“Simple Arithmetic”

In Foreign Affairs, the magazine of the Council on Foreign Relations, Council President Richard Haass [picture] gives his version of the 21st Century’s new global order:

The increasingly nonpolar world will have mostly negative consequences for the United States -- and for much of the rest of the world as well. It will make it more difficult for Washington to lead on those occasions when it seeks to promote collective responses to regional and global challenges. One reason has to do with simple arithmetic. With so many more actors possessing meaningful power and trying to assert influence, it will be more difficult to build collective responses and make institutions work. Herding dozens is harder than herding a few.

So why not work instead with a few countries, those with 70% of the world’s people, the countries of my “Top 15“? Or the G-20, modified to include the biggest nations along with the largest economies, as outlined here? Yes, the U.S. should work with others, but no, it shouldn’t be “dozens,” and doesn’t have to be “dozens” if we move to a group of the right countries, a Security Council-sized group that truly represents most of the world’s people.