This year's G8 is presided over by Germany, where the annual summit is being held. At the summits, countries' ministers collaborate to draft common mandates on issues of global and mutual concern. The G8 agenda has significant impact on India as it deals with global (climate change) and developmental (developmental and medical aid) issues. This year, the aims of the German presidency are [1]:

• Germany aims to strengthen dialogue with African nations in addition to existing programmes designed to cut indebtedness and boost financial aid. Merkel's agenda harks back to the partnership forged in Kananaskis in 2002.
• The German government has identified four main focal points: good governance, sustainable investment, peace and security and a strengthening of the health system. The latter includes measures to fight HIV/AIDS, tuberculosis and malaria.
• An outreach programme intends to involve ministers from Africa in the G8 Summit at Heiligendamm. Five founder members of the NEPAD Group -- Egypt, Algeria, Nigeria, Senegal and South Africa -- will attend as will African Union president Ghana.
• A pledge made in Gleneagles to double development aid by 2010 will be reiterated amid claims from aid organisations that some G8 nations are lagging far behind on their commitments.
• Germany spent $10.35 billion in 2006 on developmental cooperation compared with $10.08 billion the year earlier. The United States reduced its payments in the same period by more than 20 percent to $22.74 billion.

Clearly stated, if ambitious, objectives. What is far less apparent, is the point of the anti-globalisation protesters. Search results and visits to activist web sites, did not elaborate/clarify what their 'globalisation+capitalism is evil' platform is based on.

The activists and protesters at the G8 summits are (violently) anti-capitalism, but pro-what? Communism? Socialism? Some hybrid lef-wing model that escapes my comprehension? I find it challenging to direct my attention to a movement whose aims are drowned out by the clamour of their protests against *isms; and I completely dismiss their validity when they resort to violence:

[2]

[3]

[4]

[5]