Anachronisms: G8, IMF, UN...etc.

TW: The G8 leaders are meeting today (don't know who the two dudes on the right are). One of the challenges the world is going through currently is the transition from post-World War II governance structures to new expanded structures reflecting the evolving realities of our world. There are numerous institutions almost all of which were created in the immediate aftermath of WWII, which are the cornerstones of international governance- the U.N., the IMF, and the G8 are but a few. These structures are all dominated by Western nations with the U.S. at least a first amongst equals.

Circumstances have changed world economic, demographic and military power is now far more diversified. These institutions will either change or fade into irrelevance as the excluded powers ignore or create their own institutions. The challenge, of course, is that the incumbent powers are highly reluctant to cede their prerogatives. Conservatives in the U.S. experience apoplexy at the mere hint of any ceding of U.S. pre-eminence. The French and British permanent seats on the U.N. security council are indefensible in substance,but I would not want to run on a platform of giving either seat up if I were there.

Form is important but in the long-run substance drives power. Institutions created post WWII have worked effectively in many cases but WWII ended over 60 years ago. One huge challenge will be creating institutions with more disbursed power but which retain effectiveness. Managing a group of 7 or 8 is one thing, managing a group of 20 or 25 another.

Here are some GDP stats comparing 1950 and 2008
U.S. 27.3%/26.7%
U.K. 6.5%/4.8%
France 4.1%/4.6%

China 4.5%/6.3%
Brazil 0.4%/2.3%
India 0.2%/2.0%