the latter, we can sadly
expect the next Rwanda or Darfur to emerge, and we
G8 can hardly continue to sit on the sidelines or even rely
Summit 2009 solely on military interventions to put a stop to it.
74
Maintain the Status Quo
As in physics, in the realm of seemingly irreconcil-
able conflicts, inertia is a powerful law, and we must
recognize its force to minimize the effect of weak in-
terventions and merely rhetorical commitments to jus-
tice, human rights, and peace. Yet the self-sustaining
logic of conflict for groups who see killing the other as
their only option, combined with disturbing availabil-
ity of devastating military technologies, can only lead
to catastrophe. As the means of destruction become
more powerful, the likelihood of self-destruction in the
futile attempt to maintain the status quo only becomes
greater. In this sense, survival of the mightiest is a for-
mula for mutual self-destruction. From the vantage
point of Israelis, is it safe to assume that over time the
Qassam rocket will remain the most advanced weapon
of destruction to penetrate the Southern border? And
from the Iranian point of view, is it reassuring to predict
that Israel will sit back and merely passively observe
the technological development of what it views as an
existential threat?
Separation through Partition
From the schoolyard to the battle zone, the tempo-
ral truce and division of enemies are attractive alterna-
tives to the brutality of conflict. The more ambitious
jurisdictional notion of dividing intermixed peoples into

territorial units, however, is demonstrably flawed and
ultimately offers no solution at all. Dislocation through
partition has a disturbing past of immense violence,
from Native American history to the Jewish ghettos,
from the balkanization of the former Yugoslavia to the
subcontinent’s partition of India and Pakistan. The
separation of Israelis and Palestinians into hermeti-
cally sealed states or the break-up of Iraq into three
separate nations may seem an attractive path to peace
because this approach holds the theoretical promise
of separating those engaged in heated conflict. How-
ever, partition does nothing to resolve the cycles of
violence—at best, it merely suspends them for another
opportunity to advance an unmet historical claim from
forced dislocation. Partition ignores overlapping and
intermixed conditions of identity and territory. The di-
vision of Iraq into three nations would hardly resolve
the problem of Kirkuk, oil and gas, water, the rights
of minorities, who would control Baghdad, and so on.
And the two-state solution, while now nearly a conven-
tional wisdom, does not alone determine civil and hu-
man rights for Arab Israelis in Israel or Jewish settlers
in the West Bank. Partition is more likely to exacerbate
historical conflicts than resolve them.
Political Condominia of Shared Powers:
Federalism
Normative commitments to human and civil rights,
peace and prosperity are necessary, but completely in-
sufficient. Jean Monnet, the founder of the European
Union, is reported to have said that every new idea
is a bad idea before it can be implemented through
an elaborating institution. From the differentiation of
the township to the county or state, from the distinc-
tion between the province and the nation, the notion
of federalism in the United States and the concept of
subsidiarity in the economic and the political unification
of Europe all reflect attempts to capture these vertical
political strategies. Through these means, an Italian
can be a European, a Quebecois can be a Canadian,
and a Kurd can be an Iraqi.
For those who are skeptical of this approach work-
ing in the context of highest conflicts, let’s take the
inspirational, though fragile, exemplar of Iraq.
Iraq presents the contemporary laboratory for
the examination of pressing alternatives: conquest
through violence or occupation, chronic sectarian vi-
olence and civil war among Kurds, Sunni, and Shi‘i,
proposed political partition, and yes, implementation
of vertically differentiated institutions under the rubric
of federalism.
Regional Crises
This is not just a fanciful notion in Iraq today. Re-
markably, the Iraqi Constitution considers the country to
be a Federation. Both the Preamble and Article 1 of the
2005 Constitution underline this fundamental character-
istic; and the constitutional text refers to federation and
federalism extensively in three of its six chapters.
However, the second chamber of the legislative
branch (a Federation Council) has not yet been de-
veloped, and the federal system in Iraq will not be
completed without it. Without a Federation Council,
the country cannot fulfill its own definition as a fed-
eral system as constitutionally mandated under Article
48: ‘The federal legislative power shall consist of the
Council of Representatives and the Federation Coun-
cil.’ This is at the heart of the discussion in Iraq, within
the current constitutional revision process and in the
country at large.
By offering a territorial (and arguably sectarian
and ethnic) balance to central power, federalism pro-
vides the most sophisticated constitutional instrument
to hold the country together. Federalism is arguably
the best institutional tool to reach solutions to hitherto
intractable problems such as Kirkuk and oil, in addi-
tion to likely problems of water distribution and family
law. A working federalism (advanced in part through
the Federation Council) can resolve present and future
constitutional issues of great importance to the coun-
try and in an institutional and systematic manner, rath-
er than as an ad hoc political arrangement that renders
most solutions, if reached, constantly elusive.
The future of federalism in Iraq is not only important
to the peoples of that country who have struggled over
so many decades for human rights and peace. It is an
experiment of consequential interest to all of us, from
North America to Europe, from Asia to the Middle East,
to see if a society riddled by sectarian violence can
reject the undesirable alternatives of conquest, geno-
cide, and partition in favor of a vertical political strategy
and institution that accommodates self-determination
with shared values and purpose.
Professor Hiram Chodosh is Dean of the S.J.Quinney
College of Law, University of Utah, and director of the
Global Justice Project: Iraq. This is his personal opinion,
which he contributed to The Daily Star.
Chibli Mallat is Presidential Professor of Law at
the University of Utah, and EU Jean Monnet Profes-
sor of Law, USJ, Lebanon. He is senior legal advisor
of the gjpi. The authors are speaking here in their
personal capacity. G8
Summit 2009
75
 An International Agenda at a Time of Crisis
By Michelle Bernard, President and CEO Independent Women’s Forum and MSNBC Political Analyst
There may never have been a more critical G8 meet-
ing. Leaders of the world’s most important industrial
states are gathering as many nations fall deeper into
recession and some teeter on the brink of default. The
conflict in Afghanistan is growing more intractable, while
North Korea is turning more hostile. Iran and Russia
pose differing challenges, while Africa continues to suf-
fer from poverty, disease, and misgovernment. There is
so much to do.
Unfortunately, it will be hard to agree to a specific
policy agenda, but a broad consensus may become
possible if participants start by focusing on larger prin-
ciples. The leaders should be able to agree on the
direction that needs to be taken, even if they disagree on
some of the specifics.
First, there should be no retreating from a market
economy. Even Karl Marx recognized that it was the rise
of capitalism that took impoverished societies from pen-
ury to plenty. We need better accountability and trans-
parency in markets, but government can never substi-
tute for the productivity of a free and open marketplace.
Second, there should be no returning to the closed
economies of the past. Protectionism is rearing its dan-
gerous head in the U.S., Europe, and elsewhere around
the globe. There has been much discussion of look-
ing to the New Deal for remedies to today’s economic
crisis. But a more relevant lesson is the role played by
the Smoot-Hawley Tariff in turning a harsh recession in
America into a global depression. Opening markets has
benefited people the world over, and those gains must
be preserved.
Third, the greatest aid that wealthy nations can
provide to the world’s poor is to create economic
opportunities for Third World states and then to train Third
World peoples to take advantage of those opportunities.
Foreign “aid” for development has a dismal record, hav-
ing done more to enrich corrupt elites than empower
impoverished masses. Despite our current economic
travails, what those at the bottom most need economi-
cally is the chance to be entrepreneurial and to suc-
ceed—both of which we in the West take for granted.
Fourth, meeting the practical challenges of poverty
and disease requires the cooperation of businesses,
foundations, NGOs, and governments. No one gains
from demonizing companies, which often provide the
best practical means of achieving the ends we all share.
If AIDS is cured, it will be by profit-making pharma-
G8 ceutical firms. If today’s developing states join nations
Summit 2009 such as South Korea among the world’s economic elite,
76
it will be with the help of abundant investment and trade
through Western multinational corporations.
Fifth, education should top the agenda for promot-
ing domestic and international economic development.
Transformational technologies have created profession-
al and financial opportunities that previous generations
could only dream of. The world has shrunk as econo-
mies have grown more complex. Industrialized societies,
like the U.S., have much work to do to educate their
young to succeed in this new world. Poorer nations
have even further to go, both in improving the quality of
and access to schooling. Particularly important is ensur-
ing that girls, minorities, and the very poor do not lose
out to discrimination and prejudice.
Sixth, problems will not be solved through the blame
game. The U.S. and Europe sharply disagreed over the
invasion of Iraq. Today many waste time trying to as-
sign blame for the current economic crash. Although it is
important to reflect on past mistakes to make right
decisions in the future, we should look to the future rath-
er than wallow in unhelpful recriminations over the past.
Seventh, economic, environmental, and health
problems require both cooperation and a nonpartisan
balancing of competing interests. The need for interna-
tional economic coordination must be compared to the
danger of regulation by unaccountable bureaucracies.
Concern over the impact of climate change must be
contrasted with the importance of preserving economic
prosperity. In spite of what the world media often par-
rots, the science of climate change is far from settled
with many leading authorities now predicting a cool-
ing trend instead of catastrophic warming. It would be
a mistake to exacerbate existing economic challenges
with rash, economy-crushing actions in the name of
thwarting “global warming.”
Eighth, a concerted international effort is needed
to deal with the world’s hot spots. The U.S. cannot
alone bring peace and stability to Afghanistan. The Af-
rican states have been unable to create peace in Con-
go and Sudan, and defend democracy in Zimbabwe.
Iraq’s future depends upon the behavior of its neighbors
as much as upon America’s military performance. Nei-
ther Washington nor Europe has the answer for the
multiple conflicts between Israel, the Palestinians, and
Israel’s neighbors.
Ninth, leading global players have a special responsi-
bility to find peaceful means to resolve potential conflicts.
Whatever the equities of the disputes between Russia
and Georgia, China and Taiwan, and America and Iran, for
Envision

G8
Summit 2009

77
 Editorial

instance, the price of war will always be high. Tragically,

war is sometimes necessary. However, countries which
aspire to international leadership must ensure that war
truly is a last resort.

Last, and perhaps most importantly, all participants

in today’s interconnected global order need to take a
long-term perspective. Peoples, companies, NGOs,
and governments alike have an important role to play
in meeting today’s challenges. But this crisis eventu-
ally will be just a distant memory. In addressing the
problems of the present, we must be careful not to
shortchange the future.

The world looks much darker at the G8’s 2009 meet-

ing than it did last year. But our nations have weathered
economic depression and global war in the past. We can
surmount the current challenges before us. However,
doing so will require a willingness to cooperate and
openness to new ideas not often seen at international
meetings. This year more than ever we cannot afford
to allow selfish politics to trump good policy.

Michelle D. Bernard is an MSNBC political analyst

and a Sunday columnist with The Washington Examiner.
Bernard is the President and CEO of the Independent
Women’s Forum and Independent Women’s Voice.
Bernard is author of Women’s Progress: How Women
and Are Wealthier, Healthier, and More Independent
than Ever Before.

G8
Summit 2009

78
 G8
Summit 2009

79
 Mercantilism or Meeting Demand? China’s National
Oil Companies and Multilateral Diplomacy
By Tyler Anderson, Hinckley Scholar, University of Utah Hinckley Institute of Politics

Much has been said about the assertive, statist

ideology that encourages Chinese petroleum firms to
engage in unfair practices in international oil markets.
Gal Luft, executive director of the Institute for the
Analysis of Global Security and one of the most out-
spoken critics of China’s National Oil Companies
(NOCs), put it thusly:

“Sixty-seven years ago, oil-starved Japan embarked

on an aggressive expansionary policy designed to se-
cure its growing energy needs, which eventually led the
nation into a world war. Today, another Asian power
thirsts for oil: China…The seeds of what could be the
next world war are quietly germinating.”1

Henry Kissinger has also argued that competition for

oil will be the driving source of international conflict in the
near future.2

When viewed from afar, the current actions taken

by Chinese NOCs may certainly look like a mercantilist
grand strategy planned from Beijing in order to secure
long-term oil concessions and strategic partnerships
in rogue states (Syria, Iran, Sudan). However, that analysis
is fundamentally flawed—instead, the international
expansion of Chinese National Oil Companies is driven
primarily by market factors, and not by government
ideology or political calculations. This process is the
logical reaction to Chinese domestic market pressures
and supply shortages. 3;4

If anything, the Chinese government would prefer to

remain self sufficient rather than depend on NOCs op-
perating in politically unstable countries where Western oil
companies are forbidden to operate.5 Under Mao, energy
self-sufficiency was once a centerpiece of Chinese en-
ergy policy.6 Even today the more internationally oriented
NOCs often contradict domestic governmental prefer-
ences for increased spending on national infrastructure to
“prop up” national oil fields like those in Daqing.7
Unfortunately, the Chinese government faces a grim
statistical reality: consumption is vastly outpacing do-
mestic productive capabilities (BP’s statistical review
of world energy reported that in 2007 China imported
3,277,000 barrels a day of crude oil and 834,000 barrels
of refined petroleum),8 and the NOCs are hard pressed
to find domestic or international sources of petroleum
to meet this demand. Additionally, fuel subsidies further
constrain NOCs by structurally incentivizing overseas
G8 expansion. Scholars Rosen and Houser from the Peter-
Summit 2009 son Institute for International Economics contend, “With
80
limited opportunities to increase upstream production
domestically and thin or negative margins on down-
stream activities because of price controls, Chinese oil
companies have sought to boost reserve holdings, pro-
duction, revenue, and clout by expanding overseas.”9
These factors, not political machinations in Bejing, com-
pell expansion abroad.
Equally important is that Beijing simply does not
have the bureaucratic infrastructure to enforce such
a mercantilist policy. Erica Downs, scholar of Chinese
energy security at the Brookings Institute, argues:
“Where many international observers see a carefully
devised strategy for the acquisition of overseas oil and
natural gas assets driven from the ‘top-down,’ Chinese
analysts see chaos generated from the ‘bottom-up.’”10
In fact, the Chinese government (notoriously bottle-
necked as it is) has no single overriding government
body overseeing its energy policy; two of its largest
offices, the Energy Bureau and the State Energy Office,

are run by fewer than 150 staff member, many of which
have close ties to the petroleum industry.11
Furthermore, even if the Chinese government had
the bureaucratic capacity to leverage NOCs, there are
political reasons why it cannot significantly manipu-
late them from engaging in anti-market (and hence
non-profit maximizing) behaviors in order to accom-
plish additional policy objectives. Lee and Shalmon of
Harvard’s Kennedy School of Government state, “The
profitability of the state oil companies is critical to Chi-
na’s efforts to meet its long-term energy security goals
while supplying a significant percentage of the total
revenues realized from the struggling state sector.”12
As the New York Times has recently reported, it seems
that Chinese firms are more than willing to divest from
their foriegn holdings if they feal they are in danger
of being crippled economically.13
It is time we acknowledge China’s bilateral relation-
ships with oil producing states are relationships defined
by economics and not geopolitical posturing, especial-
ly as it opens new opportunities for international coop-
eration on issues of energy security. In fact, the Center
for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS) and the
US Government have both recently released papers
arguing that China has begun to show just such flexi-
bility.14;15 Steps toward this cooperation should include
the addition of China in the International Energy Associ-
ation (IEA) and addressing China’s fuel price ceiling and
subsidies. Were fuel prices allowed to rise, demand for
refined petroleum would slacken, thus reducing the rate
the Chinese production/consumption gap is expand-
ing. China already leaves a large footprint on the global
energy market, and as Chinese energy markets con-
tinue to grow cooperation with China on energy issues
becomes even more important. As NOCs continue
to operate on the market conditions rather than poli-
tics, it is evident that policy steps can and should be
taken to insure that China becomes a responsible
member of the international energy community.
Editorial
1Luft, Gal. U.S., China Are on Collision Course Over Oil. LA Times
Op-Ed, February 2, 2004.1.
2 Daniel,
Caroline. Kissinger Warns of Energy Conflict, Financial
Times, June 2, 2005. 8.
3 Downs, Erica. The Fact and Fiction of Sino-African Energy Rela-
tions. China Security, 3 (3), Summer 2007.
4 Alterman, Jon B. and Garver, John W. The Vital Triangle: China,
The United States and The Middle East, Significant Issue Series, 30
(2). Center For Strategic and International Studies. Washington DC.
5 Rosen, Daniel; Houser, Trevor. China Energy: A Guide for the Per-
plexed. China Balance Sheet. Center for Strategic and International
Studies & Peterson Institute for International Economics. May 2007.
6 Zha, Daozjiong (≤È£¨µ¿æº). China’s Energy Security and Its
International Relations. Third IISS Global Strategic Review, Geneva,
16-18, September 2005. Retrieved December 2008 www.silkroad-
studies.org/new/docs/CEF/Quarterly/November_2005/Zha_Dao-
jiong.pdf
7 Rosen and Houser (2007). 22.
8 BP Statistical Review of World Energy, June 2008. 21.
http://www.bp.com/liveassets/bp_internet/globalbp/globalbp_uk_
english/reports_and_publications/statistical_energy_review_2008/
STAGING/local_assets/downloads/pdf/statistical_review_of_world_
energy_full_review_2008.pdf
9 Rosen and Houser (2007). 22.
10 Downs 2007. 47-48.
11 Rosen and Houser (2007). 18.
12 Lee, Henry. Shalmon, Dan A. Searching For Oil: China’s Initiatives
in the Middle East. The Enviroment. Harvard University Press, June
2007. 4.
13 The New York Times. After Wall Street Losses, China Fund Said
to Shift Focus. The New York Times Dealbook, Edited by Andrew
Sorkin. February 20, 2008.
http://dealbook.blogs.nytimes.com/2009/02/20/after-wall-street-
losses-china-fund-said-to-shift-focus/
14 Alterman, Jon B. and Garver, John W. The Vital Triangle: China,
The United States and The Middle East, Significant Issue Series, 30
(2). Center For Strategic and International Studies. Washington DC.
15 Kellerhals,
Mere D. US China Relations Show Progress. America.
gov, 5/27/08. Retrieved from http://www.america.gov/st/peacesec-
english/2008/May/20080527135326dmslahrellek0.5858271.html
Tyler Anderson is an undergraduate student at the
University of Utah in Economics and Political Science
and he served a Hinckley Institute of Politics internship
with the U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs.
G8
Summit 2009
81
 Harmful Transnational Activity: Principles
for Coordinated Domestic Legal Responses
By Chris Whytock, Associate Professor, University of Utah S.J. College of Law
Maritime piracy has recently made its way into world
headlines. While piracy has existed for centuries, it
has increased dramatically in the last decade and now
causes billions of dollars of damage annually, according
to a study published in the journal Foreign Affairs.
Piracy is only one example of a wider phenome-
non that confronts today’s world leaders: harmful acts
committed by nonstate actors operating beyond na-
tional borders. Other examples include human traf-
ficking, narco-trafficking, transnational terrorism, and
cross-border pollution.
Unfortunately, the international legal system is ill
equipped to deal with these challenges. The system
was built on the assumption that only states have rights
and obligations under international law. To be sure, the
emergence of human rights law and the advent of the
International Criminal Court challenge this assumption
and represent important steps in the development of the
international justice system. Individuals now have lim-
ited but nevertheless important rights and obligations
under international law. Yet compared to the magnitude
of the transnational threats now posed by nonstate ac-
tors, the international legal framework for responding to
those threats remains disproportionately weak.
As a result, the legal response to the new rise of
piracy has relied primarily on domestic rather than
international institutions. Once captured, suspected
pirates (if not released) have been delivered to domestic
courts for trial. The United Kingdom and the United States
have entered memorandums of understanding with
Kenya whereby suspected pirates captured by the for-
mer can be tried in Kenyan courts. But for the most part,
arrangements have been ad hoc. The international
community’s responses to other types of transnational
harms have also consisted largely of improvised reliance
on domestic legal institutions.
There are two basic alternatives to the prevailing ap-
proach. One is to establish new international courts to
address challenges like these. However, world leaders
should not rush toward that solution without carefully
comparing the likely costs and benefits of formal inter-
national institutional initiatives to those of another alter-
native: well-coordinated and principled domestic institu-
tional strategies. These strategies should be based on
three key principles: effectiveness, fairness, and comity.
G8
Summit 2009
82
First, they should be designed to effectively reduce
transnational harm by holding wrongdoers account-
able and deterring future harmful acts. But the ends
do not justify the means. Hence, the second guiding
principle: fairness. Domestic institutional responses to
transnational harms must follow procedures that ensure
that suspected transnational wrongdoers are detained,
tried, and (if convicted) punished consistently with inter-
national norms of due process and human rights. Third,
these responses should be developed and implemented
in accordance with the principle of comity: each country
should develop and implement domestic responses in
coordination with other concerned countries, taking into
account other countries’ legitimate interests.
While formal international legal arrangements may
often be optimal, policymakers should not automatically
assume that this will always be the case. Domestic in-
stitutional responses—if well-coordinated and based on
the principles of effectiveness, fairness, and comity—
can also be appropriate. The essential point is that the
character of particular transnational problems will deter-
mine whether the best legal responses will rely primarily
on international, regional, or domestic institutional foun-
dations.
Moreover, history shows that even in the face of
grave transnational threats, political realities often pre-
vent countries from agreeing upon formal international
institutional solutions. Even when not optimal, coordi-
nated and principled domestic institutional strategies
may offer the best practicable responses to many of the
transnational challenges of our time.
Dr. Christopher A. Whytock is an associate profes-
sor of law at the University of Utah S.J. Quinney College
of Law, where he conducts research on transnational liti-
gation, international law, and the role of domestic courts
in global governance.
Z mag Ad

G8
Summit 2009

83
 Foreclosing on American Leadership
By Christopher Peterson, Professor, University of Utah S.J. Quinney College of Law
One of the surprising things about the U.S.’ home
mortgage foreclosure glut was how many different enti-
ties had a hand in sowing the seeds of tainted loans. It’s
widely understood that Congress’ tax break on home
mortgage interest created an incentive to shift consum-
er and medical debts into refinanced home mortgage
loans. Moreover, it is not hard to see that the Federal Re-
serve’s sustained cheap money monetary policy through
the 1990s and 2000s created tempting spreads be-
tween banks’ cost of funds and the promised yields on
subprime home mortgage securities. But what may be
less clear is how many government institutions had the
legal authority to make changes that would have pre-
vented—or at least moderated—the lending practices
that caused the foreclosure crisis.
In 1994 Congress recognized that, in the wake
of Reagan era banking deregulation, a new breed of
“predatory” mortgage lenders had began taking ad-
vantage of naïve borrowers that had significant equity
in their homes. In a tragically forgotten law called the
Home Ownership and Equity Protection Act, Congress
gave the Federal Reserve Board of Governors sweeping
authority to issue regulations constraining abusive con-
sumer mortgage lending practices. Basically, the Fed
had the regulatory equivalent of a blank check that they
never bothered to cash.
But, it wasn’t just the Federal Reserve Board.
The U.S. Federal Trade Commission has for gen-
erations had the authority to issue regulations limit-
ing “unfair and deceptive” practices by many of the
non-bank lenders that were the most reckless ac-
tors in recent years. In the past the FTC had been a
leader in the American consumer movement adopt-
ing regulations that preserved consumers’ rights
G8 in retail installment lending and debt collections. But,
Summit 2009
84
somewhere in the subprime refinance frenzy, the Fed-
eral Trade Commission forgot to act.
The American banking industry is made up of a com-
plex hodgepodge of many different federal and state
chartered institutions. In the U.S. there are federal banks,
thrifts, and credit unions—all three of which have differ-
ent regulators. And, these same types of institutions can
be chartered by any of the fifty states—and regulated
by more than fifty different state regulators, plus another
federal deposit insurance watchdog of some sort. The
Comptroller of the Currency (federal banks), the Office
of Thrift Supervision (federal thrifts), the National Credit
Union Administration, and all the other federal and state
bank regulators had the authority to limit any practice
that would jeopardize the “safety and soundness” of the
financial industry. But none of them did.
Perhaps the easiest target of blame was the der-
eliction of President George W. Bush—the leader of an
administration that opposed virtually all regulation of
any form. But, his failure cannot explain how the Ameri-
can judiciary—an institution that was supposed to act
as a check and balance on the excesses of the politi-
cal branches of government—sat on the sidelines while
millions of fraudulent loans went undeterred. The custo-
dians of the Anglo-American common law tradition nev-
er laid the strong hand of the law on mortgage broker
kickbacks, “stated income” loans, or the commission
hungry investment banks that passed on faulty paper
to investors.
It is not as though abusive and poorly underwritten
loans were something new. Courts, bankers, and bank
regulators have always dealt with this problem. What
was different was that the home mortgages that came to
clog America’s real estate markets with foreclosures and
abandoned properties were bought, packaged, and sold
to investors through a process known as securitization.
Unlike past generations where lenders retained mort-
gages in their own portfolio or sold them to relatively well
heeled government sponsored enterprises, private label
securitization created a method of connecting one limit-
edly rational group, borrowers, to another, investors. All
along the way a host of middlemen wet their beaks in a
stream of commissions and fees little regard as to whether
the loans actually made sense. But this recognition
does not answer the puzzling question of why so many
different government agencies and institutions so com-
pletely failed to stop such a large and—one would
think—detectable problem?
The answer may lie in the fundamental shift in the
political power and prestige of those that profited from
 Editorial

questionable lending. By enlisting world capital markets

and the most prestigious investment banking houses in
the once-shady fringe lending business, securitization
dramatically empowered the opponents of consumer
protection law. In the 1980s and early 1990s, American
academics generally referred to high-cost consumer
creditors as the ‘fringe lending industry.’ The appellation
invoked a picture, then accurate, of marginalized busi-
nesses that preyed on consumers by flying below the
radar screen of law enforcement and the courts. But in
the subprime home mortgage refinance glut, reference
to ‘fringe’ lenders became a misnomer. The reason is
not that fringe lenders went away, but rather that fringe
lenders became capitalized and politically embraced by
America’s most powerful financial institutions.

It remains to be seen whether the United States’

government and the American people will learn one of
the most important lessons of the financial crisis. Long
overdue, America must adopt comprehensive legal re-
form of its consumer financial services system. Not just
bailouts, America’s banks themselves need firm legal Christopher Peterson is a Professor of Law at the
change. Failing at this will risk the permanent loss of University of Utah, S.J. Quinney College of Law, where
international faith in not only American financial institu- he specializes in consumer financial services law.
tions and securities, but also American leadership.
 Pandemic Flu: Preparedness in a Changing World
By Secretary Michael O. Leavitt – Former Governor of Utah, Administrator of Environmental Protection Agency, and
Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services
Pandemics happen. They always have, they always
will. They are a fact of biological life. However, discussing
them presents a political and cultural dilemma. Anything
one says in advance of a pandemic seems alarmist. Yet
after pandemics begin, all preparations and warnings
will seem inadequate.
Periodically, a unique virus surfaces and swiftly diffus-
es across a non-immune population, causing widespread
disease on a global scale. During the past five years,
the H5N1 virus heightened the attention of the world to
pandemic danger. While the virus continues to spread
around the world among animals, no evidence has yet
emerged that it will mutate into an efficiently transmissi-
ble human pandemic virus. However, if it is not the H5N1
virus that sparks the next pandemic, it will be another
virus. Pandemics happen.
Continual preparation is an imperative. World lead-
ers must protect their citizens from the spread of in-
fluenza by working collaboratively to strengthen global
prophylactic production and treatment capacity, provide
and encourage targeted investments to production-
ready companies, and promote transparency vis-à-vis
virus and vaccination information and ideas.
Pandemic Influenza: Historical Back-
ground
During the 20th century, three pandemics oc-
curred, triggering immense devastation to human life.
The Spanish Flu of 1918 infected between 20 and 40%
of the global population and killed more than 50 million
people, including 675,000 Americans. These acute in-
G8 fections were not prejudiced and killed even the young
Summit 2009 and healthy along with the old and infirm within days.
86
The Spanish Flu was the most recent pandemic
of historic scale, but others have since attacked with
destructive consequences. Throughout two pandemic
waves, the Asian Flu of 1956-58 maintained high infec-
tion rates among the so-called “transmitter population”—
notably school-aged children—and killed between one
and four million globally, including nearly 70,000 Ameri-
cans. Later, as the mildest pandemic of the 1900s, the
Hong Kong Flu in 1968 brought about around 33,000
deaths globally, likely mitigated by a moderately immune
population and enhanced medical treatment. Though
counteractants were developed quickly and further
catastrophe preempted, unpreparedness and limited
vaccine supplies likely exacerbated the death toll in
each case.
Most recently, the Avian Influenza (or H5N1s) that
transmitted from infected poultry has killed hundreds
with a more than 60% fatality rate since its detection in
1997. Although H5N1 is a new multiple-strain, influenza
virus subtype and has contaminated and sickened many
humans, it has failed to easily transmit and protract
across humanity as viable pandemics must. Still, trans-
missibility remains a plausible and volatile prospect.
A Framework for Pandemic Preparedness
Pandemics are a fact of biological life and experts
predict that one will eventually occur and affect the entire
international community. However, governments around
the world are not prepared, nor can they resolve the crisis
alone, but require assistance from corporate actors, com-
munity institutions, critical service providers, and others.
As a result, it is essential for the international commu-
nity to work collaboratively in implementing a pandemic
preparedness agenda.
To contain an initial outbreak, plans must be
coordinated between nations and their associated
governmental entities and between governments and
the private sector, with an emphasis on local organiza-
tions not wholly reliant on the federal government. Each
nation at appropriate public and private levels should de-
velop comprehensive strategies and contingency plans
with primary aims to strengthen the capacity of the vac-
cine and antiviral industries, advocate public and private
investment, and ensure transparency of information.
A practical stockpiling and distribution counter-
measure system maintained by health industries and
supervised by national and local governments would
provide critical and prompt vaccinations and medical
supplies—such as ventilators, syringes, and intrave-
nous antibiotics—to people in any country at the outset

of pandemic influenza. To accomplish this, it is neces-
sary to bolster the vaccine industry by awarding con-
tracts with substantial incentives to companies willing
to build production facilities and generate sustainable
and adaptable inventories.
As with any remedy to global threats, a joint public
and private investment scheme can sufficiently prepare
against an attack. To deal with the relatively new H5N1
subtype, the U.S. teamed up with health technology
companies to develop new cell-based methods of pro-
duction and advanced dose-sparing technology to limit
production constraints and lower vaccination costs.
Due partly to these efforts, the U.S. has secured over
26 million doses of H5N1 pre-pandemic influenza vac-
cine and over 50 million antivirals. Existing stockpiles
are made available to domestic health experts and for-
eign countries for clinical trials, case reporting, and rap-
id viral diagnosis.
If pandemic influenza spreads within one geographic
location, it becomes an economic problem and tangible
threat to the entire world. Due to the potency of global
economic interconnectedness, as pandemic influenza
disrupts industrial or agricultural production in, for in-
stance China, the effects are likely to cause setbacks in
food trade and transportation routes everywhere.
The rapid spread and variation of a deadly influenza
strain accentuates the need for transparent information
and virus sample sharing among nations. As demonstrat-
ed in the SARS flare-up of 2003, no one country owns
the virus once it begins to spread. Such outbreaks are
effectively managed when doctors from various coun-
tries collaborate (rather than compete) and produce
Editorial
viable vaccines from shared samples. Countries like
Indonesia who want to hold H5N1 virus samples
hostage by demanding payment need to reconsider
their position and concede the fundamental principle
that health risks outweigh intellectual property gains.
Preparation is a Continuum
Pandemic preparedness generates many ancillary
benefits in that it prepares the world for other natural
and manmade disasters. Preparation for pandemic
influenza becomes a catalyst through which readi-
ness against all categories of risk can progress and
will establish innovative processes to combat all other
global threats.
Pandemic plans require active preparation for non-
routine emergencies and must be continuously adjusted
to fit contemporary needs. If a pandemic influenza occurs
anywhere, it is a risk everywhere. As nations, cities, com-
munities, companies, and households prepare and pan-
demic readiness progresses, antivirals and vaccines will
be allocated to everyone, not only the few. Global health
is at stake, but more importantly, humanity is threatened
and as global cooperation is achieved, the current gen-
eration could be the first ever prepared in the event of
a pandemic outbreak.
Secretary Michael Leavitt is the former Governor
of Utah, Administrator of the Environmental Protection
Agency, and Secretary of the U.S. Department of Health
and Human Services.
Acknowledgements: Rich McKeown and Andrew G8
Jensen. Summit 2009
87
 Interview with
His Excellency Klaus Scharioth
Ambassador of the Federal Republic
of Germany to the United States

Q: What are the major challenges and priorities for the German government at the upcoming G8
Summit?

We support the priorities of the Italian Presidency. The G8 should send a clear signal of a com-
mon effort to overcome the global financial and economic crisis. We want to emphasize that the glob-
al economic downturn hits the poorest countries especially hard and that we must show solidarity.
Another key issue is to mark the route to Copenhagen, i.e. plan the steps required to tackle climate change.
Finally we want to focus on our cooperation with Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa in what we
call the “Heiligendamm Process”, an initiative taken by the German G8 Presidency in 2007.

Q: In a speech at the Paris Conference, titled “New World, New Capitalism” Chancellor Angela
Merkel said that: “The G8 is no longer the group that can create a global order for the world.
Under Germany’s G8 presidency, we started, in what is referred to as the Heiligendamm process,
to work together with five major partners—India, China, Mexico, Brazil, and South Africa—on a
permanent and continuous basis within the OECD.” Does Germany believe that the G8 is closer
than ever before to adding new members to the G8? How many more members should be added
besides the five already mentioned?

We witness the emergence of new actors like Brazil, China, India, Mexico and South Africa on
the world scene. Germany initiated during its G8 presidency the so-called Heiligendamm Process in
order to involve these major emerging economies in the work of the G8. The Italian presidency wants to
continue and intensify this process; we support this. A real partnership with these countries is essential
because we need to cooperate with them to solve the most pressing global problems (financial crisis,
food security, climate change, energy and resource supply). It is my impression that these countries show
readiness to shoulder responsibility, they are more and more open to acting together on issues of mutual
concern. Therefore our aim is to continue and to deepen the dialogue with them. Discussions within the
G8 regarding a possible enlargement process have just started. In any case: consensus among all G8
partners is necessary. Therefore it is too early to predict a precise outcome.

Q: The Italian government has indicated that it intends to push for a fresh approach to African
development by crafting a comprehensive strategy that treats African countries as equals and
makes more use of NGOs and private sector actors rather than following the old top-down
model of simply dispensing aid. Does Germany also embrace such an approach?

The approach is not entirely new, in fact, the whole G8-Africa partnership and the Action plan
have rested on this premise right from their outset. Various G8-presidencies, including the German one
in 2007, have highlighted this philosophy in various ways. One of the issues at the G8 Heiligendamm
summit in 2007 (Growth and Responsibility in Africa) was the strengthening of the private sector in Africa
in order to promote growth and sustainable development. The Joint EU-Africa-Strategy, which was in-
troduced during the German EU-Presidency in 2007, is another good example of a partnership amongst
equals. Over the past 40 years, German development cooperation has relied on a close cooperation with
nongovernmental organizations, from Germany and abroad. We value this partnership and will continue
to channel a significant proportion of development assistance through NGOs.

G8
Summit 2009

88
Q: The Italians plan to focus on ways to improve the security situation in Afghanistan. How does
the German government view the situation in Afghanistan and does Germany plan to contribute
to helping improve security and building civilian institutions in Afghanistan?

While living conditions of millions of Afghans have improved remarkably (health; education; water,
energy and transportation infrastructure), Afghanistan is still plagued by violence and intimidation from
the hands of an armed insurgency and extremist groups. The challenge of improving the security situ-
ation in Afghanistan is twofold. First, sustainable security gains will require building self-reliant Afghan
Security Forces along with capable civilian institutions to guide them. Secondly, and equally important,
Afghans must be convinced to firmly side with their government and support Afghanistan’s constitutional
order which requires reducing the appeal of the economic and ideological recruiting tools at the extrem-
ists’ disposal. To this end, the Government of Afghanistan must be enabled to deliver basic services,
economic opportunity and a sense of personal security and stability to Afghans throughout the country.

In all of these endeavors, Germany closely and actively partners with Afghanistan. Germany has
been NATO’s lead nation for the stabilization of Afghanistan’s north for almost six years. The German mili-
tary presence there has greatly contributed to improved security, economic reconstruction and the estab-
lishment of civilian institutions. In fact, Germany was the first country to establish a NATO presence outside
Kabul. German airlift and reconnaissance capabilities operate throughout Afghanistan. Overall, Germany is
the third largest troop contributor to Afghanistan. The German contingent will grow this year from 3,500 to
4,150 to safeguard presidential elections. Germany is heavily involved in building a capable Afghan National
Army (ANA) - with seven teams of military trainers and a pledge of 50 million Euros to the ANA Trust Fund.
With a view to establish a capable Afghan National Police (ANP), Germany has deployed 140 experts, ad-
visers, trainers and military police and funds the construction of critically needed police infrastructure such
as headquarters and academies. In the field of civilian reconstruction, Germany is the fourth largest bilat-
eral donor with an assistance total of over 1.2 billion Euros in the period 2002-2010. In addition, Germany
accounts for 20% of the assistance provided by the EU for Afghanistan. That assistance amounts to 1,5
billion Euros in the period from 2002-2009. Striving to provide tangible improvements in living conditions
for the Afghan populace, Germany is particularly engaged in providing energy, water, health, education,
infrastructure (e.g. hospitals in Balkh and Faizabad, airport in Mazar-e-Sharif), mine clearance and coun-
ter-narcotics projects. In addition, Germany provides 22 million USD to UNDP to support Afghan national
elections. Germany also helps build a capable Afghan justice sector and supports building administrative
capacity through training and exchange programs.

The German engagement in Afghanistan is part of a joint international effort with the G8 being
one of many frameworks to coordinate within the donor community. We will use the G8 summit in Italy
as another opportunity to jointly assess the situation in Afghanistan and to consult with partners on the
way ahead.

Q: In the midst of the global financial crisis, there are strong domestic pressures on govern-
ments to enact protectionist trade measures. What is the position of the German government on
protectionism?

In times of crisis, it is very tempting to fence off one’s own economy. From our perspective
that would absolutely be the wrong answer. It only would lead deeper into crisis, as is shown by painful
experiences in the past. For decades, we have all benefited together from the global reduction in trade
barriers. Open markets and freedom to invest are the foundations for growth and prosperity world-wide.
We therefore have to fend off protectionist tendencies vigorously. In this context, the German government,
for example, paid very close attention in its own stimulus programme to ensuring that it does not give
preferential treatment to domestic suppliers.
G8
Thank you Mr. Ambassador. Summit 2009

89
 Interview with
His Excellency Pierre Vimont
Ambassador of France to the United States

Q: What are the most important priorities and challenges for the French government at the
upcoming G8 Summit?

I think there are three main priorities. The first one is the G8 collective response to the eco-
nomic crisis. The G8 is a natural actor in this area. Since last November, the G20 has worked intensely
to identify the root causes of the downturn and cope with its consequences including by improving the
regulation of the financial system and stimulating a sound recovery, but we have to work in concert. The
G8 will probably focus on the long term perspectives for recovery. We can come back to that later, but
the economic situation is the first priority for the French government. The second priority would be the
upcoming Copenhagen conference and the design of an ambitious and competitive international frame-
work that will deal with climate change. This is of paramount importance. The third one is the question
of development assistance particularly towards the most vulnerable in Africa, which is becoming one of
the major challenges that the G8 is addressing.

An overall priority in that context has to do with the G8 outreach towards emerging countries,
and as I was saying previously, this involves some coordination with the G20. I think that there will be
some discussions on how we are exercising the G20 process and how we organize relations between
the G20 and the G8. I think it will be necessary for the leaders that prompted the G8 meeting to have a
discussion on that and to see how things can be articulated.

You know that for some time, there has been a tradition in the G8 to allow at one point that the
eight countries that belong to the G8 meet with the five main emerging countries, Brazil, China, India,
Mexico, South Africa and I think that this has already been planned in the G8 agenda in Italy. This out-
reach activity will have to be put into the context of the new G20.

Q: Considering how popular the G20 summit in London was this year it seems like the G8 was
a little overshadowed, if only for a moment. Do you feel that in the coming years we will see a
revolutionary change between these two summits?

We will have to see. It is true that France is very much at the forefront of the idea that the G8
cannot be kept with the present format. President Sarkozy has been very clear about that; he has been of
the opinion for sometime now that the G8 should be transformed into a G13 with the five emerging coun-
tries I mentioned. In fact, at the time the financial crisis burst out with the Lehman Brothers bankruptcy
in September of last year, he said that there should be an international group to deal with the issues
that should be more inclusive than the G8. President Bush agreed to go forward and came up with this
G20 format. Now the important thing as we go along is to see of and how we keep those two processes
working side by side or if we should try at one point to simplify the way we proceed and coordinate
our policies.

Q: Of course no one has decided what the magic number will be for the Group.

When you have left the G20 out of the box it is very difficult to say to some of the members
to go back home and not participate anymore. But maybe at one point, once the economic and
financial situation is getting better, the leaders in the G8 will be able to find the right figure in order to
G8 enlarge the G8.
Summit 2009

90
 Interview with His Excellency Pierre Vimont

Q: We spoke about expansion and how France feels about it. I wanted to talk a little bit about the
agenda that the Italian Presidency put forward. Italian Foreign Minister Frattini was in Washing-
ton a few months ago to discuss five focus areas for the summit’s agenda, which included de-
velopment in Africa, non-proliferation, counter-terrorism, and the financial crisis which in itself
is quite big considering the sub-issues of protectionism and trade. Do you feel that the agenda
of the G8 has become too ambitious to tackle in a few days?

Well, that has always been the case. If you look at the history of G7 and then G8 Summits you
will see that for a three-day meeting they were able to get through many international issues. The G7 and
the G8 meetings have always been much more than just meetings on economic issues, because when
you have important world leaders in one single place, it is natural that they wish to evoke political issues
on which they feel they can make some progress.

Q: I have to agree with you on that I think there are about eight meetings so far scheduled with
foreign ministers and financial ministers, so there is a lot of groundwork done before the summit.

You have to remember that in fact the idea for the summit originally was to just have one day
or one weekend talk in a very casual and informal way about economic issues. Quite quickly though, it
became this three-day meeting of heads of state that turned into a long and well prepared process.

Q: How does France view the situation in Afghanistan and Pakistan?

We are very much in line with what has been stated by President Obama on the strategy
towards Afghanistan and Pakistan. The fact is that Al Qaeda and the Taliban move from one country to
another and you have to take into account this element if you want to find a sustainable solution to this
conflict. Having said that, what we are trying to do is to be as practical as possible and to look at what
the priorities are in both countries. If you look at Afghanistan, the important issues at stake are how to
help and assist the Afghans in improving their institutions, training their security forces and equipping
them to carry out their mission. We are also looking at increasing our technical and financial assistance
to the central government but also to the provincial governments around the country. In other words,
we are looking at helping the country and their local and national leaders to build up a viable state in
all areas, from public health to justice or education and agriculture. We also have to work very closely
with the Pakistani authorities so that they can mobilize to fight the Taliban. The priority there is to help
the Pakistani army to be better equipped, to become more efficient in its fight against the Taliban. The
current army is certainly a very efficient army but an army that has so far been mostly trained for con-
ventional conflicts and not for those kinds of counter insurgencies and asymmetrical conflicts that we
are facing today.

Q: It is definitely a very sensitive situation for Pakistan. The Swat Valley for example is an area
full of civilians that are being used by the Taliban as a shield.

Looking at the reports that we have received, one can detect that the majority of the popu-
lation seems to oppose The Taliban rule. They are very reluctant and have shown a lot of reservation
towards the Taliban and I think that is something that we have to keep in mind.

Thank you Mr. Ambassador.

G8
Summit 2009

91
 Interview with
His Excellency Ichiro Fujisaki
Ambassador of Japan to the United States

Q: What are the major challenges and priorities for the Japanese government at this upcoming
G8 Summit?

Before we get into that point, can I tell you what the G8 is from my perspective. The G8 Summit
is an annual health check up of our political and economic system. If we think of our system as an archi-
tecture, every year or all the time there are termites trying to bore into this structure. That could be in the
political field, the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction or it could be terrorism. In the economic
or social area, it could be a challenge to the market economy, a pandemic, or development issue. All in
all, you can think of our system as a building, a construction, where the west wing is the political system
and the east wing is the economic system. We always have to watch that this building is not attacked
by termites, and accordingly, a regular health check up is necessary. That is the very essence of the G8
Summit, from that point you are coming up with very similar issues every year, and similar prescriptions
as well. You address similar issues and also you are given similar prescriptions to not drink too much, to
jog a bit, etc. So, I would like you to know that is the very essence of how I see the G8.

This year this torch has been carried, passed on from last year’s Hokkaido Toyako Summit in Ja-
pan. But there are other changes as well. A big change is that the world economy has met huge challenges
since last year, so in our health check up that would be the first topic to be raised. Second or third would be
the issues carried on from the last summit, environmental issues like climate change, the fight against
terrorism, and the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction including nuclear. On top of that there
are regional issues.

Q: What are your thoughts on the G20? It seemed for a moment that the G20 Summit overshad-
owed the G8 Summit.

The G8 is very different from the G20. The G20 is very important because it covers 85 percent
of GDP of the world. As far as it addresses and copes with the global economy and financial issues today,
the G20 is a very useful tool and I think all of us should utilize this as much as possible. But the G20 is
not addressing proliferation, it is not addressing the flu pandemic, it is not addressing democracy, it is not
addressing the development issue per se. On the other hand, the G8 summit covers not only ecoonmic
and financial issues but also global issues such as the environmental issues, the fight against terrorism,
and the non-proliferation issues. Therefore, the importance of the G8 summit is not undermined or over-
shadowed by the G20 summit.

Q: Italian Foreign Minister Frattini was in Washington in January and said that in a financial crisis
where the whole world is suffering we shouldn’t let development ideas take the back seat. Would
you agree with that?

I agree with that idea. Japan is trying to increase our development assistance in Asia as well.
Of course there are two reasons that Asia should not be left behind. Asia is an engine for world develop-
ment so we think that we have to put an emphasis on Asian countries. While the Japanese economy
suffers the current situation more than those of the United States or Europe, in terms of GDP growth
prospects, we think that we should live up to our commitment because we cannot spill this economic
difficulty into developing countries.
G8
Summit 2009

92
 Interview with His Excellency Ichiro Fujisaki

Q: I wanted to take you to the second priority of the G8 Summit this year, the climate change
discussions and the Copenhagen discussions coming up. What are your thoughts on the issue?

We think that climate change is very important. Our economy is one of the most energy ef-
ficient economies and we feel especially responsible because of the framework being started in Kyoto.
However, Kyoto was not a great success because the U.S., China, and India were not there. You may
already know that the U.S. and China each account for 20 percent of the emissions in the world. Japan
accounts for just 4.3 percent. So, we are already doing a lot not to repeat this in a next framework on
climate change.

Q: Do you think that the Copenhagen meeting will be a much more positive meeting than Kyoto?

It should be. The U.S. is much more positive and that is a hopeful sign. But it depends not only
on the U.S. but other countries as well, especially emerging countries. And for that Japan and the U.S.
have established a fund to assist developing countries for adaptation to climate change. Also Japan is
implementing technical cooperation to developing countries.

Q: I wanted to take you back to the financial crisis and what it does to trade. I know you men-
tioned quite a few things about the situation in Japan, do you feel that there will be more protec-
tionism measures coming up as a result of the financial crisis?

I don’t think so. Let me elaborate on my thoughts. Japan is dependent on foreign trade. If ever
one goes protectionist, we are one of the first ones that will be hit the most. Our energy self sufficiency is
4 percent, our food self sufficiency is 40 percent. U.S. energy self sufficiency is 61 percent, U.S. food self
sufficiency is 128 percent. The U.S. can survive on its own, Japan cannot. So we need foreign trade in Japan.
We think that leading countries like the U.S. and Japan and others should not be caught in a psychology
to protect our industry.

That is exactly what happened after the great depression and countries went into the protec-
tionist mode and started trade wars, which prompted the spirit stipulated in Article 1 of 1947 GATT in
the aftermath of post WWII. This vicious cycle should be avoided with our firm commitment to promote
global trade and investment and to reject protectionism.

Thank you Mr. Ambassador.

G8
Summit 2009

93
Yuishi Kimura
 G8
Summit 2009

95
 Stylex

G8
Summit 2009

96
 G8
Summit 2009

97
 Think about the spirit of “ITADAKIMASU”
1. Rationale for establishing the
class of “ITADAKIMASU”
Waseda University affiliated
Waseda Jitugyo Elementary Course
During her visit to Japan in Febru-
ary 2005, Prof. Wangari Maathai (69),
Nobel Peace Prize laureate in 2004
met up with and was deeply moved
with a word “MOTTAINAI” that has the
spirit of the unique language culture
of Japan. Since then she has been
carrying on a MOTTAINAI campaign
to spread “MOTTAINAI” as a “world
common keyword” in every corner of
the world to protect the environment.
Prof. Wangari Maathai was award-
ed the Grand Cordon of the Order of
the Rising Sun by the country of Japan
through the Ambassador to Kenya in
May of this year (2009). She said with
joy that it is “very encouraging for her
to continue to make efforts”. She then
showed her determination to further
promote her grass roots movement
through environment protection. Am-
bassador Iwatani stated the reasons
why she was awarded this Order were
that she had contributed to globally
disseminate the spirit of “MOTTAINAI”
and introduced Japan’s efforts for ad-
dressing climate change.
In addition to MOTTAINAI, Japa-
nese language has many other words
that have peculiarity to the Japanese
language culture. From the perspec-
tive of the food culture, “ITADAKIMA-
SU” is one of them.
“ITADAKI” in “ITADAKIMASU”
was originally the verb “ITADAKU” in
a grammatical sense. When receiv-
ing a reward from a person of higher
G8 standing, or eating offerings made to
Summit 2009 Shinto and Buddhist deities, Japa-
98
nese people have deeply bent down
their head, which has been practiced
since the medieval times. “ITADAKU”
has originally been a noble conduct of
appreciation.
Even in the modern times, a full
of feelings of all the people concerned
are embraced in the act of eating a
meal. Eating animals and plants is
nothing more or less than “a noble
behavior of eating lives”.
In schools, lively voices of “ITA-
DAKIMASU!” are heard at lunch time.
However, only fewer children than
expected know the original subtext.
They need to clearly understand the
meaning of “ITADAKIMASU” and must
be proud as a Japanese of the word
created by our forerunners.
In the field of education, we want
to think of this word of weight with
children without losing substance
but to continue to inherit as a “living
word”. On the basis of this, we as
Japanese want to confidently intro-
duce “ITADAKIMASU” to the world.
2. Class descriptions
(1) 1st Lecture
Coursework is conducted with
all the children of 5th grade. Slides
are used to let them know of Prof.
Wangari Maathai’s campaign. With
the information, they think of the
word “MOTTAINAI”. While citing vari-
ous “MOTTAINAI” movements around
them, they make the class as the
place to think of the movement in their
position.
(2) 2nd Lecture
Coursework is conducted in each
class. With the opinions exchanged
during the 1st lecture, children think
of its original meaning of “ITADAKIMA-
SU”. Before closing the class, each
child makes up a slogan to sum up
the coursework.
3. From the look of the coursework
(1)_1st Lecture
A. The teacher s asked children to
think of the situation in which they will
deem it “MOTTAINAI” ‘in their daily
life’. Children gave the following an-
swers:
_To do away with things that are
Sponsored Article
still usable.
_To run an excessive amount of
tap water.
_To consume too much tissue
paper at a time.
_Wasteful spending of money.
_To leave an electric light turned
on.
_To leave food on the plate.
B. Read to children a book “MOT-
TAINAI” about the word encountered
in Japan, written by Vice Environ-
ment Minister of Kenya who received
the Nobel Peace Price (published by
Planet Link, Magazine House in June
2005). Then children were assigned
to write their feedback on their note-
book. Representative comments are
given below:
_There are poor people in the world.
_In the future, try not to repeat
MOTTAINAI things that I used to do.
_It is shameful to hear that military
expenditure is higher than the amount
of money given to developing coun-
tries.
_Instead of only we live a rich life-
style, we better collect contributions.
_If we bring a war to an end, the
number of people dying will decrease
and then we can give money.
_We must care for children.
_I thought there were various
types of MOTTAINAI in the world.
_It is cruel and inhuman that
a large amount of military spending
is taken for granted.
(2)_2nd Lecture
A. The teacher asked children to
think if there are any words of which
Japan can be proud, other than
“MOTTAINAI”. In reply to this, they
gave the following answers:
Arigatou (thank you), Magokoro

(sincerity), Ichigo-Ichie (meeting only
once in a life time), Doryoku (make
effort), Taisetsu (valued), Setuyaku
(saving), Omoiyari (compassion), To-
modachi (friend), Iccho-Niseki (kill two
birds with one stone), Kiryoku (mental
toughness).
B. All the students in the class
thought of a slogan to introduce
“ITADAKIMASU” to the people of the
world. And each student wrote the
slogan on a strip of sheet and put it
up for display. Following are slogans:
_ITADAKIMASU is a baton relay to
support our life.
_”ITADAKIMASU” is a set expres-
sion to thank for lives. Pronounce
“thanks” (arigatou) from the heart.
_”ITADAKIMASU” is a feeling of
gratitude for having lives of other
things.
_Pronounce ITADAKIMASU. ITADA-
KIMASU with thankfulness.
_Do not forget the spirit of ”ITADA-
KIMASU”!
_”ITADAKIMASU” is …that saves
lives.
_Desire to make ”ITADAKIMASU” a
world common keyword.
_”ITADAKIMASU” with a feeling that
we are having (Itadaku) lives.
_Desire to spread ”ITADAKIMASU”
globally.
_For ”ITADAKIMASU”, a feeling of
thankfulness is important.
_Eat even one grain of rice if left.
_The word to thank and respect
for all.
_Feel good saying ”ITADAKIMA-
SU!!”
_Value your life.
_”ITADAKIMASU” is packed with
lots of thankfulness.
C. In finishing the coursework for
thinking of the spirit of “ITADAKIMA-
SU”, children were required to write
their feedback down on their note-
book to confirm what they learned
from the one-shot course. Following
are their feedbacks:
_When I told to my grandmother
and grandfather about this, they said
that they had been told by their grand-
mother and grandfather to “cherish
what you have, not leave rice on the
plate.” I now think that I will eat up all
the rice served, use up a thing clev-
erly and separate recyclable things as
much as I can.
_Japanese people of today almost
forget this MOTTAINAI, so I now think
to value MOTTAINAI more.
_Poor children always tolerate their
living standards, so favored children
should not lead a life of luxury. Ev-
ery grain of rice seemingly in a small
amount is cropped with a lot of care
given. I like to express my thanks to
farming people by eating all the rice
serviced in return. I have not thought
of such thing till now.
_ITADAKU means that we have (Ita-
daku) lives of others. They include
cows, swine and vegetable and oth-
er various lives. By eating them, we
grow in height and feet, and become
healthy. So, we must say thanks to
these animals. But the people who
raised animals and plants are not
here, so say ITADAKIMASU with a
feeling of thankfulness to the animals
and the people involved. I am happy
that I could have time today to think it
over. Because I have done this today,
I will be able to say “ITADAKIMASU”
seriously.
_I practice some things. I accept
and give hand-me-downs. My school
slippers are also hand-me-downs.
The ones that become small for me
will be handed to my cousin or ac-
quaintance. I now understand that al-
though I think I live frugally, it is a life
of luxury to the people of Africa. I will
exercise saving as much as I can.
_I thought that there were many
good people among the Japanese.
This is because they have the thank-
ful mind. I used to say ITADAKIMASU
Sponsored Article
without knowing the meaning, but
from now on, I want to say it whole-
heartedly.
_I want to spread ITADAKIMASU to-
gether with its meaning to the people
of other countries in the world. Then,
leftover food might be reduced. If left-
over food is reduced, many people
could be saved. To make such a world,
I wish many more Japanese people
desire to globally spread this phrase.
As was expected, people in old days
are great!!
_I think only six letters (when writ-
ten in Japanese) can convey the joy
and appreciation to those who raised
them.
_Some lives must be lost. Other-
wise, humans cannot survive. When I
think of this, I feel very sorry for them.
Indeed our lives can be sustained and
our lives are nurtured in this way.
_I thought ITADAKIMASU was
very important. I like to share my
meals with those who cannot afford
to have meals and are going to die.
Pork, beef and chicken meat are de-
licious but we must ITADAKU their
lives. Otherwise, we will not get our
food. So, Cows, swine and poultry
are raised with care. When we say
ITADAKIMASU, say it with thankful-
ness to all involved in providing food. I
have said it without a thankful feeling,
but from today I will say it with feeling.
_I have not said ITADAKIMASU
with much feeling, but I now say
it with feeling to all the people who
made the lives and food as I studied
on ITADAKIMASU. Lastly I would say
that I want to study on the ITADAKI-
MASU again.
G8
Summit 2009
99
 Sponsored Article The Last Ark Called Survivability
by J. B. Kabua
Marshall Islands Ambassador to Japan

There is a saying that in every event in human affairs, including sea level rising and its
predicted calamity, there is an opportunity of creativity. The immensity of Nature’s force
on the human habitat arrives slow but can also take the unprepared by surprise. The op-
portunity of creativity presented by sea level rise has actually arrived. But its seascape
and physical future belongs to the survivor.

Profile of author:
current Marshall Is. Ambas-
sador to Japan served over
25 years (public policy),
critic, loves politics, classic
music and philosophy, is-
sue writer (essayist), boat/
canoe builder; interested in
fish industries

Marshall Islands
Friendship Association

And who might that be? I define this person or persons as those who are interested
in reading the “ark’s drawings” and willing to assemble the keel, ribs, rudder, etc. that
have been precut, laid before you, and ready to be assembled into a condition for human
survivability.
The debate on whose policy and way of life inadvertently destroyed another man’s
way of life and culture is finished long time ago. There is no more time for playing the
“blame game” or the “look for sympathy” overture. Instead, let us recognize and act
quickly on the new reality: that an opportunity to change the social structure, the law of
the land, and to create new wealth, etc. has arrived.
I therefore propose this action for the survivor of the future (for the sake of others).
Will you help create wealth through economic cooperation that I will design to assure eq-
uitable profit sharing with a nation whose way of life has not created its own wealth and
predicted to be a victim of sea level rise? Will you help create a trust fund exclusively for
defraying the cost of migration, relocation and resettlement? Would you be interested in
the management of extensive coral reef systems and ocean regions and their resources?
Let’s connect at e-mail: camelot_pi@hotmail.com

NEXT GENERATION

Noah Tartan Kabua, 14, Yoshio Tanaka, 15, resident Hideaki Yasuda, 29, Kyoto
son of ambassador: “If of Tokyo: “I think there is resident: “Some planning
this thing were to hap- enough land to welcome by the people must be
pen tomorrow, l think I will Pacific islands people who done. Politicians are usu-
be okay, because there must migrate. I think there ally good in understanding
are good people who will is good chance to discuss this kind of problem. Who
help”. exchange arrangements. looks after the islands area
But this is a very difficult under the sea is very in-
problem.” teresting. I think many fish
will come there and many
businessmen will like to go
there to get the resource.
But I do not know when.”
G8
Summit 2009

100
Hyatt

G8
Summit 2009

101
 Changing Ways
Record high oil prices in 2007
and 2008 prompted businesses to
re-think one of the basic tenets of
logistics in times of globalization:
produce in low-cost countries and
transport to home mar-kets. Within
a short period of time and based on
the understanding that high oil prices
are here to stay in the long run, major
international players such as fash-
ion retailer H&M and Sharp began
to buck the trend of globalization.
In what seemed a counter-intuitive
move, the companies actually made
rational, pragmatic calcula-
tions and moved
produc-
tion closer to
their customers
while looking for ways
to make logistics more e f f i c i e n t .
They wanted to maximize profits and
cut the carbon emissions for which
they were responsible, thereby
boosting their standing with inves-
tors and customers alike.
Even as oil prices have tum-
bled due to the financial crisis, the
pressure remains on companies to
do their part for the environment.
Hence, the process of re-thinking
logistics operations hasn’t slowed or
reversed in 2009. Companies con-
tinue to look for ways to trim logistics
costs and make logistics processes
more efficient . In fact, sustainability
analysts say that tough economic
times will prove a watershed for cor-
porate environmental efforts. Those
companies that are seri-ous about
sustainability and the environment
will continue their efforts while orga-
G8 nizations that only gave lip service to
Summit 2009 them will quickly brush their projects
102
aside. Companies that stick with
it know that sustainable business
practices and environmental focus
lead to innovation and a strong mar-
ket position – a position that can be
maintained for the long haul.
Focus on Sustainability
Given the economic imperative
to handle natural resources, such as
oil, efficiently, as well as a focus on
sustainability and the environment,
logistics providers and their custom-
ers are examin-ing how
to optimize glob-
al freight
trans-
port. They are
not only moving pro-
duction locations, they’re con-
sidering how to pack goods more
compactly, use transport contain-
ers more efficiently, buy from local
suppliers to cut down on transport
kilometers and use a variety of
modes of transport. Hermann Ude,
CEO of DHL Global Forwarding and
Freight, said, “In the area of Global
Forwarding, we have been thinking
about the environment as a top pri-
ority for quite some time.”
Deutsche Post DHL, the world’s
largest logistics company, was the
first company in the industry to
come forward and acknowledge its
responsibility for greenhouse gas
emissions. As the basis for world-
wide trade, the logistics industry
contributes considerably to global
carbon emissions. To acknowledge
the fact, assume responsibility and
begin to change practices in the
logistics in-dustry, Deutsche Post
DHL has launched an own climate
protection program called “Go-
Green”. It focuses on improving the
Sponsored Article
carbon efficiency of the Group and
its subcontractors by 30 percent by
2020. Within GoGreen, Deutsche
Post DHL is doing so by optimiz-
ing the fleet of vehicles and aircraft,
improving energy efficiency in the
buildings it operates in more than
220 countries around the world,
focusing on the development of inno-
vative technologies at its DHL Inno-
vation Center close to the headquar-
ters in Bonn, Germany, and involving
its approximately 500,000 employ-
ees as well as its customers and
suppliers.
In the area of freight, DHL is also
working to reduce emissions. It is
developing intermodal trans-port,
re-thinking basic logistics concepts,
optimizing its fleet and training work-
ers to be more en-ergy efficient.
Intermodal Transport:
Reducing the Impact on
the Environment
What produces lower emissions
and costs less than air transport but
is quicker than sending cargo by
sea? The answer: a combination,
or intermodal transport. Intermodal
transport is one of the most exciting
topics in the logistics world. Logis-
tics providers can help their custom-
ers save time, money and cut down
on carbon emissions by intelligently
combining transport by ship, plane,
rail or truck - as long as the transfers
are organized efficiently. The Euro-
pean Intermodal Research Advisory
Council (EIRAC) estimates that the
share of intermodal transport in all
goods transported in Europe will
increase to 40 percent by 2020.
Deutsche Post DHL has a so-
phisticated offering of intermodal
transport options. For example,
goods destined from China for coun-
tries such as Tanzania, Angola and
Nigeria can be sent us-ing the SeAir
service. Transport time by sea for
mobile phones, clothing and com-
puters, as well as technical equip-
ment to support the booming tele-
communications sector, would take
32 days. By combining air and sea
transport by transferring the goods
 G8
Summit 2009

103
 Sponsored Article
in Dubai, the SeAir tariff allows pro-
ducers to cut transport time by 50
percent, reduce costs about the
same and reduce emissions. Dubai
is already a key shipping center,
but capacity will expand greatly as
the country builds the Dubai World
Center. It will be the world’s larg-
est logistics platform, setting stan-
dards for intermodal transport. The
region could become the first fully
integrated logistics network in the
world when construction is com-
pleted in 2015. Deutsche Post DHL
is expanding its presence in Logis-
tics City, a part of the Dubai World
Center.
Cutting Costs and Emis-
sions with Modal Shifts
Deutsche Post DHL has a strong
track record in developing intermo-
dal logistics concepts. In 2005, the
company began running a so-called
block train from Lübeck/Travemünde
in Germany to and from Verona, Ita-
ly. It was the first pan-European lo-
gistics company to offer scheduled
transports with trains pulling trailers
and conventional freight wagons.
The advantages were clear: The
shipments by train were more timely
than those by truck, costs were de-
creased and carbon emissions were
reduced dramatically. More than
130,000 tons of goods are forward-
ed by train and not by truck as pre-
viously. Emission were reduced by
70 percent, the equivalent to 15,000
tons of carbon dioxide per year. “Our
customers are continuously asking
for environmentally friendly logis-
tics solutions given rising transport
costs and limited resources,” said
Hermann Ude. “By further develop-
ing these solutions we are meeting
our customers needs.”
New Logistics Concepts
Deutsche Post DHL sees it as
part of its job to re-think logistics
processes. The company is doing
so in ways big and small, includ-
ing the development of intermodal
G8 transport. But in the long run, lim-
Summit 2009 ited oil resources will require fur-
104
ther changes in logistics practices.
For instance, compa-nies may be
forced to reconsider what was uni-
versally seen as a good business
practice: avoid-ing high inventories.
Producing “just in time” means that
goods are produced and delivered
ex-actly to the point when needed,
without storage in between, even
if that meant the transport of goods
takes place in vehicles that are only
half full. Given the outlook for high,
long-term oil prices, the concept of
just-in-time delivery may take a back
seat in new logistics strategies.
Companies may begin to have fuller
warehouses, a development that
would mean fewer deliv-eries and
fewer rush deliveries, and hence a
better use of capacity on trucks and
ships.
Deutsche Post DHL works con-
stantly to optimize loads and routes.
In its DHL Innovation Center, it is de-
veloping intelligent transport routing
systems that make use of current
traffic data, satellite-supported navi-
gation and current orders for pick-
ups and deliveries. It combines this
information to reduce unnecessary
trips and reach maximum possible
capacity use, thereby saving fuel
and reducing emissions. Further-
more, the company is replacing its
fleet of aircraft and ground vehicles
with a focus on fuel efficiency when
possible. In Sweden, for example,
more than 40 percent of the DHL
fleet uses alternative fuels, and the
company plans in the next years
to replace all the vehicles it owns
with more environmentally friendly
models. But also supposedly “un-
important” measures, such as driver
training, make a significant contribu-
tion. Considering the total number
of kilometers that DHL workers
around the world drive each day, fuel-
efficient driving practices can make
a big difference overall.
Climate Protection
Program GoGreen
“Deutsche Post DHL is not think-
ing just about the current financial
crisis. We’re positioning our compa-
ny for the long term and in a sustain-
able manner. We know that it’s criti-
cal for our custom-ers and for the
environment that logistics compa-
nies help improve efficient transport.
Our activi-ties in this area build trust
with our customers, employees, in-
vestors and contractors. They know
that we think for the long term,” said
Hermann Ude. Launched in April
2008, the GoGreen pro-gram has
kicked-off successfully and is con-
stantly developed further.
With its GoGreen offering,
Deutsche Post DHL gives compa-
nies and individuals the chance to
lower their carbon footprint. For in-
stance, business customers sent
some 5.5 million GoGreen packages
and more than100 million climate-
neutral letters in Germany in 2008.
In the U.K., DHL began to operate
the first climate-neutral distribution
center in November 2008. It heats
itself by extracting warmth from 8
kilometers of pipes that run through
the building. Even if the ground is
frozen, the temperature above it
stays constant throughout the year
at 12 to 14 degrees Celsius. Other
examples: At the DHL Express hub
in Leipzig/Halle, energy efficiency
was built into the architecture. The
building participates in a commu-
nal power station. The ceiling is
outfitted with 1,000 square meters
of solar panels, and DHL is able to
contribute 100,000 kilowatt hours
to the public electricity network. In
addition, the company collects rain
water for cleaning toilets and wash-
ing planes.
 G8
Summit 2009

105
 CARING FOR THE CAREGIVERS
When measuring of the signifi-
cant weakness of healthcare infra-
structures in the sub-Saharan Afri-
can region, few numbers stand so
starkly as those quantifying the vast
undersupply of healthcare workers
present to serve local populations.
Health care workers chatting in the reception area of the Swazi-
land Wellness Centre.
The sub-Saharan Africa region,
for example, bears 75 percent of
the world’s HIV/AIDS burden, yet
employs only three percent of the
global health workforce.
Global health advocates con-
cur that this dire shortage of health
workers is the one of the most fun-
damental health system challenges
facing Africa today.
But there is new hope in the form
of several recently established “Well-
ness Centres for Health Care Work-
ers®” in Swaziland, Lesotho and
other sub-Saharan nations with frag-
ile, understaffed healthcare systems.
The centres were originally con-
ceived by the International Council
of Nurses in collaboration with its
member national nurses associa-
tions (NNAs) in sub-Saharan Africa
and with support from sister NNAs
in the North. The International
Council of Nurses (ICN) is a federa-
tion of 132 national nurses associa-
G8 tions representing the more than 13
Summit 2009 million nurses working worldwide.
106
Soon, such high-profile players
on the global health scene as BD
(Becton, Dickinson and Company)
and PEPFAR (the US President’s
Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief) ral-
lied around the concept.
These facilities have opened the
Swaziland Wellness Centre receptionist and administrator Faith
Dlamini welcomes a client at the Centre.
door to improved retention practic-
es, better health, and an increased
sense of being valued for the Afri-
can health workers who toil daily on
the front lines of the battle against
HIV/AIDS, TB and other infectious
diseases.
An under-supply
of health workers
In Uganda, only 29,000 health
care professionals serve a popula-
tion of 30 million people. And in Ma-
lawi, according to 2006 data com-
piled by WHO, only 25 nurses and
one doctor were available for every
100,000 patients.
Contrast this to the United King-
dom, where every 100,000 patients
have the opportunity to avail them-
selves of the services of 937 nurses
and 256 doctors.
Massive under-funding of na-
tional healthcare systems contrib-
utes to a steady exodus of heath
workers from sub-Saharan Africa
and a increase in unemployed health
Sponsored Article
workers as funding for established
posts disappeared. Illustrating the
“brain drain” affecting the region’s
healthcare sector, only 360 of the
1,200 physicians trained in Zim-
babwe during the 1990s were still
practicing in the country as of 2001.
In the 2002-2003 period, more than
3,000 nurses trained in South Africa,
Zimbabwe, Nigeria, Ghana, Zam-
bia and Kenya registered in the UK.
And Ethiopia’s public health sector is
losing nearly ten percent of its phy-
sicians every year, primarily to other
countries and to the private sector.
Making matters worse, the
relatively few health workers on
the scene function under hazard-
ous working conditions and ex-
perience a high prevalence of in-
fectious disease, especially HIV/
AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.
Those who contract an infectious
disease face the same treatment
access challenges as the general
population. In addition they are re-
luctant to queue with their patients
for services and treatment.
“Wellness Centres help keep
health workers healthy, in their jobs
and in their country, ” says David
Benton, Chief Executive Officer
of ICN. “The Centres also deliver
the powerful message that health
workers are valued and cared
for. By stabilizing the local health-

care workforce, these centres
play a critical and strategic role in
strengthening overall healthcare
systems in developing countries.”
“The nature of the work done
by health workers--especially those
who are in touch with patients 24
Nurse Counsellor Selby Sukati is proud to serve his colleague-
clients at the Swaziland Wellness Centre.
hours a day -- exposes them to
stress, depression and various in-
fections that, if not attended to im-
mediately, affects their health gross-
ly,” says Ugandan Commissioner for
Health Services/Nursing Margaret
Chota. “Many health workers are
sick but cannot access healthcare
easily.”
Sub-Saharan nations are thus
experiencing a large and steady de-
cline in the number of already scarce
health workers due to death and
disease, underinvestment and poor
retention practices.
Overstressed and under-
valued
Dysfunctional work environ-
ments contribute to the problem,
too. In regular consultation with its
members in sub-Saharan Africa,
ICN found that a primary “push” fac-
tor motivating health workers to mi-
grate is that they feel overstressed
and undervalued.
Furthermore, nurses and physi-
cians report that being treated in the
same facility as one’s patients under-
cuts their effectiveness as caregivers.
“If healthcare workers were in-
fected with HIV, they would have
to queue alongside their patients
for treatment,” Masitsela Mhlan-
ga, former president of the Swa-
ziland Nurses Association, told
The immediate family members of health care workers are also
welcome at the Centres.
The Lancet last year. “So today,
you are a patient and tomorrow
you are a nurse or clinician. The
health workers felt undermined
and they were losing their author-
ity and the confidence of their pa-
tients. They would be stigmatized.”
The Wellness Centres emerge
To protect the health of health-
care workers and to promote their
retention, ICN and the Swaziland
Nurses Association created the first
Wellness Centre in Swaziland in
2006. The Lesotho Wellness Centre
followed in 2007. BD (Becton, Dick-
inson and Company) created a part-
nership with ICN in 2007 to expand
and establish Wellness Centres for
Health Workers in various countries
in sub-Sahara Africa.
BD is a leading global medical
technology company that develops,
manufactures and sells medical
devices, instrument systems and
reagents. The company’s Global
Health Initiative works to strengthen
healthcare systems in developing na-
Sponsored Article
tions through technical training and
support, expanding access to ap-
propriate diagnostic and other
medical technologies, and investing
in new products suitable for use in
these settings.
Excited by the promise held
forth by the Wellness Centre for
Health Care Workers® model first
launched by ICN, BD alerted PEP-
FAR to the significant potential of
this innovative, workforce retention
resource. This subsequently led to
an October, 2008 agreement where-
by PEPFAR joined BD and ICN as a
collaborator in support of the Ugan-
da facility.
A number of additional part-
ners have been working with
ICN, BD and PEPFAR to estab-
lish, develop and sustain Well-
ness Centres. These include: the
Stephen Lewis Foundation; the
ministries of health in implement-
ing countries; the national nurses
associations of Swaziland, Lesotho,
Uganda, Malawi, Zambia, Denmark,
Sweden and Norway; the World
Health Organization; the Rose
Foundation; and Nurses SOAR of
Georgetown University.
“Health care workers are the
foundation of a health system,” said
Gary Cohen, BD Executive Vice
President. “By addressing the fun- G8
damental needs of healthcare work- Summit 2009
107
 Sponsored Article
A student nurses assists the president of the Lesotho Nurses Association in unveiling the sign at the official opening of the
Lesotho Wellness Centre for Health Care Workers in Maseru, Lesotho.
ers, such as protecting them from
occupational hazards and providing
medical treatment when needed,
Wellness Centers strengthen a
country’s capacity to serve patients.
“By working in partnership with
ICN and PEPFAR in support of the
centres, we believe our company
stands at the forefront of the most fun-
damental issue affecting health sys-
tems in Africa,” Cohen added. “This
kind of social investment delivers
unusually far-reaching results. For
example, the Swaziland centre has
the capacity to reach the country’s
entire healthcare workforce.”
Managed by nurses and sup-
ported by inter-sectoral partner-
ships, centres provide a number of
dedicated services for health work-
ers and their families, including HIV
and TB prevention, treatment and
care in a discreet setting, psycho-
G8 logical counselling and stress man-
Summit 2009
108
agement, and occupational safety
training and professional training.
The facilities serve as a knowl-
edge and training centre for continu-
ous professional development, and
also provide grief-related services.
Health workers receive training in
disease prevention through needle-
stick injury surveillance and immu-
nizations for healthcare workers, as
well as post-exposure care.
Centres presently operate in
Swaziland and Lesotho. Facilities
are scheduled to open in Zambia,
Malawi and Uganda this year.
Swaziland: The first Centre
The Swaziland Wellness Centre
for Health Care Workers – which
opened in September 2006 – is situ-
ated in a country with a 26 percent
HIV prevalence rate, the highest
in the world. National life expectan-
cy is 32 years.
The centre’s land and building
were provided by the Swaziland
Nurses Association. The site – the
first of its kind in the region – is ac-
credited as an official antiretroviral
therapy (ART) facility.
Thanks to additional support
through PEPFAR, the Swaziland
program also supports mobile out-
reach to health workers situated in
remote, rural areas.
The global health community
has been highly encouraged by the
results of the Swaziland centre to
date. According to its most recent
report, the site has served 6,225
health workers, a figure equal to 77
percent of the country’s total health
workforce.
The centre launched a TB

Thabsile Dlamini of the Swaziland Nurses Association waves from the entrance
of the Swaziland Wellness Centres for Health Care Workers in downtown Man-
zini, Swaziland’s largest metropolitan area.
and MDR-TB training program for
nurses, and also provides HIV and
TB training for support workers in-
cluding kitchen, maintenance and
cleaning personnel. Swaziland also
started hepatitis B immunizations
for healthcare workers and has
been conducting pubic education
programming via radio broadcasts.
As one of the most promising
outcomes to date, the president of
the Swaziland Nurses Association
reported no cases of nurse migra-
tion during 2007.
The Centre in Lesotho
Situated in a nation with a 23
percent HIV prevalence and 35-year
life expectancy, the Lesotho Well-
ness Centre served its first client in
November 2007 and hosted a for-
mal opening in April 2008. Like the
Swaziland facility, the centre is ac-
credited as an official ART site and
receives PEPFAR funding for mobile
outreach to workers situated in out-
lying areas.
Since its opening, the centre
has served more than 2, 338 health
workers. More than 200 have
received a variety of critical training
including in post-exposure prophy-
laxis, management of TB and MDR-
TB, resilience for children below the
age of 18, grief and loss, and be-
havior change and communication
skills.
Three more in the pipeline
Work on the structure for the
Zambian Wellness Centre for Health
Care Workers was completed in
November 2008. The site will also
receive PEPFAR support for mobile
outreach to remote locations. The
centre is scheduled to open later
this year.
The Malawi Wellness Centre for
Health Care Workers is now under
construction and also set to open
towards the end of 2009.
And groundbreaking for the
Ugandan Wellness Centre for Health
Care Workers occurred in October
2008 with an opening scheduled for
the fourth quarter of 2009. PEPFAR
funding will underwrite a significant
expansion of the Uganda centre
over the next three years.
Sponsored Article
“The next day it starts all
over again”
The centres’ initial successes
reflect the high-functioning team-
work among ICN, BD, PEPFAR and
other collaborators.
And clearly, numbers and epide-
miological statistics help to inform
us about the vital need for Wellness
Centres, their initial successes, and
the tremendous promise they hold.
But some impacts cannot be
measured in numbers. The ven-
ues should also be viewed as a
place of refuge and sharing for
people engaged in work that is
physically, psychologically and
emotionally demanding.
“You accompany a patient
through all the stages from diagno-
sis to death and when they die, you
feel like you have died,” Masitsela
Mhlanga told The Lancet. “Then
the next day it starts all over again
with new patients. We all need a
place to share our experience.”
G8
Summit 2009
109
Sponsored Article Muskoka is a great destination,
even if you’re not a world leader
Muskoka gets ready to meet the world
Canada’s Muskoka counting down to 2010
Key global issues and the
opportunity for face-to-face
discussions among the leaders
of the world’s major industrial
nations are the substance of
the G8 Summit.

But after the communiqués

are complete, it is often the
striking settings of these annual
retreats, captured in the requi-
site photo calls, that remain im-
printed on public memory.

LOCATION, LOCATION
Picture the stately white halls of
Heiligendamm, the swaying palms
of Georgia’s Sea Island, Hokkaido’s
serene mountain top, or Gleneagles
rolling greens.

In 2010, yet another postcard

location will join that list of interna-
tional hot spots.

The Government of Canada has

already selected Muskoka, and its
landmark Deerhurst Resort, as the
venue for its fifth turn at hosting the
event, from June 25 to 27 next year

Situated just two hours north of

Toronto, Canada’s largest city, Prime
Minister Stephen Harper dubbed it
“a jewel in the Canadian Shield and
an ideal location.”

This 2,500 square mile region of

1,600 lakes, granite cliffs and maple
forests is no stranger to globetrot-
ting, high profile travelers either.

STEAMSHIPS, TRAINS &

AUTOMOBILES
Once the summer preserve of
wealthy industrialists, Muskoka has
drawn visitors from far away places
like New York, Pittsburg and Phila-
delphia since before Canada be-
came a country.
 Sponsored Article

First sportsmen’s clubs, fol-

lowed by families, would arrive by
train and then board steamships
that dropped them off for extended
stays at the region’s growing num-
ber of lakeside inns.

Founded by a transplanted York-

shire man intent on providing “first-
class English service” back in 1896,
Deerhurst itself has evolved from
a rustic 18-room lodge, where on
start-up a week’s accommodations
cost $3.50 per person including
meals, to a modern 400-room hotel
and conference centre, renowned
for offering the most on-site activi-
ties of any resort in Eastern Canada.

OH CANADA
A fixture of what is known na-
tionally as simply “cottage country,”
it has become a low-key icon of Ca-
nadians’ collective love for the rural
weekend retreat.

And much of Deerhurst’s 780

acres are designed with outdoor
relaxation in mind, from mountain
biking and horseback riding trails
to parasailing, paintball and, once
the snow flies, classic northern
pursuits like snowmobiling and dog-
sled rides.

Deerhurst and the region’s hun-

dreds of travel-oriented businesses
are also fortunate to be surrounded
by other touchstones of Canadian
life and culture

This is the very landscape that

fueled the country’s best known art-
ists, the Group of Seven.

The resort’s vibrant hometown

of Huntsville and a string of neigh-
bouring waterside communities
have retained an enviable balance
of main street charm and thriving
industry.

And the region encompasses

nearby Algonquin Provincial Park, an

G8
Summit 2009 Cont. p116

112
Hinckley
 Verso paper

G8
Summit 2009

114
 G8
Summit 2009

115
 Sponsored Article

accessible yet unspoiled Ontario wil-

derness playground that has inspired
Canadian success stories from prime
ministers to musicians and the found-
ers of the internationally fashionable
Roots clothing brand.

TAKING CARE OF
BUSINESS
While Muskoka continues efforts
to diversify, tourism remains a piv-
otal draw. And even play is serious
business at a property that has put
itself on the map by hosting annual
events like the world’s largest pond
hockey championships and an Iron-
man 70.3 race.

Over the past two decades,

Deerhurst has strategically expand-
ed its business beyond peak sum-
mer leisure traffic into a full-service,
40,000 square foot conference facil-
ity known for its on-site teambuilding
program, turn-key themed events
and top-level meetings.

“And the Summit is, in essence,

the biggest, most important small
executive retreat on the planet,”
noted Deerhurst General Manager
Joseph Klein.

GREENS & GARDENS

Another big draw for the corpo-
rate crowd, as well as vacationers,
is Muskoka’s emergence as a major,
top level golf destination.

Deerhurst was the forerunner,

building the highly playable, par-72
Robert Cupp and Tom McBroom
designed Deerhurst Highlands in
1990 to flow harmoniously around
the rugged and craggy landscape.

Today, it has been joined by sev-

en more prime resort courses, not to
mention the area’s many other long-
term favorites including Deerhurst’s
own second 18-hole course, Deer-
hurst Lakeside.

Deerhurst’s kitchens also put its

golf course areas to good use, for-
G8 aging for edible ingredients served in
Summit 2009 the resort’s seasonal dishes.
116
BBC

G8
Summit 2009

117

A founding member of the re-
gion’s Savour Muskoka culinary trail,
Deerhurst is North America’s only
resort that produces both maple
syrup and wildflower honey on its
own grounds as well as growing its
own supply of herbs, composting all
its green food waste and fueling the
resort’s back country Hummer tours
with biodiesel recycled from its used
frying oil.
The resort also works with about
20 different local food suppliers,
showcasing, like a dozen more area
chefs, small business partnerships
and what can be successfully pro-
duced in a relatively short northern
growing season.
It remains to be seen if the Jap-
anese Prime Minister will have an
opportunity to feast on Deerhurst’s
third shiitake mushroom harvest
grown on recycled oak logs.
But Deerhurst Resort Executive
Chef Rory Golden sees the Summit
as a singular opportunity for Canada
and every host nation to showcase
its heritage and bounty to the world.
“Wine, cheese, seafood, our
country produces so many great,
perhaps unexpected, flavours from
coast to coast,” said Golden.
“We all come from different
viewpoints and cultures.”
“But somehow when you can
get people together to share over
a dinner table the world suddenly
seems a lot smaller,” he laughed.
COUNTING THE DAYS
While the eyes of the world and
the needs of its ultimate VIP guests
come inherent with plenty of chal-
lenges, Deerhurst’s staff is steadily
getting ready.
Living in a high demand destina-
tion and in close proximity to nature
seems to encourage resourceful-
ness.
And while there will be lots of
famous names and crowds around
next June, nobody in the various ho-
tels or neighbouring towns is fazed.
Perhaps understandable when
you consider that Muskoka is al-
ready a longtime mecca for Holly-
wood celebs, NHL stars and other
notables, since back when Clark
Gable, Ernest Hemingway and Prin-
cess Juliana of the Netherlands all
summered here.
Music superstar Shania Twain
performed in Deerhurst’s popular
stage shows before getting her big
break in Nashville.
And every summer theatre and
music festivals across the region are
packed with well known acts.
Sponsored Article
“For all of us it’s a summit in
more than one sense,” said Klein.
“It takes a massive team effort
across the government, services,
our communities, the private sector
and the host venue to complete the
mountain of preparations and make
it easy for the most powerful people
on the planet to relax with each oth-
er and get down to business.”
“Day-by-day we’re looking for-
ward to collaborating with everyone,
especially our neighbors across the
region. This is a tremendous op-
portunity to showcase the Muskoka
region, Ontario and Canada around
the globe.”
“We are honored, we are proud,
we’re busy and we’re delighted.”
Before and after June 2010,
one thing seems certain, Muskoka
will continue to be a great place to
meet, or just get away from it all.
IF YOU GO
For destination information visit
discovermuskoka.ca and huntsvil-
leadventures.com
G8
Summit 2009
119
 G8
Summit 2009

120
Liat Airlines

G8
Summit 2009

121
 G8
Summit 2009

122
Sponsored Article

G8
Summit 2009

123
 G8
Summit 2009

124
 The paperless business card that talks!
Make your email come alive with an...

innovative
personal
memorable
comprehensive
effective
noticeable
consistent
polished
versatile
motivating
visible
economical
focused
efficient
complete
direct
green

... 60 second intromercial and mini web site that

links your clients to all the media you use to do business

When recipients open your email, your interactive card will appear
No special software required

Your logo

Your video intromercial,

URL links to your
personal message,
various web sites,
promotional video,
email, or/and
or product demo
social network
(up to 13 total)

Optional contact
information

For a demo and your first free card go to

www.intro60.com
 G8
Summit 2009

126
 Sponsored Article

Occasionally when cer- Brighton Equity Investments

tain individuals get together
with the same core values and Emerging as one of the most innovative
an obvious synergism exists, companies of the 21st century
companies are formed. This
is what happened in the cre-
ation of Brighton Equity Invest-
ments.
Brighton Equity Invest-
ments and it’s holding com-
pany Brighton Equity Partners
with affiliate companies in au-
tomated parking, alternative
energy, medical technologies
and hospitality will emerge
as one of the most innovated
companies of the 21st century.

Brighton Equity Investments, charge for time periods measured munity”

has purchased a 50% interest in
Triox Technologies, Inc. (TTI).Triox
is a research and development
contractor in the area of material
science and will be co-managed
by Brighton Technologies.
From the natural energy within
an atom, TTI has been able to har-
ness energy to generate electric-
ity, which will spontaneously and
continuously produce an electrical
in years.
“The coupling of material sci-
ence with the fundamental fre-
quencies of nuclear spin is a
unique insight into ways to pro-
duce electricity”
“The basic physical principle
of nuclear spin angular momen-
tum upon which the new gen-
erator technology is based is well
supported in the scientific com-
The bottom line will be this:
cell phones batteries will never
need to be re-charged. Lap-top
computers batteries will be guar-
anteed for up to six years, fire and
smoke detectors will never need a
battery change. And the list goes
on into circuit boards, medical de-
vices, digital cameras, etc.

G8 To learn more go to www.brightonequity.com and www.selfvalet.com

Summit 2009

128 1-800-936-1168
 Brighton Parking Systems
( www.selfvalet.com ) has the
potential of being the largest au-
tomated parking company in the
United States.
Brighton Parking Systems re-
duces space required for parking,
lowers constructions costs, and
provides secure and safe parking
while protecting the environment.

Brighton Technologies is also

acquiring a 50% interest in an
Alaska water bottling company.
This facility has the potential of
producing 100,000 liters of pure
glacier water per week and an ad-
ditional 1,000,000 gallons of wa-
ter to be shipped by bulk carrier
to third world countries.
The revolutionary discovery of
our Alaskan partners in bottling
will set Brighton a part from all
other water companies.
To our knowledge we’ll be the
only bottling company shipping
our water in biodegradable con-
tainers.

To learn more go to www.brightonequity.com and www.selfvalet.com G8

Summit 2009
1-800-936-1168 129
Quinney
 Hilton

G8
Summit 2009

132
Quinney
 Country profiles
Canada France Germany Japan

Leader: Leader: Leader: Leader:

Prime Minister President Chancellor Prime Minister

Stephen Harper Nicolas Sarkozy Angela Merkel Taro Aso

Geographical Geographical Geographical Geographical

information: information: information: information:

Area: 9,970,610 km2 Area: 550,000 km2 Area: 357,021 km2 Area: 377,864 km2
Population: 32.6 million Population: 63.0 million Population: 82.3 million Population: 127.7 million
(2006) (2006) (2006) (2006)
Annual population growth Annual population growth Annual population growth Annual population growth
rate: 1.0% (2006) rate: 0.5% (2006) rate: -0.2% (2006) rate: -0.003% (2006)
Capital: Ottawa Capital: Paris Capital: Berlin Capital: Tokyo
Official languages: Official language: Official language: Language:
English and French French German Japanese

Economic data: Economic data: Economic data: Economic data:

GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] GDP (nominal) 2007 [2]
- Total $1,436 billion - Total $2,593 billion - Total $ 3,321 billion - Total $ 4,382 billion
- Pro capita $43,674 - Pro capita $ 42,033 - Pro capita $ 40,400 - Pro capita $ 34,296
- % World GDP 2.6% [4] - % World GDP 4.8 [4] - % World GDP 6.2 [4] - % World GDP 8.0 [4]

GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] GDP (PPP) 2007 [3]
- Total $ 1,270 billion - Total $ 2,068 billion - Total $ 2,812 billion - Total $ 4,292 billion
- Pro capita $38,617 - Pro capita $ 33,508 - Pro capita $ 34.212 - Pro capita $ 33,596
- % World GDP 2%[4] - % World GDP 3.2 [4] - % World GDP 4.3 [4] - % World GDP 6.6 [4]

Form of government: Form of government: Form of government: Form of government:

Federal parliamentary Presidential republic Parliamentary federal Parliamentary

monarchy republic constitutional monarchy

G8s held to date: G8s held to date: G8s held to date: G8s held to date:

Kananaskis Summit (2002) Evian Summit (2003) Heiligendamm Summit Hokkaido Toyako Summit
Halifax Summit (1995) Lyon Summit (1996) (2007) (2008)
Toronto Summit (1988) Summit of the Arch (1989) Cologne Summit (1999) Kyushu-Okinawa Summit
Ottawa Summit (1981) Versailles Summit (1982) Munich Summit (1992) (2000)
Rambouillet Summit Bonn Summit (1985) Tokyo Summit (1993)
(1975) Bonn Summit (1978) Tokyo Summit (1986)
Tokyo Summit (1979)
G8
Summit 2009

134
Italy United Kingdom United States of Russia
America

Leader: Leader: Leader: Leader:

Prime Minister Prime Minister President President

Silvio Berlusconi Gordon Brown Barack Obama Dmitriy Medvedev
Geographical
Geographical Geographical Geographical information:
information: information: information:
Area: 17,075,200 km2
Area: 301,255 km2 Area: 244,820 km2 Area: 9,629,091 km2 Population: 142.8 million
Population: 58.3 million Population: 60.5 million Population: 299.4 million (2006)
(2006) (2006) (2006) Annual population growth
Annual population growth Annual population growth Annual population growth rate: -0.5% (2006)
rate: 0.3% (2006) rate: 0.5% (2006) rate: 0.9% (2006) Capital: Moscow
Capital: Rome Capital: London Capital: Washington D.C. Official language:
Official language: Official language: Official language: Russian
Italian English English
Economic data:
Economic data: Economic data: Economic data:
GDP (nominal) 2007 [2]
GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] GDP (nominal) 2007 [3] GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] - Total $ 1,290 billion
- Total $ 2,105 billion - Total $ 2,804 billion - Total $ 13,808 billion - Pro capita $ 9,074
- Pro capita $ 35,745 - Pro capita $ 46,098 - Pro capita $ 45,725 - % World GDP 2.4 [4]
- % World GDP 3.9 [4] - % World GDP 5.1 [4] - % World GDP 25.3 [4]
GDP (PPP) 2007 [3]
GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] GDP (PPP) 2007 [2] GDP (PPP) 2007[3] - Total $ 2,090 billion
- Total $ 1,787 billion - Total $ 2,168 billion - Total $ 13,808 billion - Pro capita $ 14,705
- Pro capita $ 30,365 - Pro capita $ 35,634 - Pro capita $ 45,725 - % World GDP 3.2 [4]
- % World GDP 2.8 [4] - % World GDP 3.3 [4] - % World GDP 21.3 [4]

Form of government: Form of government: Form of government: Form of government:

Parliamentary republic Parliamentary constitu- Presidential federal re- Federal Republic

tional monarchy public

G8s held to date: G8s held to date:

G8s held to date: G8s held to date:
Gleneagles Summit (2005) Sea Island, Georgia (2004)
Genoa Summit (2001) Birmingham Summit Denver, Colorado (1997) Saint Petersburg Summit
Naples Summit (1994) (1998) Houston, Texas (1990) (2006)
Venice Summit (1987) London Summit (1991) Williamsburg, Virginia
Venice Summit (1980) London Summit (1984) (1983)
London Summit (1977)

G8
Summit 2009

135
 G5 Countries
Brazil - Total $ 1,099 billion South Africa
Geographical - Pro capita $ 977
information: - % World GDP 2.0

Area: 9,596,960 km2 GDP (PPP) 2007 [3]

Population: 1,331 million - Total $ 2,989 billion
(2008) - Pro capita $ 2,659
Capital: Beijing - % World GDP 4.58
Official language: Manda-
rin Chinese Form of Government:
Leader: Leader:
Economic data: Parliamentary Federal
President, Luiz Inácio Lula Republic President, Jacob Zuma
da Silva GDP (nominal) 2007
- Total $ 3,250 billion Geographical
Geographical - Pro capita $ 2,461 Mexico information:
information: - % World GDP 6.0
Area: 1,221,037 km2
Area: 8,514,876 km2 GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] Population: 47 million
Population: 192 million - Total $ 6,991 billion (2008) [1]
(2008) - Pro capita $ 5,292 Capital: Cape Town (leg-
Capital: Brasilia - % World GDP 10.82 islative), Pretoria (admin-
Official language: istrative), Bloemfontein
Portuguese Form of Government: (judicial)
Official language: Afri-
Economic data: Socialist Republic Leader: kaans, English

GDP (nominal) 2007 President Felipe Calderón Economic data:

- Total $ 1,314 billion
- Pro capita $ 6,938
- % World GDP 2.8
GDP (PPP) 2007
- Total $ 1,836 billion
- Pro capita $ 9,695
- % World GDP 2.8
Form of Government:
Presidential Federal
Republic
China
India
Geographical GDP (nominal) 2007
information: - Total $ 283 billion
- Pro capita $ 5,906
Area: 1,972,550 km2 - % World GDP 0.5
Population: 108 million
(2008) GDP (PPP) 2007
Capital: Mexico City - Total $ 467 billion
Official language: Spanish - Pro capita $ 9,761
- % World GDP 0.71
Leader: Economic data:
Form of Government:
Head of Government: GDP (nominal) 2007
Manmohan Singh - Total $ 893 billion Constitutional Republic
- Pro capita $ 8,478
Geographical - % World GDP 1.9
information:

Area: 3,287,594 km2 GDP (PPP) 2007 [3]

Population: 1,148 million - Total $ 1,346 billion
(2008) [1] - Pro capita $ 12,774
Capital: New Delhi - % World GDP 2.07
Official language: Hindi,
English Form of Government:

Leader: Economic data: Federal Republic

President: Hu Jintao GDP (nominal) 2007

G8
Summit 2009

136
Nickel institute

G8
Summit 2009

137
 G8
Summit 2009

138
 G8
Summit 2009

139
T he 2 0 0 9 G 8 S ummit magazine for V I P ’ s delegates and diplomats