70-years-chart-illustrates-the-dominance-by-the-cfr-trilaterals-bilderbergers

QUESTIONER: First of all, I want to say that I think the piece is excellent, and I
really appreciate this conversation. I want to ask a couple of questions about this
calculus or potential calculus. Let me just start with a simple one and add a
couple to it.
If -- I'm interested if you took the sort of current line-up of players and said, all
right, everybody on this side of the line is for the concept that some sort of reform
or restructuring of these current institutions needs to take place to recognize that
the world order in 2006 is different from the one in 1946. And all those who are
either, you know, against that or reluctant to do that stand on the other side.
I'm interested -- it's sort of like shirts and skins. I'm interested to know, you
know, in addition to us and obviously China and India and presumably Brazil, et
cetera, who else is on the side that favors the reform and reorganization in the
manner that you talk about And who are the powers that are against it
A related question is, I was struck by something you said near the end of your
article when you said developing countries on the periphery of the global
economy can be expected to back Europe in resisting U.S.-led reform efforts, and
that struck me as slightly counterintuitive. And I wonder if you could just say a
little bit more about that and explain that.
And then, I guess, the third question that it leads to for me is: If you were sitting
down with the national security team of the next administration, whichever --
wherever that comes from, and you were laying this out, what do you think some
of the strategic steps that you'd be recommending to them might look like to move
in the direction of this reform and reorganization
DREZNER: Okay. Very good questions. I think I can answer your first two in one
swoop, which is who -- you know, who is on what side, the shirts and skins.
I mean, to some extent I would argue it corresponds just down to brute interest; which
countries are growing at very, very high rates and which countries are not You know,
the U.S. and China and India, and to a lesser extent Brazil and South Africa and South
Korea -- you know, countries that are foreseen as -- perceived as being on the rise,
particularly economically, would fall under that one category.
And then, on the other hand, you've got countries in the developing world that are not
growing by nearly as fast a rate, namely in Africa and Latin America. These countries
also have relatively long standing colonial ties or ex-colonial ties with members of the
European Union. So it's not shocking that you'd see, you know, a similar kind of alliance
between those two groups, which is why I argued that -- when I said countries on
periphery, I was primarily referring to Africa on this. Those states have very low growth
rates on the whole, you know, with the exception of South Africa and Botswana.