Our World in 2018

EUR 10
DEMOCRACY VS GREED, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE,
POLITICAL APATHY VS POPULISM, EUROPE THE DAY AFTER
OUR WORLD
Past, present, future
February 2018 | Issue 008
Leading minds reflect on the state of our societies, and examine the challenges that lie ahead.
An edition dedicated to generating ideas that will help form a new vision for our world.
A publication by
NEW EUROPE
Featuring

DEMOCRACY VS GREED, ARTIFICIAL INTELLIGENCE,
POLITICAL APATHY VS POPULISM, EUROPE THE DAY AFTER
OUR WORLD
Past, present, future
A publication by
NEW EUROPE
Featuring

OUR WORLD PDF Edition
EDITOR
Alexandros Koronakis
a@neweurope.eu
Cover title: Back to reality
Concept: Alexandros Koronakis
Illustration: Lavrentis Horaitis
Production by: JZ STRATEGIC
OUR WORLD
A publication of:
NEW EUROPE
ISSN number: 2593 - 4163
Published by Brussels News Agency SPRL
Av. de Tervuren/Tervurenlaan 96,
1040 Brussels, Belgium
Tel. +32 2 5390039
Fax +32 2 5390339
info@neweurope.eu
© 2018 New Europe all rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced, stored in a retrieval system, or transmitted in any form by any
means, electronic or otherwise, without express permission. The Publishers accept no liability for third party views published, nor damage caused by
reading, viewing or using our content. All information is correct at the time of going to print, we accept no liabilities for consequent changes.

OUR WORLD
Democracy Challenged
By Serge Schmemann
Looking across the globe, it might appear at times that violence, chaos and fear
are getting the upper hand over order, democracy and reason.
The world has always been a messy place, of course, and it may be that the
internet and social media give the worst of times more prominence than the best.
But there are real reasons for anxiety. Traditional democratic ideals and
institutions are under attack. Some leaders in Eastern Europe espouse “illiberal”
democracy, which treads on traditional human rights. Authoritarian leaders from
RKNK
in his pursuit of a doomsday weapon. And the United States under Donald Trump
becomes more bitterly divided and unpredictable.
Historically, however, there has also been pushback, a rejection of oppression
and despotism. It brought about the end of apartheid, the fall of the Berlin Wall,
the Black Lives Matter movement in the United States, the acceptance of more
than a million refugees in Germany.
C
.T
a voice in how they’re governed, and to allow them to change leaders peacefully.
But it can never be taken for granted. It is constantly confronting challenges and
threats and adapting to changing times.
Serge
Schmemann
Serge Schmemann
is a member of the
editorial board of
The New York Times.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Serge Schmemann. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
5

Some people’s
headache.
NEW EUROPE

CONTENTS
FEBRUARY 2018
8 OUR WORLD
5 Democracy Challenged By Serge Schmemann
12 Evolution in democracy and our democratic societies
By Alexandros Koronakis
8 EUROPE’S FUTURE
16 Make Europe Popular again By Antonio López-Istúriz White
18 Ireland: Doubling down on EU membership By Helen McEntee
20 Reliable Partners in a Changing World Scenario
By Luis Videgaray Caso
22 Europe’s internal and external challenges By Mikuláš Dzurinda
24 The Future of Transatlantic Relations By David McAllister
26 Business as usual, or will we adapt to the rapidly changing world?
By Ingeborg Grässle
28 “America First” Wakes Up the EU By Elmar Brok
30 A conversation with Helmut Kohl By Theodore Roussopoulos
32 Armenia – A Crossroads between Europe and Asia
By Gagik Tsarukyan
34 AEAIG
K
36 It’s Europe’s time to provide the answers By Andrianos Giannou
38 E.NBy Maroun Labaki
40 Unwelcome Europe By Markella Papadouli
42 A battle of campaigners By Shane Fitzgerald
44 Brexit and the microcosm of Europe By Dr. Foteini Kalantzi

INDEX
8 OUR ECONOMIES
48 How Inequality Works By Angus Deaton
50 The Global Economy’s Risky Recovery By Joseph E. Stiglitz
52 The Free Market for the Next Generation By Eli Hazan
54 Saving the Environment and the Economy
By Edmund S. Phelps
56 Short-Term Gains, Long-Term Hazards By Maurice Obstfeld
58 Rediscovering Public Wealth Creation By Mariana Mazzucato
60 Can Economic Policy Solve Economic Problems?
By Jason Furman
8 SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
66 Safeguarding Elections in the Digital Age By Jimmy Carter
68 Contemporary challenges and opportunities for our societies
By Carlos Moedas
70 Tackling ‘digital’ at the state level in a post-DSM world?
By Krzysztof Szubert
72 How IT Threatens Democracy KA.A
74 The Internet of Things – Delivering a Connected World
By Karim Lesina
76 A Big Data Dystopia By Chelsea Manning
78 Creating the Policy Environment for AI Innovation
and Citizens’ Trust By Naveen Rao
8 2018 | OUR WORLD

80 Making Social Media Safe for Democracy
By Samantha Bradshaw and Philip N. Howard
82 The End of Twitter Diplomacy? By Rob Worthington
84 The Social Media Threat to Society and Security
By George Soros
86 The Self-Regulation Mistake By David Ibsen
88 Is this the end of the era of science? By Dr Rick Phillips
8 ENERGY & CLIMATE
92 The Energy Union in 2018: the year of engagement
94 A Year of Renewed Climate Commitments By Laurence Tubiana
96 A Truly Global Response to Climate Change
By Akinwumi Adesina, Suma Chakrabarti, Bandar M. H. Hajjar, Werner
Hoyer, Kundapur Vaman Kamath, Jim Yong Kim, Jin Liqun, Luis Alberto
Moreno, and Takehiko Nakao
98 Russian gas in Europe: new highs and political intrigues
By Konstantin Simonov
101 Gazing into the Energy Crystal Ball for 2018
By Kostis Geropoulos
8 OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
106 A More Perfect Union By Joe Biden
108 Agile Governance for a Fractured World By Klaus Schwab
110 Revolutionary Centrism By Tony Blair
112 Reversing a Democratic Decay By Marina Silva
114 What Makes Propaganda More Dangerous Today?
By Samantha Power
116 A Democracy That’s Drowning in Cash By Celestine Bohlen
118 Has dealing with Pride and Prejudice become a challenge
for media? By Lieven Taillie

INDEX
120 Will the Center Hold? By Lawrence Summers
122 Stealing the Populists’ Clothes R
124 The Venal Roots of Political Turmoil By Janine R. Wedel
126 The New Democratic Wave By Kishore Mahbubani
128 Why We Need Political Parties By Moisés Naím
130 Roadmap to a New Convergence By Francisco Jaime Quesado
131 The time beckons By Sri Sri Ravi Shankar
8 GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
134 A New Balance for the Global Age By Gordon Brown
138 East Asia’s Rising Star By Sri Mulyani Indrawati
140 Asia’s Cities Against North Korea By Yuriko Koike
142 The Trumping of Asia By Kevin Rudd
144 Xi Unbound? By Minxin Pei
146 How to Break Korea’s Barriers to Social Mobility
By Ha-Joon Chang
148 Latin America’s Annus Mediocris By Jorge Castañeda
150 Venezuela’s Struggle for Freedom By María Corina Machado
152 We Dream of Living in a Free Venezuela By Lilian Tintori
154 The Only True Strategy for Russia By Mikhail Khodorkovsky
156 In Turkey, Democracy Is in Peril By Elif Shafak
158 Africa, the Business Deal of the Century By Célestin Monga
160 In Syria, the World’s Democracies Failed Us By Fadi Azzam
10 2018 | OUR WORLD

OUR WORLD
Evolution in democracy and
our democratic societies
By Alexandros Koronakis
Biological evolution takes place over tens
of millions of years. Characteristics
passed down slowly over successive
generations combined with the Darwinian
of what at school we were taught as ‘the food
chain’, has led to humanity as we know it
today.
The same can be said for the institution of
democracy since its inception, and its various
localised implementations of representation
politics. The state of local (seen here as
national) democracies is to evolve over time.
Certainly, there can be short-lived abnormal
mutations, but in the grand scheme of things
the direction will be a forward, positive trend.
Societies move at a different pace than
evolution in biological systems, because
actions of single humans and groups can spur
social change and have more of an immediate
impact. Many will think of Rosa Parks, others
will conjure Emily Davison, and if we’re honest
even Jon Snow will pop into some people’s
minds. But while we seem to ascribe ‘change’
to single individuals, it is many more who
came together in each case to push society
that real change is brought about.
Electoral systems, democracy, and
nationalism
Electoral systems come into question, only
when societies are extremely divided. The
democratic structures, which allowed Donald
Trump to win the election in 2016 while not
winning the popular vote, would not have
been called into question if the figures
aligned. Yet if this is a problem of democratic
Alexandros
Koronakis
Alexandros
Koronakis is the
Editor of ‘Our World’,
and the Editor
of New Europe
newspaper.
election, rather than be left to create another
problem in the future.
Europe faces its own question of democratic
legitimacy – over the person who will run the
closest thing the EU has to a government: The
European Commission.
It has been quite a rollercoaster since the
turn of the millennium. The European Union
started the century with explosive growth (in
membership), economic prosperity for all, and
taking centre-stage in the global political arena.
Less than 20 years later, the EU is shrinking in
what was looking once like a global powerplayer
has become a fragmented ghost of past
glories. Nationalism has taken hold once again,
and European Political parties risk becoming
pawns of local politicians.
The EU is indeed edging closer and closer
to a directly elected President, but the biggest
obstacle to achieving ‘more democracy’, is
the people whose power is threatened by a
more democratic Europe – national politicians.
C
had more political power in Europe than
the Chancellor of Germany? Merkel would
not be likely to accept that, unless it was
her taking the reigns herself. This is why the
idea of merging the position of President of
the European Commission and President of
the European Council is unlikely. The excuse
most likely is that it will be too much power to
give to someone who is not directly elected
by citizens. The reality is that it will be more
power than national leaders would pass up
the chain.
Europe is indeed still in search of its own
paradigm to use as a lever. To push past a
tipping point, momentum will have to come
from the local, and European level. The
heroes at the centre of this story, are easy
12 2018 | OUR WORLD

OUR WORLD
PHOTO CREDIT: NEW EUROPE
The EU is indeed
edging closer and
closer to a directly
elected President, but
the biggest obstacle
to achieving ‘more
democracy’, is the
people whose power is
threatened by a more
democratic Europe –
national politicians.
OUR WORLD | 2018
to point out at the national level:
Emmanuel Macron, seen as Europe’s
new visionary, and Angela Merkel,
weakened as she may be, will build
momentum ‘at home’. And at the
capital of the European Union, the stars
have aligned for Martin Selmayr, who
is the new Secretary-General at the
European Commission. Selmayr has,
and will outlast many politicians’ terms.
His biggest enemy is a change-averse
system that have devoured many
before him. Whether one agrees with
his personal vision, his dedication to
progress for the European Union can
be one of the few EU-centric powers
.
with Jean-Claude Juncker, with whom
he will go hand-in-hand until the EU
elections. Europe can only hope that
the next President of the Commission
and the institution’s seventh Secretary-
General will have compatible, if not
joint, visions for the future of Europe.
The federal problem.
When it comes to making Europe
much more like the USA, a federation
of States, what is really the problem?
The first problem is nationalism;
the politicians who take advantage of
human nature. Human beings in one
country want to be better off than
human beings in another country, one
at the expense of the other. The same
of course could apply within a country,
with competition between cities, but
we tend to forget that.
More Europe and an ever-closer
Union, is the natural state of evolution
for the EU. It is only a matter of time.
13

OUR WORLD
Time necessary for national
politicians to come together and agree
on a system that will equally divide
voting rights and power in such a
federation. Time necessary for them to
concede their power and hand it over
to a new structure. Time necessary
for it to mature in peoples’ minds that
while history, language, colour, culture,
are inconsequential in front of the
one grand truth that we are all human
beings with a shared need for peace,
prosperity, fairness, and justice.
When putting forward this universal
argument, I’m often asked “Why stop
with the EU?” In the long term, we
won’t. But the European Union is the
best place to start, and one of the most
challenging places to succeed.
Natural selection vs
evolutionary stupidity
Moving on to a very different kind
of problem. One major flaw with
representative democracy today,
is that it allows our politicians to be
insulated from those they govern. In so
far as they do not become involved in
a catastrophic scandal, they and their
consequences of their own actions.
In the USA, the long list of politicians
who have not stopped to blink at the
unending gun violence in the country,
do not feel that such incidents could
ever be a problem for them. Some
will or will not keep guns in the house,
others will collect them, but they will
usually not live in neighbourhoods
where their votes will result in them
being hurt as a consequence.
In the name of preserving the
second amendment to the constitution,
and propping up an entire industry,
America has been engaged in a selfinvolved
arms race to the bottom. Not
the international arms race to possess
as many nukes as possible, but a race
to sell as many guns as possible – too
In the name of
preserving the
second amendment
to the constitution,
and propping up
an entire industry,
America has been
engaged in a selfinvolved
arms race
to the bottom.
many of which end up with troubled
youths. In mid February, there was
another school shooting in the USA.
17 killed by an army of one. The killer,
had purchased at least ten guns in
the past year or so – and it appears
he had done so with great ease.
You’ve all seen the graphs – there are
more guns per capita in the USA than
anywhere else in the world. Firearms in
A
Indeed, personal convenience, and
meant it remains possible for nearly
anyone to buy a gun in America.
On the night of February 26, 2012,
some might remember another
tragedy that occurred. A man whose
name is not worth remembering, was
driving into his gated community –
concealed gun strapped to his side. This
former altar body, had grown up with
some sort of cop fantasy, and when
he saw a young black man walking on
‘his streets’ he began to follow him –
even calling 911 to say he was doing
so. One thing led to another, and the
young black man – Trayvon Martin -
whose name we should all remember
– was shot dead. The killer, said he
had feared for his life. The victim, was
armed with a pack of skittles and a
can of ice tea. The shooter was fully
acquitted of all charges in court. The
day of the acquittal, #BlackLivesMatter
.
clashed that day; gun control and
racism. The videos of police brutality,
and the many questionable deaths of
black people – put bluntly, in situations
where white people would still be alive
- managed to steer the conversation
from guns, to the grater evil of racism.
Societies’ have evolved after
reaching organic tipping points;
historically resulting in revolutions
or wars. Racism has – at least in the
legal sense, long been left behind.
Society has not always understood,
implemented or taken ownership of
these changes, but the footprints were
made in the sand.
But what about guns? The
ridiculous tradition of the 21st century
gun hoarding in the USA cannot
remain. Our world is better than
that. It’s time for American citizens to
push past the power of the industry
and the millions of dollars that
the NRA are funnelling to political
campaigns directly or indirectly.
It’s time Americans set aside even
their own convictions, in the name
of logic. It’s time to take the leap
towards evolution, and ban personal
gun ownership in the US without a
valid reason for a permit, and a strict
procedure on being considered for
such a permit. I can’t help but feel we
are getting there; coming closer to
that tipping point on the issue of guns.
We will finally see more and more
politicians coming out against the
constitutional right that Americans
hold so dear. And even though I am
not American, I say ‘we’ because any
such loss of life, is not a loss for the
A.
So here’s to pushing our societies
past those tipping points, bringing
about change without bloodshed,
having a revolution of principles, to the
.
14 2018 | OUR WORLD

THE FUTURE’S
SUpERpOWER
IS INSIGHT
See how real-time analytics are
the superpower your business needs.
intel.com/analytics
WE KNOW THE FUTURE
BECAUSE WE’RE BUILDING IT
© Intel Corporation. Intel, Intel Core, and the Intel logo are trademarks of the Intel Corporation or its
subsidiaries in the U.S. and/or other countries. Printed in USA 0117/DOR/PDF Please Recycle

EUROPE’S
FUTURE
CHARLES CLEGG

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Make Europe
Popular again
By Antonio López-Istúriz White
A
vote and fake news. These are two
common traits shared by Brexit, the
US and French elections and the
fake referendum in Catalonia. A vote is the
highest expression of democracy while fake
news is its lowest.
And democracy cannot stand without
well-informed citizens. A number of
elections will take place in 2018 – in Cyprus,
Finland, Italy, Hungary, Slovenia, Sweden,
Ireland, Latvia and Luxembourg, among
others. Unfortunately, the risk is high that
fake news will overshadow them.
Fight the fake with facts
Online platforms and social media have
provided people with new ways to connect,
engage, debate and spread information
at a level never seen before. At the same
time, the current scale of disinformation is
unprecedented.
We need to reconstruct and empower
traditional media by supporting them in
the new digital reality. More than ever, our
societies need professional, independent,
ethical, investigative and fact-based
journalism where freedom of speech and
information uphold our plurality of views.
Social media companies also need to take
their responsibility as platforms that can
spread fake news.
On the side of the user, the citizens need
to be able to detect fake news. This can start
at school where children can be made aware
of fake news and develop critical-thinking
skills. That applies to adults too, who must
be alert and vigilant towards sources of
information and verify their reliability. Fake
news must be replaced by fact news.
Antonio
López-Istúriz
White
Antonio López-Istúriz
White is Secretary-
General of the
European People’s
Party and Member
of the European
Parliament of the
Spanish centre-right
People’s Party (Partido
Popular). He is also
Secretary Treasurer of
the Wilfried Martens
Centre for European
Studies and the
Secretary-General of
the Centrist Democrat
International.
Fight the fake with acts
Populists use fake news as a weapon
to undermine democracy. Propaganda,
misinformation campaigns, support for
anti-European political forces are all part
of their arsenal to spread lies and create
chaos, especially in electoral times. The
European Union (EU) has never been a more
successful scapegoat.
.R
the myths. Concrete proposals to uncover
specious words. Real change instead of
false tomorrows. The EU must act where it
.C
security, migration, defence, the economy,
globalisation, digitalisation or climate
change call for European leadership and
common solutions. Each euro must be
spent to improve the lives of the European
citizens.
On this, the European Union is already
delivering results, such as the end of
roaming fees in the EU, its commitment to
common defence, the introduction of the
European Pillar of Social Rights and the
youth employment initiative.
The European Union is also a beacon of
values in the world. Without the EU, which
values would we follow? Those represented
by China? By Russia? To protect our way of
life and our standards, the EU must continue
to be a global player. Europe is a continent
of pioneers and discoveries. To keep this
position in the world, talents must stay in
Europe and be attracted by it.
As the European economy is growing, it is
time to plan for tomorrow and prepare for
.
be in people, especially the youth. We need
to train people to acquire skills due to the
pace of digitalisation and the ageing work
force. Among those who need to gain new
skills, politicians are not exempt.
Fight the fake with heart
Populists moved from empty promises to
false words: they have disrupted the way
of communicating in politics. And they
have managed to do so because European
citizens feel distant from the European
project. There is a lesson in there for
16 2018 | OUR WORLD

EUROPE’S FUTURE
The Brussels Town Hall on the
Grand Place is illuminated in
the color of the European flag in
Brussels, Belgium, 31 January 2018,
during the launch of the European
Year of Cultural Heritage 2018.
EPA-EFE/STEPHANIE LECOCQ
all of us. In the three letters that
distinguish popular from populism,
fits a whole conception of politics.
Popular means caring about the
people, populist means playing on
people’s fears. Of course, the word
popular is very dear to the European
People’s Party. The people are at the
heart of our action.
Bruxelles, ma belle, these are
words that go together well.
It is not a song you will hear
often. Well, it is time to change the
tune about the European Union.
We need to bring the European
Union closer to the European citizens.
It starts by explaining the benefits
that this incredible political project
brings to the Europeans. The people
must feel European and proud of our
OUR WORLD | 2018
common history.
It is time to reconnect. We have a
project for the European citizens, we
need to tell it and we need explain
what we have achieved. With facts
and with words. The EPP will elect
its Spitzenkandidat next November
in Helsinki for the European elections
in 2019, putting a face and a voice
on our ideas. The European citizens
must be involved at an early stage in
the choices for their future.
This is why we asked them to share
with us their concerns, proposals,
E
on the dearcitizen.eu platform. It is a
place to have an informed discussion
and not spread lies. Making Europe
popular again will not make us very
popular. But if it wins the hearts
of the Europeans and brings them
More than ever,
our societies need
professional,
independent, ethical,
investigative and
fact-based journalism
where freedom
of speech and
information uphold
our plurality of views.
back to the European project, there
might be a new song in the making.
Songs can spur change and true
words protect democracy.
17

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Ireland:
Doubling
down on EU
membership
By Helen McEntee
Britain deciding to leave the European
Union has been sobering for many in
the EU. It is clear that when you have
one of the largest members of the EU voting
to leave something is not right. Even if the
UK had voted to remain by a small margin;
it should still have acted as a wake-up call
to the EU. For the EU to succeed it must
be connected with and stay relevant to its
citizens. There is recognition now that the EU
is not perfect, nor will it ever be, but there is
a need for a real debate about its future and
how it can best succeed. We can not allow
a project that has brought stability, peace,
to simply fail and slowly fall apart after all of
the success that it has had. It remains the
best vehicle to deal with the many issues
facing us in the coming years.
Often when looking forward it is important
to look back. Take Ireland, when we joined
the EU in 1973, we had a population of less
than 3 million. We were inward looking,
generally unindustrialised and mostly
agricultural. Ireland was poor and was most
E
completely dependent on the UK for trade.
Our membership of the EU has helped
to transform Ireland; we are now one of
the most prosperous countries in the EU,
we have one of the youngest populations,
a population that is highly educated; we
have huge pharma, financial services
and technological industries that employ
thousands of people around the country.
Helen
McEntee
Helen McEntee
TD is Minister for
EA
of Ireland. She
was previously
appointed Minister
of State for Mental
Health and Older
People in May 2016.
She was elected
to Dáil Éireann
in March 2013.
Deputy McEntee
was appointed
by An Taoiseach
Enda Kenny to
the Oireachtas
Committee on
Transport and
Communications.
She is also a
member of
the Oireachtas
Committee on
Environment,
Culture and the
Gaeltacht.
…the EU has done
so much more
for Ireland than
just economic
prosperity. It has
helped to bring
peace to the
island of Ireland.
Our agricultural industry has grown and
our trading relationships have completely
transformed. By having access to a free
market of 500 million people it has allowed
Ireland establish trading relationships with
not only the EU but globally as well. Our
economic dependence on the UK, while
remaining important, has lessened as we’ve
become more embedded within the EU.
But the EU has done so much more
for Ireland than just economic prosperity.
It has helped to bring peace to the island
of Ireland. In the 1960’s and 1970’s almost
3,000 people lost their lives in the troubles.
There was a deep mistrust and little or no
on the island of Ireland. The EU helped to
bring about dialogue and this culminated
in the Good Friday Agreement of 1998. This
is the framework for peace on our island
and it is underpinned by our membership
of the EU. This peace was hard fought and
the fragile nature of that peace should not
be underestimated by anyone.
Ireland is a member of the EU and a
member of the Eurozone. There has been
in some quarters comment that we should
think about following Britain out of the EU;
I reject that entirely. While I respect the
decision of the British people I think that we
have seen and will see the errors of Brexit. I
believe that Ireland should double down on
18 2018 | OUR WORLD

its membership of the EU and play
an even stronger role in shaping the
future of Europe.
That is why I have started a
national civic dialogue about the
Future of Europe in Ireland. We
want as many people as possible
throughout the country to have
their say on Europe, good, bad or
.
We need to hear what Europe is
doing well and where it can improve.
Ireland can lead on many of the social
issues, we can lead on areas that will
provide further opportunities for our
young people like the completion of
the digital single market, the single
market, the banking union, and we
can play an active role in areas such
as security and defence and climate
change.
We want to hear the views
of our citizens, who are
generally positive about
the EU. And while we’re probably one
of the most pro-European countries
in the EU it does not mean we should
be complacent. This is an opportune
time to try and solidify support for
the EU and its institutions and it is a
chance to develop an understanding
of what the EU does and how it
works.
I am looking forward to continuing
this extremely important dialogue
and feeding the views of the public
into the government agenda. We will
EUROPE’S FUTURE
be concluding the first part of our
citizens’ dialogue on the 9th May
next year on Europe Day.
Europe has given Ireland so
much over the last 45 years of our
membership. We no longer feel like
an outlier in Europe, we are a vibrant,
modern and open nation and we
must ensure other countries are
given the opportunity to develop and
prosper too.
The debate around the future
of Europe from an Irish context is
as important as Brexit; however,
the future of Europe is not Brexit,
it will become what our citizens
determine. That is why engagement
and dialogue is crucial for the Future
of Europe.
TIE. © European Union , 2017 / Source: EC - Audiovisual Service / Photo: Mauro Bottaro
OUR WORLD | 2018
19

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Reliable Partners
in a Changing
World Scenario
By Luis Videgaray Caso
In January 2013, Mexico and the European
Union (EU) decided to update the Economic
Partnership, Political Cooperation and
Cooperation Agreement (Global Agreement),
signed in 1997 and entered into force in 2000.
The geopolitical scenario had gone through
substantial changes since the signing of the
instrument.
Therefore, both Parties established that
the existing Agreement needed to adapt
to the new realities of the international
scenario, trade and investment, as well as
international cooperation.
Originally, Mexico and the EU decided to
explore possibilities for a comprehensive
GA
its trade pillar, given the changes the
international trading system had gone
through since the Agreement’s signing.
New rules had been implemented and new
disciplines, such as e-commerce, had been
introduced. Likewise, the EU had acquired
new competences on economic issues that
catalyzed new opportunities for both Parties.
Moreover, starting a revision process
provided possibilities for assessing, not
only the Global Agreement section, but the
bilateral relation as a whole, which by 2013
included the Strategic Partnership and its
E
to develop the partnership.
Thus, Mexico and the EU began to
perform a thorough evaluation of their
bilateral relation and its current tools, which
would be utilized to create a new, modern
instrument that could rule our relations for
Luis Videgaray
Caso
Luis Videgaray
Caso is the Foreign
Minister of Mexico.
He has a career
of more than 25
years in public
administration.
Among the various
positions he has
held, the following
stand out: adviser
to the Secretaries of
Energy and Finance
and Public Credit;
Director of Public
Finance at Protego,
SA; Secretary of
Finance of the
State of Mexico;
as well as Federal
Deputy in the LXI
Legislature, during
which he served
as Chairman of
the Budget and
Public Account
Committee.
The EU is an actor
suited for contributing
to Mexico’s internal
and external goals:
an ally in the defense
of the rule of law,
the consolidation of
democracy and the
protection of human
rights.
the next 20-25 years.
Mexico and the EU had experienced
radical transformations in recent years. As
a result, both Parties identified together
three new fundamental issues that needed
to be addressed during the revision of the
Agreement and the bilateral relation. First,
Mexico had strengthened its democracy and
in economic and social terms. Second,
European integration had progressed,
deepening the ties between member states,
increasing EU membership from 15 to 28 in
just a few years.
Third, the international scenario had
experienced both geopolitical alterations,
as well as the emergence of new actors.
Together, these factors increased the
international weight of Mexico and the EU,
making them important actors in the global
scenario and stronger partners for each
other.
Both Parties decided to base the
negotiations on goals of common
prosperity, the projection of Mexico and
the EU as strategic partners assuming
global responsibilities, and the promotion of
increasing economic and social exchanges
20 2018 | OUR WORLD

EUROPE’S FUTURE
General view of
at half mast in
the Constitution
Square to
commemorate
the 32 anniversary
of the earthquake
that occurred on
19 September
1985, in Mexico
City, Mexico, 19
September 2017.
EPA-EFE/JOSE MENDEZ
encompassed by the relationship.
It is worth highlighting that Mexico
and the EU share a common interest
for strengthening their cooperation
in subjects of global importance;
these include combating climate
change, implementing the 2030
Agenda, and fighting poverty and
social exclusion, among many others.
Additionally, since Mexico is today a
recipient and a donor of international
cooperation funds,both Parties are in
triangular cooperation projects.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Today, as the negotiations
come close to their
conclusion, this innovative
Agreement incorporates the Strategic
Partnership and its Joint Executive
Plan into a single instrument, which
will become a reference in terms of
EU comprehensive deals with third
countries.
Our aim is that the Agreement
represents the newest generation
of these deals, with the most up-todate
mechanisms to further develop
.
Recent events in the international
scenario have detonated a certain
sense of urgency.
These changes bring awareness of
the importance of working together
to defend international institutions,
protect the rules-based multilateral
trading system represented by
the WTO, and fight protectionism
in benefit of free and open trade,
the engine behind economic
development for Mexico and the EU
in recent years.
The new Agreement between
Mexico and the EU will have a
substantial economic impact: it will
provide access to the European
market for high value-added Mexican
exports, translating into more jobs for
Mexicans. Today, the EU represents
only 8% of our foreign trade, a
percentage that Mexico would like
to increase. In comparison, in terms
of investment, the EU is the second
investor in Mexico worldwide, behind
the United States.
In addition to the Agreement’s
economic benefits, its political
importance cannot be disregarded;
it adds value to high-level political
dialogue and interactions with
legislators and civil society. The
Agreement will not only reinvigorate
our existing political relations, but
it will also send a strong message
to the rest of the world in favor of
dialogue, cooperation, free trade, and
multilateralism.
The EU is an actor suited for
contributing to Mexico’s internal and
external goals: an ally in the defense
of the rule of law, the consolidation
of democracy and the protection of
human rights.
The EU is also a key actor for
diversifying our ties by bringing new
trade opportunities and securing
enormous investment potential.
Moreover, the EU is a strategic
partner for Mexico’s work as a
relevant international player, capable
of assuming global responsibilities.
21

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Early morning view of European commission headquarters building, known as the ‘Berlaymont’ in Brussels, Belgium, January 2018.
Europe’s internal and
external challenges
By Mikuláš Dzurinda
EPA-EFE/OLIVIER HOSLET
...The EU is a project
based on common
values: Values such
as free political space
in which everyone
can aspire to hold a
degree of political
power, and in which
an important role
is played by civil
society, independent
courts, minorities and
independent media.
The 2018 holds important
challenges for the European
Union, concerning both its
internal functioning and its external
.
them will be to continue increasing
the EU’s competitiveness and defence
capabilities, as well as and its unity
and capacity for action. In order to
make 2018 a success in this strategic
endeavour, we have to address not
only day-to-day practical issues, but
also various enduring dilemmas.
Among the concrete problems I
have in mind are those related to
the domestic developments in some
of our member states, mainly Poland
and Hungary. The dispute between
Slovenia and Croatia over the Gulf of
Piran as a gateway to international
waters for Slovenia also needs
a resolution because it seriously
jeopardises the EU’s unity and
internal cohesion. Unity and capacity
for action are of outmost importance,
especially now at the time of the
UK’s departure from the EU, but also
in light of the unstable situation in
our neighbourhood. Moreover, the
EU is a project based on common
values: Values such as free political
space in which everyone can aspire
to hold a degree of political power,
and in which an important role is
played by civil society, independent
courts, minorities and independent
media. These values, more than
anything else, make up our strength
22 2018 | OUR WORLD

in confronting threats and challenges in the
long term. A major challenge for the European
community is managing the departure of the UK
from the EU. This departure must be managed
in a way that does not weaken the unity of the
EU, and at the same time, preserves a strong
bond between the UK and the remaining 27.
Future-oriented onward-looking partnership
and an alliance spirit should take precedence
over perceived short-term gains on either side.
The year 2018 will undoubtedly be crucial not
K
E
mutual relationship. Of no lesser importance in
my view is the development of relations with
the United States under President Trump. The
transatlantic alliance remains the backbone of
European security during this period which is
otherwise characterised by a shift in US foreign
and security priorities. The emerging European
Defence Union must not be a competitor, nor a
duplication of transatlantic defence capabilities,
nor should it simply replace NATO in its basic
.E
defence capabilities should serve to reinforce
the Transatlantic Alliance, by enhancing the
West’s capability to respond to current and
future security challenges early, rapidly and
.T
East and Africa, as well as the increased foreign
policy and military engagement of Russia
E
in this area.
Regarding the dilemmas, the one that will
keep us most occupied is, in my view, the
dilemma between deeper centralisation
and the subsidiarity principle. The need for
more cooperation between member states
and more community competence in some
areas is unquestionable but, at the same
time, there is also a need to maintain a certain
degree of internal competitiveness – while
still strengthening cohesion and convergence
within the EU... Closely related to this dilemma
is the relationship between the already existing
and the envisaged enhanced cooperation
between some member states in certain areas,
E
as a whole. This refers to strategic areas such
as a Defence Union, common asylum policy,
OUR WORLD | 2018
Mikuláš
Dzurinda
Mikuláš Dzurinda
is President of the
Wilfried Martin
Centre for European
Studies since
December 2013.
He is the former
prime minister of
Slovakia (1998-
2006) and has held
various positions
in government
politics in 1990.
Once he became
prime minister and
formed a coalition
government in 1998,
Dzurinda introduced
far-reaching
reforms which have
enabled Slovakia to
begin the process
of joining the EU
and NATO. After
being re-elected in
2002, Dzurinda led
Slovakia to become
a member of the EU
and NATO in 2004,
a process which he
actively took part in
from the beginning.
EUROPE’S FUTURE
and further deepening of cooperation within
the Eurozone.
We will continue our search for the right
answers to civilizational challenges, and
will endeavour to devise a value-based and
sustainable solution to the consequences
of migration. In parallel to this challenge, we
must strive to strengthen the stability in our
neighbourhood, particularly in Ukraine, the
Western Balkans and the Levant region of
the Middle East. A special, complex, longterm
and extremely important challenge for
E
Africa. This is a topic that is also related to the
process of further enlargement of the EU. It
would be desirable for this process to gain new
momentum in 2018. The prospect of accession
should serve as a stimulus for both the
candidate and the aspiring countries in bringing
them to implement deep political and economic
reforms leading to their modernisation and, at
the same time, to increase their compatibility
and competitiveness vis-a-vis the EU.
Understandably, the expert community and
general public are eagerly awaiting the postelection
arrangements in Germany. These
will be extremely important for the further
development of the EU and for an effective
response to the above-mentioned challenges.
An important task lies ahead – not only for
Spain – to resolve the situation in Catalonia
in a manner acceptable to both the Spanish
national government and the Catalan regional
government. Particular attention will be paid
to several upcoming elections, particularly the
parliamentary election in Italy, which will be
important for both the unity of the EU and for
the stability and further development of the
Eurozone. Thus, as I see it, this year will be no
less interesting than last year. Looking ahead,
I feel both hope and responsibility, because
we all should contribute to the continuation,
consolidation and enlargement of the European
project. We at the Martens Centre, of which I am
the President, have given much thought to the
further functioning of the EU for some time. I
am glad that this year we will be able to present
our initial strategic ideas on the functioning of
E
the Eurozone, migration and asylum policies,
E.
23

EUROPE’S FUTURE
US President Donald J. Trump (R) and Chancellor of Germany Angela Merkel (L) hold a joint press conference in the East
Room of the White House in Washington, DC, USA, 17 March 2017.
EPA
The Future of Transatlantic Relations
By David McAllister
One year into Donald Trump’s
presidency, the question
of how US foreign policy
will further develop remains
unanswered. His “America First”
slogan, his comments on US alliance
commitments, his suspicion of free
trade, the withdrawal from the
Paris Climate Agreement or the
constant rhetorical questioning of the
commonly negotiated Iran Nuclear
Deal have caused some tension in
the transatlantic relationship.
Nevertheless, the transatlantic
partners continue to share vital
interests and face common threats.
These threats, whether they are
security-related, economic or other,
are so numerous and diverse that
neither the United States nor the
European Union can adequately
address them alone. Thus, we have
to continue building upon the strong
foundation of our common values
to strengthen our relationship in
.
The EU and the US are each other’s
most important partners. A strong
transatlantic bond is crucial for us
and for the world.
Economic growth
The European Union and the United
States enjoy the most integrated
economic relationship in the world.
Total US investment in the EU is three
times higher than in all of Asia. EU
investment in the US is eight times
24 2018 | OUR WORLD

the amount of EU investment in India and
China together. Our economic ties are
an important driver for the transatlantic
relationship, contributing to growth and jobs.
T
global economy as a whole. The EU and the US
economies account together for about half
of world GDP and for nearly a third of global
.
we should explore ways to further deepen
EU-US trade and investment relations,
taking into account the common ground
reached during the TTIP negotiations. Our
rules-based, open, and non-discriminatory
multilateral trading system plays a crucial
role in promoting global economic growth
and sustainable development. If we want to
ensure a better future for our citizens, we
should deliver the necessary conditions to
strengthen economic growth and create
jobs.
The transatlantic partnership
in security
Unfortunately, 2018 will most likely not be
more tranquil than previous years. We can
expect a wide range of common threats and
challenges. Both sides of the Atlantic should
remain fully committed to our security and
strategic partnership. The US and the EU
are at their greatest when our partnership
is strong. Most of the threats we face, such as
The EU and the US
are each other’s
most important
partners. A strong
transatlantic bond
is crucial for us and
the world.
OUR WORLD | 2018
David
McAllister
David McAllister
is a Member of
the European
Parliament and
a Vice President
of the European
People’s Party
(EPP). He is Chair
of the Committee
FA
in the European
Parliament.
McAllister was born
in Berlin in 1971.
He is married and
has two daughters.
He holds both
German and British
citizenship. His
political career
started in 1998
becoming a
Member of the
State Parliament
of Niedersachsen
(Lower Saxony) until
2014. He served as
Prime Minister of
Niedersachsen from
2010 till 2013.
EUROPE’S FUTURE
terrorism, hybrid threats, economic volatility,
climate change and energy insecurity are
global threats and need a multilateral
.
is a very positive signal that the European
Union is strengthening its common defence,
notably through the new European Defence
Fund, which will supplement, amplify and
enhance national investments in defence
research and new capabilities, and through
the Permanent Structured Cooperation
(PESCO), which will enable Member States
jointly to develop their defence capabilities
and invest in shared projects. Furthermore,
the US Congress just approved $4.6 billion
for the European Deterrence Initiative in
the 2018 federal budget, showing a strong
commitment to our bond.
Foreign Affairs
The challenges the world is facing can no
longer be tackled unilaterally. History has
shown that when we are united, we succeed
in the face of obstacles. From the aggressive
and irresponsible provocations of the regime
in North Korea, which threatens not only
regional, but also global peace and security,
to the lasting wars in Syria as well as in
Yemen, which have become humanitarian
emergencies of catastrophic proportions, to
the ongoing illegal actions of Russia, which
violates the sovereignty and territorial
integrity of Ukraine – we have to speak with
one voice so that peace and freedom may
become permanent.
The long-lasting bond between the US
and the EU is based on respect for common
values, international law and the idea of
multilateralism.
This has led to prosperity and security,
from which people on both sides of the
Atlantic have benefitted. In a changing
world full of challenges, we have to adapt.
There is need to further strengthen and
deepen the transatlantic relationship. We
should continue to work towards increased
cooperation on security issues, as well as
cooperate more closely on creating economic
growth and therefore jobs, alongside
fostering a closer political dialogue in the
spirit of enriching our valuable partnership.
25

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Business as usual, or will we adapt
to the rapidly changing world?
By Ingeborg Grässle
At the beginning of last year, many
pundits predicted a dire 2017. And
what did we get? No victory for
the far right, but a sweeping success of
the pro-European Macron, no large-scale
increase in the number of migrants, but a
decrease of immigration. The emergence of
a closer military cooperation within the EU,
further steps towards a joint protection of
European borders. Most importantly, in 2017
Europe attained solid economic growth,
and unemployment levels decreased in all
member states. As a result, at the end of
2017 we had a strong euro and renewed
economic stability.
Thus, at the beginning of 2018, there is a
renewed belief in the European idea, and we
witness a strengthened Europe.
How can we take advantage of this new
situation? What are the main challenges
that Europe facing? What do citizens
expect from Europe?
2018 will be the last year before the next
European elections, and hence a year of
intense activities. The discussions on the
next Multiannual Financial Framework (MFF),
which will set the EU’s budget for the period
2021–2025/6/7 and define the priorities
on which Europe wants to spend its funds
in those years, will dominate the work of
the Parliament. Since the UK, a major net
contributor to the budget, leaves the EU, the
struggle for budget allocations will be even
more severe than in the past.
-Will we once again extrapolate past
spending, or will we be able to redirect our
funds, in line with today’s needs, to face
those challenges everybody is talking about?
Can we continue to spend 50% of the EU’s
budget on agriculture and the rural areas,
Ingeborg
Grässle
Ingeborg Grässle is
a German Member
of the European
Parliament (EPP),
Chair of the
Budgetary Control
Committee, Member
of the Committee
on Budgets and
Member of the
delegation for
relations with the
People’s Republic of
China.
knowing that more than 80% of those funds
will benefit a rather small group of large
landowners?
- Can we continue to allocate more than
40% of all funds via national envelopes to
structural policy projects whose usefulness
remain too often doubtful, according to
various reports of the European Court of
Auditors?
- Are we able and willing to resist the
well-oiled PR machinery that will advocate a
continuation of existing programmes, and
are we intelligent enough to allocate far
more funds to those activities our citizens call
for: protection of the EU’s external borders,
addressing the migrant crisis, a stronger and
better external policy, a more secure Europe,
and protection against terrorism?
- Are we prepared to deal with the
new challenges from globalisation? Which
resources will be available to bolster
innovation and digitalisation within the EU?
Recent reports on e.g. Chinese trade policy,
but also the American tax reforms, show the
urgency of devoting more attention to the
protection of intellectual property, and to the
safeguarding of our industrial and banking
sectors.
As chair of the Committee on Budgetary
Control, I see the need for a profound review
of the sectors and activities on which the
EU wants to use its budget. The world is
changing fast, Europe is changing fast, new
challenges ask for our involvement.
- Security: are we willing and able to
support a nascent European army? What
funds are we willing to allocate? Will this
become a common European undertaking,
or will we continue on an intergovernmental
way? Are the 27 willing to go as far, or will
this remain an intergovernmental sector,
with just a marginal role for the EU and its
budget?
26 2018 | OUR WORLD

EUROPE’S FUTURE
A beach ball emerges from the water.
N|
- Again on security: are we willing
terrorism? Are we willing to allocate
funds and create the necessary
European institutions, or will the
intergovernmental way prevail?
Again, this would require far-reaching
decisions within the EU.
- Border protection: in my opinion,
this constitutes a real European duty.
Considerable funding is required.
- Migration: the rapid population
growth in Africa will continue for the
foreseeable future, this will lead to
major migration movements within
Africa and beyond. Thus, there will
be continued pressure on Europe’s
borders.
- Development assistance: after
50 years of development assistance,
a real impact assessment of that
assistance needs to be conducted,
one that has an impact beyond the
circle of assistance specialists. Why
are so many major recipients of aid
in the lower echelon of the doing
business index? What steps are being
taken to encourage the setting up of
businesses, and to advance the rule
of law? Why are education systems
so poor and is professional training
so underperforming?
- How do we interact with and
support our direct neighbours: the
Balkans, Ukraine, the countries in the
Caucasus region, North Africa? What
else do we need to do so that they can
achieve economic growth, social and
political stability?
And, last but not least, 2018 will
challenge us all to bridge the gap
between East and West, between
South and North – to work for a
united and strong European Union.
The world
is changing
fast, Europe is
changing fast,
new challenges
ask for our
involvement.
OUR WORLD | 2018
27

EUROPE’S FUTURE
“America First”
Wakes Up the EU
By Elmar Brok
US President Donald Trump has been
has already put the relationship
between Europe and the United States to the
test. Be it defense and security cooperation
within NATO, trade relations, cooperation
on global challenges like climate change,
or participation in bodies such as the G7 or
G20, there is hardly any area that has not
T
judgment. For over a century, the transatlantic
partnership has been central to US foreign
policy. At a time when the key challenges we
face – from terrorism to climate change to
mass migration – extend far beyond national
borders, such cooperation is more important
than ever.
Yet Trump’s “America First” approach,
together with his erratic leadership style, is
undermining the partnerships and mutual
agreements on which transatlantic – and,
indeed, global – cooperation has long been
based. Trump’s doctrine might please his core
constituents, but it fails to account for even
the most basic principles and mechanisms
of international politics.
For all his supposed “deal-making”
skills, Trump seems not to understand that
international agreements work only if they
compromise. As a result, he is taking actions
that jeopardize the cohesion and unity of the
West, while bringing about negative, lasting
change in the world order. Trump’s approach
to defense, trade, and climate change are
emblematic of this pattern.
Elmar Brok
Elmar Brok is
former Chairman
of the Committee
FA
in the European
Parliament and a
the CDU Party in
Germany.
A strong NATO is undoubtedly in the
interest of both the US and the European
Union. That is why Trump’s often-misleading
criticisms of the Alliance, which cast doubt on
his loyalty to it, were so dangerous. Though
Trump eventually endorsed Article 5 of the
North Atlantic Treaty – the mutual-defense
commitment that forms the core of NATO –
the damage was done.
As a result, the West is widely perceived
– including by world leaders – to be divided
and weak. Russian President Vladimir Putin,
for one, has taken this as a sign that he can
continue to challenge openly the European
and global security architecture.
In recent years, Putin has attempted to
facilitate his violations of the sovereignty and
territorial integrity of neighboring countries
by undermining the cohesion of the EU and
NATO, whether through disinformation
to Euroskeptic and fascist groups in Europe.
In this sense, Trump’s equivocation about
NATO has played directly into Putin’s hands.
The good news is that the EU seems to
understand that, if it can’t rely on the US, it
needs to take matters into its own hands,
by pursuing more integrated security and
defense policies.
Last June, EU leaders agreed to activate
the “Permanent Structured Cooperation”
(PESCO), which allows the bloc to implement
joint defense projects that strengthen its
overall defense capabilities.
We will take further concrete steps to
improve cooperation among European
armed forces. Collectively, European armies
have more soldiers than the US and spend
more on defense than Russia or China. But
that of the US.
A
defense cooperation among EU member
states costs up to €100 billion ($116 billion)
annually. Given this, increasing cooperation
could not be more important, though
European defensive capabilities will be a
complement to NATO, not a replacement.
Another policy that could undermine
transatlantic security – both directly, and
by further distancing the US from its allies
28 2018 | OUR WORLD

EUROPE’S FUTURE
– is Trump’s decertification of the
Iran nuclear deal. Although the deal
doesn’t directly address many aspects
of Iran’s destabilizing behavior,
especially its threats toward Israel,
the EU – and the entire international
community – remain convinced that
the agreement is needed in order to
enable constructive engagement with
Iran in those areas.
As for trade, Trump’s
suspicion and even rejection
of international trade
agreements has created a large political
vacuum that others – especially China
.AT
to tout his nationalist approach to
trade, America’s partners are looking
to deepen their relationships with
one another. The recent trade deal
between the EU – which accounts for
more world trade than China and the
US combined – and Japan will be the
world’s largest.
The geostrategic implications of this
trend should not be underestimated.
The EU must
recognize that
the US will not
be as reliable
a partner in
the coming
years as it has
been since the
end of World
War II, and it
must adjust
accordingly.
United States President Donald J. Trump salutes the Marine Guard as he returns
to the White House in Washington, DC, USA, 26 January 2018, after attending the
World Economic Forum in Davos, Switzerland.
If Trump continues on the path
toward protectionism, America’s
trading partners will retaliate. Any
US actions against EU steel exports,
for example, would certainly trigger
a prompt reprisal from the EU. And
trade conflicts would surely affect
relations in other areas.
Then there is issue of climate
change. Trump has withdrawn the US
from the 2015 Paris climate agreement.
By contrast, the EU considers climate
action to be one of its top priorities,
not just for the obvious ecological,
social, and economic reasons, but
also to support a comprehensive
foreign and security policy. After
all, unbridled climate change will
inevitably trigger destabilizing mass
migration, particularly from climatevulnerable
regions like Africa.
Given that the US is the world’s
largest polluter in history, Trump’s
pursuit of climate-destroying
policies, including his support for the
EPA-EFE/RON SACHS / POOL
American coal and cement industries,
will have global implications. And,
contrary to Trump’s rhetoric, it will
undermine America’s own future
competitiveness. Unsurprisingly,
future-oriented US companies like
Tesla oppose this dangerous policy
orientation.
The EU must recognize that the
US will not be as reliable a partner in
the coming years as it has been since
the end of World War II, and it must
adjust accordingly. Of course, Trump
won’t be president forever, and the
ties that bind the US and Europe will
outlast him.
The EU and the US remain each
other’s most important economic and
security partners, and this fact is likely
to bring the two sides back together
once Trump’s tenure is over. In the
meantime, however, the EU needs
to do what it takes to protect its own
interests on the world stage – with or
without the US.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
29

EUROPE’S FUTURE
A portrait of late former German
Chancellor Helmut Kohl is seen during
R
Cathedral in Speyer, Germany, 01 July
2017. Kohl, widely regarded as the
G
died on 16 June 2017 at his home in
Ludwigshafen, Germany. He was the
sixth chancellor of the Federal Republic
of Germany from 1982 to 1998.
EPA/DDP IMAGES / POOL
In all my political
decisions, time was
needed for everyone
to understand the
benefits for the
country.
A conversation with Helmut Kohl
By Theodore Roussopoulos
hard has it been to
convince your people on
“How
much needed reforms,
especially on decisions concerning
crucial issues?” I asked 15 years ago
the Chancellor Helmut Kohl during
a private dinner at the European
People’s Party Summit where
we attended with the then Vice
President of EPP and subsequently
Prime Minister of Greece, Kostas
Karamanlis.
T
hard” he replied.
How hard Ι insisted
If I were lucky it would take at
least two years for the people to
understand what I intended to do.
EG
I was ruthlessly attacked. In all my
political decisions, time was needed
for everyone to understand the
benefits for the country. At the
beginning the press, the people
and my political adversaries were
all against me. As long as I endured
and did not back down, my political
decisions started to pay back and
the results justified them. In any
crucial. That was the time needed for
everyone to understood it was the
right one.”
These are more or less the words
Kohl used at a time when he had
already withdrawn from political
action. He was elected Chancellor
four times. That adds up to 16 years
living in between hammer and thorn.
He influenced European decision
making like no other leader.
30 2018 | OUR WORLD

A few years ago I was fortunate to meet
one of his personal friends, a person who
travels often to Greece and is a top executive
in the German automobile industry. I asked
him how did the late Chancellor assess
the situation after the economic crisis. He
replied that he was more concerned about
the stability of the European infrastructure.
His statement was reported on all the
German newspapers at the time: “I will not
allow them to destroy the Europe we build
.
was not able to act on it…
Going back in time, during our private
dinner 15 years ago, he had explained why
things have changed so dramatically: “The
old guard of European leaders we have
all lived through war. We know, thus, that
we have to do everything in our power to
avoid it. To do so you have to make mutual
compromises. You also need to understand
one another, the problems of each one and
The Europe of Kohl, Mitterrand,
Adenauer and De Gaulle had no
room for herd mentality like the one
we often see today. Central bankers were
not the ones who decided upon the social
face of politics.
There was no room for nationalist
racism from the part of the bigger countries
towards the smaller ones, of the Northern
countries to the southern ones. Even if
some thought of it they did not act on it. It
was not recorded in the decision making of
the then European Economic Community
(EEC) or in the actions taken by the big
European powers.
Nowadays the South is referred to in
the newspapers of the Northern countries
with the uncourteous label P.I.G.S. which
includes the initials of all south European
countries (Portugal, Italy, Greece, Spain).
T
pigs.
In February 2016, Holland and Austria
decided to organize a summit with the
participation of the Balkan countries
concerning the refugee issue. The summit
did not include the most prominent
OUR WORLD | 2018
Theodore
Roussopoulos
Theodore
Roussopoulos is
a Journalist, and
Adjunct Professor
in History of
communication
at European
University Nicosia.
He has served as
Minister of State of
Greece, and holds
a PhD in History
from Edinburgh
University.
EUROPE’S FUTURE
European Balkan country, Greece, and the
one that is mostly dealing with the huge
waves of refugees in the Aegean islands.
When it comes to statements there
seems to be some kind of support but not
when it comes to actions.
Hungary, Poland and the Czech Republic
violating all the European agreements do
not allow in their territories any refugees
coming from Greece or Italy.
It is in the shores of Greece and Italy
where millions of refugees either struck
by war or in search of the promised land/
of better living arrive in the European
continent. Once upon a time we all, more
or less, felt as Europeans maintaining at the
same time our pride, culture and history.
We were assimilated by the participation
in the common currency, the freedom of
movement and the European vision. Today
it seems that these ideals give way to petty
interests. Many leaders, nowadays, are
strengthless/powerless.
Instead of taking bold decisions and
leading their people through harsh times
they choose to follow a mob of populist,
right wing extremists and in some cases
even fascist elements. Those actions,
though, lead Europe into becoming an
appalling formation, one that, like a
disease, kills itself.
Helmut Kohl, who died in 2017, was
the last of those political leaders who lived
E
was divided by war and not just economic
inequalities.
include a good deal of social perception
and sensitivity. Did the vision of another
Europe die with him? The Europe that so
eloquently described one of the greatest
political leaders of the 20th century Winston
Churchill when he said:
“We hope to see a Europe where men of
every country will think of being a European
as of belonging to their native land, and…
wherever they go in this wide domain…will
truly feel, ‘Here I am at home’”
What happened to that vision? Where is
that home?
31

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Armenia – A Crossroads
between Europe and Asia
By Gagik Tsarukyan
Much though we talk about global
problems and challenges, do
we have to admit that currently
we live in a quite interesting and rapidly
changing world, in an era when many
existing constants begin to break down
or be transformed. In countries shaping
the global economic agenda we witness
how the development of scientific
technologies and new industrial models
break the existing stereotypes. At present
the global economy is undergoing a stage
of irreversible transformation. The world
is on the threshold of a new industrial
revolution; the fourth one, which is going
to erase the already known and accepted
technological borders, and radically
transform the technological and industrial
chains. The characteristics underpinning
this new industrial revolution are going to
and the shaping of a digital economy and
digital society.
It is beyond doubt that Armenia, my
country, is still far from this extremely
serious transformation pulse of the 21st
century, since we still need to be able to
solve very simple, albeit necessary issues
within our country. Yet, ineluctable is the
fact that in order to have a competitive
economy and competitive state we have
to move on to a new economic policy.
necessity to change the economic model.
Second, solving the social polarization
challenge, and third, the organization of
repatriation, for which we need to solve
severe problems within the country,
Gagik
Tsarukyan
Gagik Tsarukyan
is President of the
Prosperous Armenia
Party.
starting from the restoration of trust up
to ensuring equal competition conditions.
The forenamed issues should become the
pulse of our state’s agenda.
I am inclined to believe that there is
an opportunity for Armenia to become a
model to showcase the entire world as to
how it is possible to shape an innovative
environment aimed at launching stateof-the-art
organizations in a country
with a small economy. The aforesaid
organizations should become the engine
of a new economic policy.
Quite recently, in Yerevan I initiated an
international conference under the slogan
“New Policy For a Prosperous World”. It
was a rather ambitious initiative aimed
at contemplating over the new policy
and generating novel ideas and thoughts
together with our colleagues from across
the world.
Armenia stands at the crossroads of
Europe and Asia. It is a country which
has historically been at the crossroads
of the Silk Road. Armenia is a member
of the Eurasian Economic Union and has
concluded a free trade zone agreement
with Vietnam.
Currently, possibilities for trade and
economic agreements with Iran, India,
Egypt, Israel and a number of other states
are being considered. Last November,
Armenia signed a comprehensive
agreement with the European Union;
a market of 500 million consumers.
Armenia can become a bridge for the
aforementioned integration poles. Not
making use of this superb chance would
be unforgivable.
Let me quote Elisabeth Bauer, a brilliant
Armenologist: “Armenia has been a cradle
32 2018 | OUR WORLD

EUROPE’S FUTURE
of civilization and, as far back as in
the 1st century B.C. the Armenian
economy, arts and traditions were
so developed that this culture
became a stimulus for Egypt, Greece
and Rome both in the material and
spiritual sense”.
The party and alliance led
by me, have proposed a new
economic model for our country’s
development, the implementation
thereof, I believe, will launch the
beginning of Armenia’s success
story. For this, each and every one
of us needs to become the change
which will transform the world.
At present the global
economy is undergoing
a stage of irreversible
transformation.
The Armenian Genocide memorial complex in Yerevan. The memorial sits on one of three hills along the Hrazdan River that
carry the name Tsitsernakaberd (swallow’s fortress), and was the site of what was once an Iron Age fortress.
NEW EUROPE
OUR WORLD | 2018
33

EUROPE’S FUTURE
A different EU Agenda for
Innovation and Growth
By Donald Kalff
The present goldilocks economy will not
last. It is debt driven whilst increase in
productivity, the only true source of
economic growth, is continuing its downward
path. Also, the policies of central banks and the
ignited economic growth created a multitude
of unknown risks of unknown proportions
The search should be on for policies
that help real enterprises, operating in the
real economy, to create economic value.
Developing new products, increasing
productivity and improving return on assets
must take center stage. Real enterprises
provide a counterweight to the financial
economy and the destruction of economic
value inherent in many of its business models
These policies can and should capitalize
on the many competitive advantages EU27
enjoys vis-a- vis the other trade blocs. Many of
these EU27 advantages have, so far, not been
recognized as such. Obviously, programs to
enforce what is already strong should to be
preferred over programs that seek to remedy
weaknesses.
EU Innovation and Economic Growth Agenda
Civil Law
Unlike England, Wales and Ireland contract
formation in most of EU27 requires good
faith. Moreover, reasonableness and
fairness guide contract partners in handling
all favorable and unfavorable developments.
This contrasts sharply with the Anglo-Saxon
world in which partners can take any action
that is not excluded by law or by contract.
This makes contract formation a lengthy and
costly process, as all undesired behavior must
.I
become a permanent feature of a partnership.
Donald Kalff
KA
PhD is a graduate
of the Wharton
School and a
former member
of the Executive
Board of KLM. At
present he publishes
extensively about
the positioning,
governance and
management of
large enterprises.
He is also the
(co) founder of
6 companies in
biotech, poverty
related diseases
and cybersecurity.
He is a corporate
executive,
entrepreneur and
writer.
This EU27 advantage is crucial at a time when
enterprises are increasingly relying on a
.
Also, the use of civil law in EU27 in settling
law as it is rule based and judges take the
original intentions of the contract partners
as a point of departure.
Unfortunately, most EU27 commercial
courts have been subjected to restructuring
and cost cutting. As a result, proceedings have
been delayed and the quality of the rulings
has been compromised. This is destroying
economic value in the form of lost sales,
postponement of investments and distraction
of management. A program to bring the courts
up to strength is long overdue.
Finance
In EU27 banks provide most of the capital for
private enterprises. Family businesses and
.
Stock markets play a modest role in corporate
.AE
markets spin around listed enterprises. They
are spared the focus on shareholder return
on investment. The incorrect assumption
higher stock price can be neglected. Pressure
to cut costs, to acquire and to buy back shares,
.T
remuneration, linked to shareholder return on
investment, can be avoided.
EU27 should help enterprises to reduce
dependence on stock markets by stimulating
competition amongst suppliers of capital and
by facilitating new platforms.
Innovation
Progress in business increasingly depends
on cooperation and EU27 can point to many
examples where government, knowledge
institutions and business came together to
achieve breakthroughs This is in stark contrast
to the US which continues to rely heavily on
competition.
It should now cut a bewildering range of
subsidies to stimulate innovation. Application
34 2018 | OUR WORLD

The search
should be on for
policies that help
real enterprises,
operating in the
real economy, to
create economic
value.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Container blocks at the port of
Singapore.
EPA/WALLACE WOON
procedure are cumbersome and a
burden for small and medium sized
companies. Resources should be
reallocated from programs with
that have demonstrated that they
work. These are: building an advanced
ICT infrastructure, providing R&D
infrastructure to start ups, compelling
customers of truly innovative products,
increasing government sponsored
fundamental research and setting
environmental and other standards.
Patents
Friend and foe agree that EU27 has
created the best patent system in the
world. The Unitary Patent has been a
EUROPE’S FUTURE
major step forward and programs are
being implemented to speed up the
process of granting patents.
However, filing, servicing and
defending of patents is still costly and
the appeal process is lengthy and nontransparent.
These are all barriers that
hit small companies hardest.
Several improvements have been
suggested. A “use it or lose it” provision
would reduce the size of the pool of
large companies’ patents in which small
companies can become ensnared.
Raising the level of inventiveness
would prevent large companies
from continually making small
improvements to extend patent life.
The lifetime of a patent could vary from
industry to industry depending on the
time to market.
Increased funding for the European
service to applicants to a structurally
higher level.
Competition
European Competition Law and DG
Competition are the envy of the world.
However, there is a strong case to be
made for complementing the present
focus on consumer protection with
the protection of small companies in
their roles as suppliers, customers and
partners of large companies. Abuse
of power by large enterprise takes
the form of predatory agreements,
reneging on contractual obligations
without impunity and extracting
intellectual property from small
partners without proper remuneration.
This abuse should be countered at a
time that cooperation between large
and small companies is one of the keys
to innovation and economic growth.
In conclusion
EU27 has many distinctive and valuable
competitive advantages vis-a vis the
other trade blocks and is well advised
to nurture and strengthen what is
already strong.
35

EUROPE’S FUTURE
It’s Europe’s
time to provide
the answers
By Andrianos Giannou
Europe’s 2018 has been hailed as the
year of solutions, to any or all of
the challenges that the Continent is
confronted with. Expectations abound.
Coalitions are being formed. Actors are
elbowing for pole position. Be it migration
or economic integration, or even more
ambitiously, the overall future of the
European Union, all wheels have been
declaratively set in motion for a pivotal
year. However, the direction remains
elusive.
In this respect, Europe remains
multidirectional. It is not anymore about
the speed or the pace. Rather, it is about
the destination, the end goal. It is the very
guiding mantra of an “ever-closer union”
of yesteryear that is being questioned,
not how fast further integration should be
achieved. To some, it is all about “taking
power back.” To others, it is business
as usual, or technocratic progressivism
by stealth. “More or less Europe?” is la
question du jour. We all have established
that we are unhappy with the current state
.
a better Europe look like?
To respond, I believe that we have to
remind ourselves why any form of polity
.T
be simple: to make life for its citizens
better. All humans strive for the same goal:
a better life, at present and in the future,
for themselves and their families. The post-
War social contract, which aimed to deliver
Andrianos
Giannou
Andrianos Giannou
is the President of
the Youth of the
European People’s
Party (YEPP), the
largest political
youth organisation
in Europe. He was
elected a Vice-
President of YEPP
in 2015, and went
on to become the
10th President of the
organisation in April
2017.
exactly that, was based on an equilibrium
between the citizens, the state and private
enterprise under which, in broad terms,
the citizens would provide democratic
legitimacy to the state and manpower to
the private sector, the state would provide
welfare and security to the citizens and a
regulatory framework for private enterprise
employment to the population and act as
the main source of state revenue through
taxation. Recent increasing levels of
disenchantment, vote abstention, income
inequality, a general sentiment of insecurity
and uncertainty, as well as the rise of
populism and extremism, which feed on
those, are clear signs that this balance has
.
the past and the present: mismanagement,
corruption, greed, tax inefficiency and
avoidance. Correcting those will not
.
of this breakdown come from the future;
a future that is already here but to which
political reality has yet to adapt. The advent
of the Fourth Industrial Revolution, which is
based on cyber-physical systems and brings
about further automation, the Internet of
T
employment. What will become of society
if companies fail to create jobs at the rate
required for the existing social contract to
function, as predicted? At the same time,
climate change has increased migratory
pressure, as has the spread of the internet,
which has made international –including
regional– disparities more visible and
perceptible. Increased levels of migration
insecurity.
What is the role of the European
Union in this context? How can
better for Europeans? Those big, common,
challenges require common solutions.
They all require scale. When it comes to
attracting innovation, Europe doesn’t lack
talent. To some extent, it doesn’t lack
36 2018 | OUR WORLD

EUROPE’S FUTURE
financial resources either. What
it lacks is a functioning common
market. It lacks scale. In addition
to putting in place an institutional
structure that will create a truly
single market of 500 million, we will
have to get the policy mix right. It
will not be enough to simply attract
technological advancement. We will
have to embrace it, make it our own,
and more than that, we will have to
come up with the rules that make
it inclusive, that make it work for
everybody; we will have to harness
it. Europe will have to become the
continent that makes innovation –
as well as globalization, including
all. We can lead change and shape
its rules only by working together.
The same applies to the other big
questions of the day, in particular
migration and security.
Europe will have to become the
continent that provides the
answers, that provides the
solutions, that leads by example,
that provides a new model to the
world, a new social contract. A sense
Europe will have
to become the
continent that
makes innovation
work to the benefit
of all.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Voting at the YEPP Congress in Dubrovnik, Croatia in April 2017.
of opportunity, of shared growth
and success, a sense that success
serves all people will have to go
hand in hand with a sentiment of
security, of certainty. We will have
to defend and inspire. We will have
to move forward, leaving no one
behind.
Does this mean that further
integration is the answer to our
existential question? The response
should be a qualified “yes,” as it
should have always been. That
is because I believe that further
integration should be employed
only when necessary: in addressing
the big challenges. That test is not
tautological: it is subsidiarity that
is the guiding principle. Nor should
it be assumed that Europeans will
jump on the news. The necessity for
further integration, in those areas
that make the cut, will have to be
clearly explained and democratically
legitimised. We will have to tell
YEPP
the truth. And we will have to
have a compelling narrative that
to the daily lives of all Europeans,
not abstract notions. For the young
people in particular, the usual
argument that centres on peace will
not do anymore. It’s the equivalent
of trying to sell a black-and-white TV
in 2018. There is no excitement, no
motivation.
It belongs to a museum. It
is tangible, practical, inclusive
solutions that focus on opportunity
and security that might do the trick.
Nor will ideology. Our principles and
ideals should inform and shape our
policy responses. We will be judged
.
However monumental the task
in recent history that so many actors
have been prepared for change. It is
in our hands to make it meaningful
to all Europeans.
37

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Europe must
be made more
effective. Now!
By Maroun Labaki
I
I.A
there are signs that Europe will see some
progress. The Brexit effect, the Trump
changed and a new dynamic is emerging.
Now everyone is waiting for Angela Merkel
to install her new government. Then she will
be able to sit down with Emmanuel Macron
and design and propose new steps towards
European integration. To overcome the
inertia of the European machine, agreement
between Paris and Berlin is not necessarily
enough, but it is essential.
There is a lot of talk these days about
.T
may be new but the idea is as old as Europe
itself. How can we prevent the most reluctant
from stopping others who wish to take
the European project further? Reluctance
can be legitimate, so can fear and even
capriciousness, since these are carried by
democratically elected governments. But
arithmetic, just as democracy, teaches us
that the greatest number must prevail. It
is not right that the likes of Kaczynski and
Orban are able to block Europe single
handedly.
II.T
may not be more dangerous than it used
to be. It is however very dangerous, even
more so since the arrival of Donald Trump at
the White House. Fire is smouldering in the
Middle East, with the radicalisation of Israel,
with war and rivalries between Sunnis and
Maroun
Labaki
Maroun is a Belgian
journalist, author,
and President of the
Press Club Brussels
Europe. Previously,
he was the former
European and
Foreign Editor of
the daily Le Soir
(Brussels). His Most
recent book is
entitled “Trump, tu
ne nous auras pas
2017).
The world we live
in may not be
more dangerous
than it used to be.
It is however very
dangerous, even
more so since the
arrival of Donald
Trump at the White
House.
Shiites, with the victory of Bashar al-Assad,
with the ambitions of the Kurds, with the rise
in power of Turkey, etc. As we have seen,
this instability can mar social cohesion and
sow death in the cities of Western Europe.
It can jeopardise our energy supplies.
It can lead us into armed conflict. To the
East, Russian imperialism is back. Further
NK
fire. And out of everywhere, out of every
underground bunker, comes looming the
threat of proliferation, of biological weapons
and cyber-attacks...
II.E
weight is diminishing and our presence in
the G7 will soon be a farce. Our research
capabilities are dwindling. Tomorrow’s
robots will no doubt speak English, but with
a Chinese or an Indian accent... And how
about tomorrow’s bosses?
To my mind, Europe is a great project for
civilisation. It is the home of human dignity.
Never before has there been a geographical
expanse with such a high degree of peace,
freedom, democracy, prosperity, solidarity,
etc. The European Union is, of course, far
38 2018 | OUR WORLD

EUROPE’S FUTURE
French President Emmanuel Macron (R) and German Chancellor Angela Merkel (L) during their meeting at Elysee palace in
Paris, France, 19 January 2018.
EPA-EFE/CHRISTOPHE PETIT TESSON
from perfect, but the whole world
regards it as a model.
One can be insensitive to
these arguments and not
appreciate Europe for its
values. In that case, its usefulness at
least must be recognised. Indeed in
all matters, only Europe will protect
us. Only it will give us a voice in the
commotion of the world. Only it will
enable us to reach the critical mass
required for our strategic autonomy.
If Europe really is to achieve these
objectives, it must correct its lack of
OUR WORLD | 2018
effectiveness - fast. The EU needs
new transfers of sovereignty; its
competences must be broadened.
And the European Parliament must
be at the heart of a new institutional
architecture that is more democratic
and more comprehensible.
II.N
this, nothing so ambitious, can be
expected of the Macron-Merkel
couple. All positive steps, whether
on the euro or on immigration, for
example, are of course welcome, but
I
will persist.
Unfortunately, the French
President and the Federal Chancellor
are not being pressed by public
opinions.
In Europe, public debate has
been heavily influenced, almost
wing populists, who compete for the
same simplistic ideas and slogans to
disqualify the European project. And
social networks have certainly not
helped to clarify the issues. Things
are bad: people seem to have lost
their desire for Europe. But I hope
I.
39

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Unwelcome
Europe
By Markella Papadouli
The last year and a half has been
extraordinary, full of unexpected
twists and turns: the election of
Donald Trump in the US, the suspension of
Cataluña’s autonomy in Spain, the explosion
of (recognition of) sexual harassment cases
around the world buoyed by the #MeToo
Campaign, the crystallisation of Brexit ...
In many ways, 2017 shook what we took
for granted and forced some change which
was latent.
2017 was a significant year also in the
perhaps because of the lack of change. Mass
movement of forced migrants continued,
similarly, worryingly, to years before it.
According to IOM 186,768 people fleeing
persecution, civil war, violence, destruction of
their homes, loss of their loved ones or simply
chronic and demeaning poverty, decided to
make a perilous journey to reach protection
in Europe. There are no reasonably accessible
legal routes for such migrants to reach safety
otherwise. Seeking asylum in European
embassies outside Europe remains a taboo
in the migration debate. In reality those who
want to leave have limited choices. They can
with people smugglers, organised criminals,
transport and border crossing, in exchange for
the migrant’s scarce money (or other forms of
exploitation), thereafter taking very little care
of their “client’s” safety.
In 2017, the overwhelming method of
arrivals (92%) in Europe according to IOM
was by sea. An estimated 3,116 people died
in transit, in addition to the 5,143 deaths at
Markella
Papadouli
Markella Papadouli
(LLM, MA) is a
GK
Registered European
Lawyer for the AIRE
Centre (Advice on
Individual Rights
in Europe) and a
Lecturer
in International
and European
Refugee Law at
London South Bank
University.
sea the year before, and the 3,777 the year
before that. 2018 has just started and already
404 people have been reported as dead or
missing at sea, adding to the numbers of the
previous years and making the Mediterranean
an underwater grave.
Those who selected the land crossings
fared little better. Some lost their lives on
the way due to extreme weather conditions,
exhaustion or lack of appropriate resources
and healthcare.
Some of those who managed to survive
did so in the hope of joining their family who
already live in Europe and could support them
in rebuilding their lives. But surviving the
journey is not a synonym to family reunion:
frustrating, dysfunctional and often unfair
asylum procedures, collective expulsions at
the borders or even complete border closure
are some of the ways that EU Member
States have chosen to address the migration
phenomenon.
This unwelcoming facet of EU Member
State behaviour has been captured in the
numerous pending cases and challenges
before domestic and European Courts.
And it is not just on dry land that the
EU Member States show an unfriendly
and sometimes hostile face. 2017 saw the
most peculiar phenomenon of domestic
investigation and prosecution of nongovernmental
organisations attempting to
rescue those in danger at sea (see the pending
case of the Juventa), an interesting coincidence
with Frontex’s reinforced mandate to counter
smuggling and the Italian imposed code
of conduct for NGOs wishing to continue
performing rescues in the Mediterranean.
Rescuing life at sea, an international obligation
pursuant to the law of the sea, in 2017 became
more complicated than ever. Indeed some
rescuers are now at risk of criminal liability.
The EU and the Common European
Asylum System, despite its reforms (still under
negotiation) have continued to fail migrants
and member states alike. The obsession with
which country’s responsibility it is to examine
a particular asylum application demonstrates
the inverse of the European spirit. Member
States kept playing “responsibility ping
pong”, using legal instruments such as the
40 2018 | OUR WORLD

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Children stand next to their tent inside the Khirbat al-Jawz camp, in the north-western Jisr al-Shughour countryside, Idlib, Syria,
19 January 2018. More than 6000 families were forced to leave their homes on the frontline and move to several camps like
Khirbat al-Jawz, Ein al-Baida and al-Hambuoshyeh in the north-western Jisr al-Shughour countryside, Idlib.
EPA-EFE/YAHYA NEMAH
Dublin Regulation to keep the sheer
number of applicants outside of their
under the EU asylum seeker relocation
mechanism, which sadly didn’t live up
to its ambitious purpose.
Migrants in 2017 largely continued
to live in conditions which can only be
described as tragically inadequate:
provided by EU Member States who
either could not or did not make an
more humane, only partly explicable
by national financial strain. This
can hardly be described as a good
foundation for a fresh start in 2018.
The commitment of the EU and
Member States, decades ago, was to
create a just, safe system based on
solidarity, guaranteeing that vulnerable
individuals can access and receive the
OUR WORLD | 2018
protection to which they were entitled.
Years after Tampere, the names of
the court cases and challenges may
vary but the issues arising from the
disputes go to the very heart of the
Common European Asylum System
and remain the same.
It seems in the end that, despite
all its twists and turns, the biggest
surprise 2017 had to offer was the
bitter realisation that there was no
fundamental change in attitude in the
field of migration. Whirlwind political
developments aside, it was yet another
year in which state sovereignty prevailed
over the principle of human dignity when
it came to migrants. If not the loss of life,
the growing number of deaths at our
doorstep, what might it take to change
the attitude of individuals, governments
and the EU in 2018?
It seems in the end
that, despite all its
twists and turns, the
biggest surprise 2017
had to offer was the
bitter realisation
that there was no
fundamental change in
attitude in the field of
migration.
41

EUROPE’S FUTURE
A battle of
campaigners
By Shane Fitzgerald
We enter 2018 still reeling from the
Trump/Brexit campaigns of 2016.
The narrative of the past year
has been one of an old guard routed by
insurgents bent on chaos. The implications
for the European Union were grave.
From our slightly calmer vantage, the
emerging lessons of Brexit and Trump
are not that modern politics has been
tipped into anarchy, but rather that small
groups of committed believers, armed with
clear visions and simple messages, can
run rings around the political and media
establishment, which are more than ever
distracted, compromised and overloaded
with competing priorities.
In victory, and to nobody’s great surprise,
the Trumpians and Brexiteers have worn
the mantle of power no more gracefully
than those they despised and evicted from
.
Rather their authority has been rapidly
degraded by fresh coalitions of focused
opponents. In Trump’s case, this has
involved a rearguard effort by the US
security establishment to hold his team to
account for lying about their interactions
with Russia.
In the UK, it is hard to know which coalition
was more surprising – the huge crowds that
surged in the heat of a snap election to
put the ‘unelectable’ Jeremy Corbyn at the
doorstep of Downing Street, or the bickering
gang of European leaders who have so far
handed to Michel Barnier and his team.
In the middle of this gang has been Angela
of the modern era, and a virtuouso of the
Blair-Clinton strategy of triangulation as
a way to capture the soft centre ground
Shane
Fitzgerald
Shane Fitzgerald
is Director of
Campaigns at Red
Flag, where he
manages national,
European and
international
advocacy campaigns
for Red Flag’s major
clients.
Campaigning is
exhausting. It
takes discipline,
resources and
organisation.
But it works.
of political debate. This approach has life
in it yet (witness the remarkable rise of
Emmanuel Macron), but the unceremonious
crippling of Merkel’s political career by a
band of far-right insurgents has certainly
shown the risks of appealing to compromise
and the status quo above all else.
There are lessons here for us all. In
the tired arena of Brussels regulatory
policy, it is clearer than ever that small
groups of activists have worked out how
to harness the discontent of vast numbers
E.
Their ammunition? Focused outrage. Their
approach? Disciplined campaigns.
There is a tendency to underestimate
certain NGOs and activist groups because
they represent wide and shallow coalitions,
but the best of them demonstrate an ability
chosen wedge issues, which they do far
more tenaciously than traditional lobby
groups.
Brussels trade associations and the
agencies that support them spend their
time laboriously building consensus
around constantly cycling lists of priorities.
They must also devote huge efforts to
relationship-building and peace-keeping
42 2018 | OUR WORLD

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Anti-Brexit
campaign group
‘The No 10
Vigil’ sail a boat
bedecked with
E
River Thames in
London, Britain,
19 August 2017.
EPA/Tolga Akmen
with the policy insiders who they hope will tell them what
is really going on. This triangulation results in advocacy
Cameron ’16 or Merkel ’17).
More dangerously, these trade associations and
their agencies create their own large echo chambers of
mutual denial where they furiously agree with each other
about what should happen rather than analysing, and
attempting to shape, what is actually happening.
Caught up in the arcane procedures of the Brussels
bureaucracy, these insiders dismiss the online petition
campaigns of Europe’s legions of NGOs as so much
‘clicktivism’ while failing to realise the power of a simple
message, repeated ceaselessly, endorsed by tens of
thousands.
The depressing history of European referendums
indicate that ultimately this sort of policy by petition
is a democratic dead end. It is too easily hijacked by
extremists who use it to push their agenda over the
heads of the silent majority. But the traditional lobbying
model is also not tenable.
Can we triangulate our way out of this one?
Perhaps we can. Traditional business lobbies can no
longer just rely on sober appeals to economic clout and
OUR WORLD | 2018
job creation in order to protect their laundry lists of
priorities.
They need to scan the horizon for the issue that would
have the biggest impact on their membership, devote
the resources to properly quantify the risk and frame
the problem, and then relentlessly campaign.
Crucially, they need to attach genuine and tangible
political reward to their side of the argument. Because
the other side are all about attaching political risk.
They need to identify every other interest that would
be affected by the change, find the most compelling
people within that group, and amplify their voices. They
need champions who can push back on inaccuracies
and distortions promoted by opposed interests, and
who will praise political leaders for doing the right thing.
Ultimately, if enough relevant policy-makers hear enough
genuine grievances from enough real people, they will
think twice before making harmful decisions.
Campaigning is exhausting. It takes discipline,
resources and organisation. But it works. It also forces
all of us to focus on what really matters, rather than
.
Ultimately, this is the road to a European politics that is
more substantive, realistic and useful. So, here’s to 2018,
and to the campaigns ahead.
43

EUROPE’S FUTURE
Brexit and the
microcosm of Europe
By Dr. Foteini Kalantzi
ce n’est plus grand chose” (“England
is not much anymore”). These were President
“L’Angleterre,
de Gaulle’s famous words as he vetoed British
entry into the EEC in 1963. At that moment, he was also
British from those of the continent. Last year, along
the same lines, the British nation expressed its will to
disentangle itself from the Eurocratic tentacles of Brussels.
The ongoing debate in the British media and Parliament
people, who are just left waiting and speculating as to the
outcome of this saga. Nigel Farage has of late expressed
the opinion that Leave’s mandate would actually increase
with a second referendum that he now thinks should take
.
May’s divided cabinet, British citizens and intimidated
Europeans residing in the UK are left in darkness. This
could be regarded as a lack of responsibility on the part of
leading Brexiteers and those implementing the outcome
of the referendum.
Since there is no certainty about the future, everyone
.
Brexit will make Britain great again. In this scenario, it will
E
the rest of the world. Others portend an isolated post-
AEEE
London, Britain, 18 December 2017.
EPA-EFE/ANDY RAIN
44 2018 | OUR WORLD

Brexit Britain whose only major trade deal
is the exchange of its regained sovereignty
.
Aside from this frustration of these
people, the prospect of Brexit has yet
another drawback. It has left another crack
in the project ‘ever closer Union’.
It has underlined the big socio-economic
discrepancies between the different
states, and the increasing poverty and
gaps between classes within them. People
cannot see the bigger picture and plan for
the long-term viability of their country, if they
cannot put food on the table. That is why the
catastrophic scenarios about the ‘reaction of
the markets’ to Brexit fell on deaf ears. When
Professor Anand Menon tried explaining to
an audience in Newcastle, that Brexit would
cause a decrease in the UK GDP, a woman
yelled back at him ‘That’s your bloody GDP,
not mine’.
Some say that those people who
voted Out have parochial views, i.e.
older generations or people with no
.A
younger generations and those with higher
educational qualifications voted Remain.
However, the demographics of the Brexit
vote only tell one part of the story. The
other part of the story is that, apart from the
forceful and at times deceitful campaigning
for Brexit, there has been a continuous
collapse of the European ideal.
T
distrust towards the EU, has been one of
the main reasons for this outcome in the
referendum. Euroscepticism is partly a side
Europe, but it is also a defence mechanism
by peoples against an amorphous construct
and economism. Many Europeans, including
a lot of British people, are close to their
national identity. They relate to it and they
understand themselves through it. However,
E.
The EU does not inspire loyalty anymore – it
has lost its glow.
In any case, 2018 will open the road for
the political and economic developments
OUR WORLD | 2018
Foteini
Kalantzi
Foteini Kalantzi is a
Researcher at the
Greek Diaspora
Project in SEESOX.
She received her
PhD in International
Relations from
University of
Macedonia and
carried out part
of her research in
Freie Universitaet
Berlin. Her thesis
‘Securitisation
of migration in
Greece’ examined
how discourse and
political practices
contributed to
the socio-political
construction of
migration as a
security threat
between 2000-2014.
EUROPE’S FUTURE
everyone has been waiting for. At present
position for the UK emerging after the dust
settles. Since the EU is the largest trading
partner for Britain, there will probably be
a bespoke trade agreement between the
two parties. While a trade deal is feasible,
as Emanuel Macron said, full access to the
single market (including access to the EU for
K
accepting its rules is not feasible.
Brexit Secretary David Davies said that he
wishes to secure a free-trade deal with
to as ‘Canada plus plus plus’; however, EU
negotiators have stressed many a times that
Britain will not be allowed to “cherry-pick”
sectors. This is a reminder that the British
has been the deal throughout the history of
the EU. Since 1973, the UK has opted-out
from several important areas, for example
the EMU, the Schengen area, the Justice and
LT
and the Charter of Fundamental Rights
(where the UK obtained an exemption with
the signature of a protocol).
Despite the love-hate relationship
between the Continent and Albion, there are
constant reminders from the EU that it is not
too late for the UK to change its mind. The
President of the European Council, Donald
T
of heart. Our hearts are still open for you".
However, there are no signs of returning
from the state of limbo the country lives in.
While the drama of Brexit is unfolding at
its pedestrian pace within the microcosm of
Europe, 2018 will convey the realisation that
there is only one way forward for Europeans
as the realities of the fast-paced world
progress - climate change, massive migratory
changes in the geopolitical and global
economic power game.
This way forward is for Europeans to work
together without divisive rhetoric and shorttermism,
to not only make Europe more
competitive in world markets, but also more
humane and democratic.
45

THE MULTI-AWARD-WINNING AGENCY
WE
SOLVE
PROBLEMS
.
WINNER
Crisis
Management
PRNEWS
PLATINUM
AWARDS
2017
WINNER
Reputation
Management
Brussels l Dublin l London l Paris l Washington DC l Los Angeles

NEWSVILLE
OUR ECONOMIES

OUR ECONOMIES
How
Inequality
Works
By Angus Deaton
I
nequality has been named as a culprit in
the populist incursions of 2016 and 2017.
But what is inequality, and what role does it
play in inhibiting or encouraging growth, or in
undermining democracy? Does inequality kill,
say, by driving people to suicide or to “deaths
of despair”? Or is inequality a necessary evil
that we must tolerate at certain levels?
These are questions I am often
asked. But, truth be told, none of them is
particularly helpful, answerable, or even well
posed. Inequality is not so much a cause of
economic, political, and social processes as a
consequence. Some of these processes are
good, some are bad, and some are very bad
indeed. Only by sorting the good from the
bad (and the very bad) can we understand
inequality and what to do about it.
Moreover, inequality is not the same thing
as unfairness; and, to my mind, it is the latter
that has incited so much political turmoil in the
rich world today. Some of the processes that
generate inequality are widely seen as fair. But
others are deeply and obviously unfair, and
have become a legitimate source of anger and
.
In the case of the former, it is hard
to object to innovators getting rich by
all mankind. Some of the greatest inequalities
today are a consequence of industrial and
health revolutions that began around 1750.
countries in northwest Europe. But they have
since improved living conditions and health
outcomes for billions of people around the
Angus
Deaton
Angus Deaton, the
2015 Nobel laureate
in economics,
is Presidential
Professor of
Economics at
the University of
Southern California
and Professor of
Economics and
International
A
University’s
Woodrow Wilson
School of Public and
IA.
world. The inequalities stemming from these
advances – both within and between countries
progress generally.
On the other hand, getting rich by bribing
the state for special favors is clearly unfair, and
rightly resented. Many in the United States
– more so than in Europe – automatically
regard capitalist or market outcomes as
fair, and government action as arbitrary
and unfair. They object to government or
university-sponsored programs that seem to
favor particular groups, such as minorities or
immigrants.
This helps to explain why many white
working-class Americans have turned against
the Democratic Party, which they view as the
party of minorities, immigrants, and educated
elites. But another reason for growing public
discontent is that median real (inflationadjusted)
wages in the US have stagnated over
the past 50 years.
There are two different explanations
for the divergence between median and
top incomes, and it matters a great deal
.T
impersonal and unstoppable processes such
as globalization and technological innovation,
which have devalued low-skill labor and
favored the well educated.
The second explanation is more sinister.
It holds that median-income stagnation is
actually the direct result of rising incomes and
wealth at the top. In this account, the rich are
getting richer at the expense of everyone else.
Recent research suggests that there is
some truth to the second story, at least in the
US. Although globalization and technological
change have disrupted traditional work
arrangements, both processes have the
.
The fact that they have not suggests that
themselves. It will take much more work to
determine which policies and processes are
holding down middle- and working-class
wages, and by how much, but what follows is
a preliminary list.
First, health-care financing is having a
disastrous effect on wages. Because most
Americans’ health insurance is provided by
48 2018 | OUR WORLD

their employers, workers’ wages are
salaries in the medical industry. Every
year, the US wastes a trillion dollars –
about $8,000 per family – more than
other rich countries on excessive
health-care costs, and has worse
health outcomes than nearly all of
them. Any one of several European
financing alternatives could recoup
those funds, but adopting any of them
those now profiting from the status
quo.
A
related problem is increasing
market consolidation in many
sectors of the economy. As a
result of hospital mergers, for example,
hospital prices have risen rapidly, but
hospital wages have not, despite a
decades-long shortage of nurses.
Increasing market concentration is
probably a factor underpinning slow
productivity growth, too. After all, it
seeking and monopolization than
through innovation and investment.
Another problem is that the US
federal minimum wage – currently at
$7.25 per hour – has not increased
since July 2009. Despite broad
public support, raising the minimum
wage is always difficult, owing to
the disproportionate influence that
wealthy firms and donors have in
Congress.
Making matters worse, more than
20% of workers are now bound by
non-compete clauses, which reduce
workers’ bargaining power – and thus
their wages.
Similarly, 28 US states have now
enacted so-called “right-to-work” laws,
which forbid collective-bargaining
arrangements that would require
workers either to join unions or pay
union dues. As a result, disputes
between businesses and consumers
or workers are increasingly settled out
of court through arbitration – a process
that is overwhelmingly favorable to
businesses.
Yet another problem is outsourcing,
not just abroad, but also within the
US, where businesses are increasingly
replacing salaried or full-time workers
with independent contractors.
The food servers, janitors, and
maintenance workers who used to
be a part of successful companies
are now working for entities with
names like AAA-Service Corporation.
These companies operate in a highly
competitive low-wage industry, and
opportunity for advancement.
The earned income tax credit (EITC)
has provided a boost in living standards
for many low-paid US workers. But,
because it is available only to those
who work, it puts downward pressure
on wages in a way that unconditional
would not.
Unskilled immigration also poses
a problem for wages, though this
is controversial. It is often said that
immigrants take jobs that Americans
do not want. But such statements are
meaningless without some reference
to wages. It hard to believe that lowskilled
Americans’ wages would
have remained as low as they did in
the absence of inflows of unskilled
immigrants. As the economist Dani
Rodrik pointed out 20 years ago,
globalization makes demand for labor
more elastic. So, even if globalization
does not reduce wages directly, it
makes it harder for workers to get a
pay raise.
Another structural problem is that
the stock market rewards not just
innovation but also redistribution from
.T
G
has grown from 20% to 25% over the
same period that median wages have
stagnated. The increase would be
even higher if executive salaries were
.
OUR ECONOMIES
The final problem on our
preliminary list is political. We have
.
The Consumer Financial Protection
Bureau, despite having uncovered
major scandals, is now under threat,
as is the 2010 Dodd-Frank legislation,
which introduced measures to prevent
another financial crisis. Moreover,
President Donald Trump has indicated
that he wants to eliminate a rule
requiring money managers to act in
their clients’ best interest. All of the
deregulatory “reforms” currently being
proposed will benefit capital at the
expense of workers and consumers.
The same is true of US Supreme
Court rulings in recent years.
The court’s decision in Citizens
United v. FEC, for example, gave wealthy
Americans and even corporations
the ability to spend almost unlimited
amounts to support candidates and
engineer legislative and regulatory
outcomes that work in their favor.
If this account of stagnant median
wages and rising top wages is correct,
then there may be a silver lining to our
era of inequality, because it means that
the US’s dysfunctional labor market
is not an irremediable consequence
of unstoppable processes such as
globalization and technological change.
Broadly shared progress can be
achieved with policies that are designed
workers. And such policies need not
even include redistributive taxation,
which many workers oppose. Rather,
they can focus on ways to encourage
competition and discourage rentseeking.
With the right policies,
capitalist democracy can work better
for everyone, not just for the wealthy.
We do not need to abolish capitalism
or selectively nationalize the means
of production. But we do need to put
the power of competition back in the
service of the middle and working
classes.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
49

OUR ECONOMIES
The Global Economy’s Risky Recovery
By Joseph E. Stiglitz
A
year ago, I predicted that the most
distinctive aspect of 2017 would be
uncertainty, fueled by, among other
things, Donald Trump’s election as president
in the United States and the United Kingdom’s
vote to leave the European Union. The only
certainty, it seemed, was uncertainty – and
that the future could become a very messy
place.
As it turned out, although 2017 was not a
particularly great year, it was far better than
many had feared. Trump proved every bit as
bombastic and erratic as expected. Anyone
who paid attention only to his incessant tweets
might think the US was teetering between a
trade war and a nuclear war. Trump would
insult Sweden one day, Australia the next, and
then the EU – and then support neo-Nazis at
home. And the members of his plutocratic
of interest, incompetence, and sheer nastiness.
There have been some worrisome
regulatory rollbacks, especially concerning
environmental protection, not to mention
the many hate-driven acts that Trump’s
bigotry may have encouraged. But, so far,
the combination of America’s institutions and
the Trump administration’s incompetence has
meant that there is (fortunately) a yawning
gap between the president’s ugly rhetoric and
what he has actually accomplished.
Most important for the global economy,
there has been no trade war. Using the
exchange rate between Mexico and the US as
a barometer, fears for the future of the North
American Free Trade Agreement have largely
subsided, even as trade negotiations have
stalled. Yet the Trump roller-coaster never
ends: 2018 may be the year that the hand
grenade Trump has thrown into the global
.
Some point to the US stock market’s
record highs as evidence of some Trumpian
economic miracle. I take it partly as evidence
that the decade-long recovery from the
Joseph E.
Stiglitz
Joseph E. Stiglitz,
a Nobel laureate
in economics, is
University Professor
at Columbia
University and Chief
Economist at the
Roosevelt Institute.
GR.E
downturn – even the deepest – eventually
comes to an end; and Trump was lucky to be
of his predecessor in setting the scene.
But I also take it as evidence of market
participants’ short-sightedness, owing to
their exuberance at potential tax cuts and
the money that might once again flow to
Wall Street, if only the world of 2007 could
be restored. They ignore what followed in
2008 – the worst downturn in three quarters
inequality that previous tax cuts for the super
rich have brought.
They give short shrift to the deglobalization
risks posed by Trump’s protectionism. And
T
tax cuts are enacted, the Fed will raise interest
.
In other words, the market is once again
showing its proclivity for short-term thinking
and pure greed. None of this bodes well for
America’s long-term economic performance;
and it suggests that while 2018 is likely to be
a better year than 2017, there are large risks
on the horizon.
It’s a similar picture in Europe. The UK’s
decision to leave the EU didn’t have the jolting
anticipated, largely because of the pound’s
depreciation. But it has become increasingly
clear that Prime Minister Theresa May’s
government has no clear view about how to
manage the UK’s withdrawal, or about the
country’s post-Brexit relationship with the EU.
There are two further potential hazards
for Europe. One risk is that heavily indebted
I
avoid crisis once interest rates return to more
normal levels, as they inevitably will. After
all, is it really possible for the eurozone to
maintain record-low rates for the foreseeable
future, even as US rates increase? Hungary
and Poland represent a more existential
50 2018 | OUR WORLD

OUR ECONOMIES
The EU is being
tested, and there
are well-founded
fears that it will
be found wanting.
The effects of these
political tests on
next year’s economic
performance may be
small, but the longterm
risks are clear
and daunting.
An Artist’s rendering of the world in imbalance.
FLICKR / QIMONO
threat to Europe. The EU is more
than just an economic arrangement
of convenience. It represents a union
of countries with a commitment to
basic democratic values – the very
values that the Hungarian and Polish
governments now disparage.
The EU is being tested, and there
are well-founded fears that it will be
found wanting. The effects of these
political tests on next year’s economic
performance may be small, but the
long-term risks are clear and daunting.
On the other side of the world,
Chinese President Xi Jinping’s Belt and
Road Initiative is changing Eurasia’s
economic geography, putting China at
the center, and providing an important
stimulus for region-wide growth. But
China must confront many challenges
as it undergoes a complicated transition
from export-led growth to growth
driven by domestic demand, from a
manufacturing economy to a servicebased
economy, and from a rural to
an urban society. The population is
aging rapidly. Economic growth has
slowed markedly. Inequality is by
some accounts almost as severe as in
the US, where it is the fourth-highest in
the OECD (behind Mexico, Turkey, and
Chile). And environmental degradation
poses a growing threat to human
health and welfare.
China’s unprecedented economic
success over the past four
decades has been partly
based on a system whereby broad
consultation and consensus-building
within the Communist Party and the
Chinese state underpinned each set
of reforms.
Will Xi’s concentration of power
work well in an economy that has
grown in size and complexity? A
system of centralized command
and control is incompatible with a
as China’s; at the same time, we know
markets can lead an economy.
But these are all essentially longterm
risks. For 2018, the safe bet is that
China will manage its way, albeit with
slightly slower growth.
In short, as the advanced
economies’ post-2008 recession fades
into the distant past, global prospects
for 2018 look a little better than in 2017.
T
stimulative stance will reduce the need
for extreme monetary policies, which
almost surely have had distortionary
but also on the real economy.
But the concentration of power in
China, the eurozone’s failure (thus far)
to reform its flawed structure, and,
most important, Trump’s contempt
for the international rule of law, his
rejection of US global leadership,
and the damage he has caused to
democracy’s standing all pose deeper
risks. Indeed, they threaten not just to
hurt the global economy, but also to
slow what, until recently, had seemed
to be an inevitable march toward
greater democracy worldwide. We
should not let short-run success lull
us into complacency.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
51

OUR ECONOMIES
The Free Market
for the Next
Generation
By Eli Hazan
While the Free Market and
Capitalism have made our
world so prosperous, out of
this abundance has brought a magnitude
criticism of the economic system that has
brought so many people to places that they
had once never dared to dream about.
Many countries who have adopted this
economic system based on the Free Market
are experiencing the greatest economic
situations in history. However, sometimes
it seems that the more economic and
democratic success a country experiences,
more of its own people express
dissatisfaction, longing for a world that
only truly existed in their imagination. Add
to this a short-term memory and a lack of
perspective, and maybe we can understand
why people demonstrate on the streets in
order to retain the agenda that once caused
them harm.
Israel is an essential case study for
the “libel” of the Free Market: From the
establishment of the State in 1948 until
1977, Israel was ruled by the Left-Wing
Labor Party, which instituted a monopolistic
and protectionist government. At this time,
there was a fairly permanent economic
situation of the poor and the poorer. Were
there rich people? Yes, but not as we are
today. Since then, the Likud, the centre-
I
in a freer direction.
Although the Likud hasn’t managed to
institute a completely free economy, it is
Eli Hazan
Eli Hazan is the
FA
Director of The Likud
Party. Previously
served as adviser
to the Minister of
Education, as well
as Parliamentary
adviser to the
Chairman of the
Likud faction and
the Coalition. He is
also a lecturer at the
S.I.D College.
quite fascinating to see what has been done
in the last 30 years: Israel’s population has
doubled in size and life expectancy has
grown substantially – placing Israel among
the top 8 nations in the world. The number
of vehicles per 1000 residents has increased
by 133%, the tax burden has dropped
G
from $8000 to $41000, while Israel’s GDP
has bypassed countries such as Britain,
France, Italy, and Japan. Foreign exchange
reserves have grown by 2700%, government
debt fell from 270% to about 60%. Total
exports grew tenfold, reaching $100 billion
this year. The number of students increased
by 351%, and unemployment fell to 4%.
However, Israelis still suffer from
two main economic problems that
hinder success: the cost of living is very
high, and there is an acute problem of
high housing prices. Nevertheless, the
political structure of the State prevents
Netanyahu’s government from improving
the situation. On one hand, labor unions
and big corporations continue to put a lot
of pressure on the government in order to
smaller competitors. On the other hand,
the bureaucracy is only growing stronger.
It is a recipe for a terrible stagnation.
In 2011, many Israelis partook in social
demonstrations on the streets. Along with
spontaneous demonstrators, populist
politicians from the Left exploited the
general population’s lack of interest and
understanding regarding the cost of living.
These dangerous politicians demanded the
greatest injustice a country could do to its
citizens: increasing government spending.
Not only did they deny the opening of the
market to competition, they added insult
to injury by demanding more power to the
bureaucrats. As time goes by, it seems that
these politicians are unwilling to learn the
lesson of what happened in countries like
Venezuela.
Given the situation in which many of
Israel’s young people are not interested in
these issues, an ironic situation is created.
The recipe that led to Israel’s success is
52 2018 | OUR WORLD

OUR ECONOMIES
Give me Capitalism or Give Me Death & Make Love not Capitalism. Two posters seen in the streets of New York City.
MICHAEL MANDIBERG | FLICKR
mistakenly portrayed as a failure,
and the recipe that led to the failure
of Israel is mistakenly portrayed as
a success. In fact, everybody asks
to receive from the State without
realising that they must work for it
and give back.
Thus, without understanding
the significance of these
actions, this situation may
cause this young generation to
sacrifice the next for their own
gain. We understand that in fact, the
great challenge of our generation is
to educate the present generation
and those who will come after; to
treat the free economy as Churchill
defined Democracy: “Democracy
is the worst form of government
... except for all the others.” The
story of Israel is not unique. We
OUR WORLD | 2018
power of parties such as the British
Labor Party led by Jeremy Corbyn,
or Bernie Sanders, who is one of
the leaders of the Democratic Party
in the United States, to understand
that the challenge is huge.
And that is the whole story in a
nutshell. If we do not educate the
next generation to believe in the
Free Market and to apply it, we may
quality of life of those who used to
live here two generations ago. If leftwing
politicians want to impose their
views on us, we should do everything
possible to prevent it by democratic
means.
If we do not educate the next generation to believe in
the Free Market and to apply it, we may find ourselves
living in the poorer quality of life of those who used to
live here two generations ago.
53

OUR ECONOMIES
Saving the Environment
and the Economy
By Edmund S. Phelps
Every country has national problems,
such as a dangerous loss of inclusion or
a costly loss of growth. We learn that a
solution does not happen without society’s
understanding of the problem and a wide
desire for action.
But with climate change, all countries have
a shared problem, too. And although experts
have gained understanding and reached a
consensus on the objectives to be sought,
these goals require wider support from society
than exists so far.
As everyone knows, most of the climate
change started with the burning of fossil fuels
brought by the industrialization that began in the
late eighteenth century and has been producing
rising levels of carbon dioxide ever since.
A major point is that the climate has already
deteriorated to such an extent that it has
become costly to society and even dangerous
to life: The violence of hurricanes has risen
following the rise of water temperature in
the Caribbean. Air quality is deteriorating
noticeably around the world. And rising sea
levels are threatening many low-lying cities.
In his recent book, Endangered Economies,
G
measures, public and private, taken to block
further climate change. A point introduced
by Heal is that the damage – in many cases,
the devastation – done to our natural world
has serious consequences not only for the air
and water we depend on for our existence,
but also for businesses, which have relied
water cycle, marine and forest ecosystems,
and more. Thus, preserving “natural capital”
would raise the rate of return on capital in
the business sector. Businesses would react
by investing more, thus boosting productivity
Edmund S.
Phelps
Edmund S.
Phelps, the 2006
Nobel laureate
in Economics, is
Director of the
Center on Capitalism
and Society at
Columbia University
and the author of
Mass Flourishing.
in the economy. And with each such boost,
preserve still more of the world’s natural
capital.
The world, then, must give up aspiring to
economic growth so rapid that it is running
down the world’s natural capital. We want
economic growth that is “green” – without
damaging or destroying the environment. At
the same time, we want improvement of the
environment without stopping innovation and
economic growth.
In a series of powerful presentations and
interviews, the Columbia economist and
mathematician Graciela Chichilnisky contends
that mankind’s survival requires that we
remove the CO2 already accumulated in the
atmosphere and ensure that it stays out of the
atmosphere. To cover the cost, Chichilnisky
proposes a marketplace in which the captured
carbon is sold for commercial use.
Another possible solution is “regenerative
agriculture,” such as what the biologist Allan
Savory recently introduced in Patagonia.
I
create an incentive for private actors to undertake
carbon capture far beyond what a national
.
success will depend on whether “carbon farming”
supply, and thus falling prices.
We will also have to come to grips
with fundamental challenges such
as continuing population growth,
industrialization, and weak governance. And
we will have to strike a balance between
people still have lives that are worth living.
One might look at the growing body of
research into climate change and conclude
that we can rest easy: the experts have already
worked out what needs to be done. But the
experts themselves are not so naive. They know
that businesses will not police themselves,
and they recognize that much will depend on
for social good. The problem is that too many
people assume that businesses, households,
and policymakers will simply do what the
experts recommend: that all companies – out
54 2018 | OUR WORLD

OUR ECONOMIES
of social pressure or threats from the
state – will pay for the damage they
cause; and that all governments will
eventually institute carbon taxes or
cap-and-trade arrangements to reduce
and eventually eliminate emissions.
Another problem is that much
environmental damage is not
straightforward to control. Even if large
pollution by, say, replanting rainforests
in Central America, the earth has come
to have a human population that is
huge and still rising. This presents
challenges. As the economist Dennis
J. Snower showed some years ago,
discrete individual activities – such as
or simply letting the water run – can
contribute significantly to pollution
and environmental degradation, but
go largely unseen by governments,
communities, and individuals. That
being the case, any program to
protect the environment must be
based on moral suasion: to call on all
individuals– not just corporations – to
summon whatever sense of altruism
they have and curb voluntarily their
own polluting.
Yet, another problem is that
many countries are still undergoing
industrialization. So, even if every
country on the planet could reduce
its per capita contribution to pollution,
the ongoing rise in the proportion of
the world’s population working in
countries that are now in the stage of
industrializing will pull up the global
average. Clearly, this demographic
phenomenon will make for tough
sledding as we pursue Heal’s proposed
measures to limit CO2 emissions.
We will also have to confront the
fact that not all governments are
able to stand up to vested interests.
Powerful companies can get away with
violating environmental restrictions
issued by the government, especially
if they are a major source of income
and jobs.
We want economic
growth that is ‘green’
– without damaging
or destroying the
environment. At the
same time, we want
improvement of the
environment without
stopping innovation
and economic
growth.
More difficulties arise if most
people are still poor but
determined to become
rich – as rich as the richest countries
in the West. In such a country, the
government might not be ready to cut
deep into carbon emissions or other
pollution lest it miss its growth target.
It has been estimated that 20% of the
world’s population accounts for 80%
of the world’s consumption of natural
resources. Because the right to survival
trumps any one country’s right to ruin
the environment in pursuit of growth,
climate change will have to be tough
with those that think the costs of
reducing emissions are too high.
Lastly, renewable energies could
pose new challenges for wages and
employment in the future. According
to the International Renewable
Energy Agency, the US wind and solar
industries have been creating jobs –
employing 777,000 people in 2016 –
while the coal industry has continued
to shed them. But this is not a useful
observation, given that employees
come from other industries, not
from some vast pool of unemployed
but well-suited workers. It would be
absurd to think that total employment
is raised by every newly arriving
industry.
Economic theory implies that
a new industry will expand overall
employment only if its method of
production is more labor-intensive than
the cross-industry average. However, I
have yet to see data for the renewables
sector that addresses this issue, and I
would not be surprised if the industry
became highly capital-intensive over
time.
I have long emphasized not just
the material rewards of work – mainly
wage rates (from the bottom up) and
labor force participation rates – but
also the non-material side of work (the
various satisfactions that people get
from the experience of work). Now that
the imagination and ingenuity of our
experts and engineers have helped us
turn the corner, it will be important that
we get back to business: to conceive
of new products and methods of
production, test them in the market,
and strive for the new.
“Young America,” Abraham Lincoln
once said, “has a great passion – a
perfect rage – for the ‘new’.” It is time
for us all to be young like that again. As
the project to reclaim our environment
plays out and as the other international
challenges are being met and resolved,
also to revive an older conception
of work based on exercising one’s
initiative and using one’s creativity. The
good life must again be understood as
a personal voyage into the unknown,
through which one might “act on the
world” and “make your garden grow”
– in order to be “somebody.”
The worry – my worry, at any rate –
is that our national economies, many
of them already highly regulated in the
name of stability, will become much
more regulated in the name of a green
economy. Yes, many regulations may
be needed, but we must be careful in
do not strangle the sources of what
makes life worth living.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
55

OUR ECONOMIES
Short-Term
Gains,
Long-Term
Hazards
By Maurice Obstfeld
AN
the state-mint in Rome, Italy.
EPA
The year 2017 appears to be ending
on a high note, with GDP growth in
much of the world continuing to rise,
marking the broadest cyclical upswing since
the start of the decade. Throughout Europe
and Asia, and in the United States and Canada,
growth expectations have risen, while some
important emerging economies that until
recently were shrinking – for example, Brazil
and Russia – have resumed growth.
Several countries continue to struggle,
including many fuel exporters and low-
or natural disasters, especially drought. But
faster recovery is benefiting roughly twothirds
of the world’s population.
These developments follow years of
geographically uneven, stop-and-go growth
following the global crisis of 2008-2009 and
the subsequent 2010-2011 rebound. As
recently as early 2016, the world economy
sputtered, driving the price of oil to near $25
per barrel (it is now around $60) and yielding
the weakest global growth rate since the
outright contraction of 2009. Thus, heading
into 2018, the sense of relief among many
economic policymakers is palpable.
Why has economic performance
improved? While there has been a marked
rise in indicators of consumer and business
sentiment, and with them, investment, it
would be wrong to attribute the recent
upswing entirely to happenstance or “animal
spirits.” Fundamental factors, notably
Maurice
Obstfeld
Maurice Obstfeld
is Chief Economist
of the International
Monetary Fund.
macroeconomic policies, have been at work
as well.
Monetary policy has long been and
remains accommodative in the largest
countries. Even though the United States
Federal Reserve continues to raise interest
rates gradually, it has been cautious, having
wisely responded to the turbulence of early
2016 by postponing previously expected
rate increases. The European Central Bank
has started to taper its large-scale asset
purchases, but has also signaled that interestrate
increases are a distant prospect.
As a result, financial conditions have
been easy, buoying both lending and asset
prices worldwide. Fiscal policy in advanced
economies has, on balance, shifted from
contractionary to roughly neutral over the
past few years, while China has provided
slowed at mid-decade, with important
positive spillovers to its trade partners.
remain relatively low – indeed, puzzlingly so
in the advanced economies – even as gaps
between actual and potential GDP have
narrowed or closed. Some might view the
of all possible worlds.
For many countries, however, longer-term
growth prospects are less encouraging. Aging
workforces, slower productivity growth, and
higher debt burdens since the crisis darken
56 2018 | OUR WORLD

the outlook. For example, annual
per capita growth in the advanced
economies averaged 2.2% in the
decade following 1995, and naturally
dipped following the crisis; but even
for the years between now and 2022,
annual per capita growth will reach
only 1.4%, according to International
Monetary Fund projections.
Absent some unforeseen
surge in productivity, the
current upswing in advanced
economies will inevitably moderate:
growth will slow as monetary policies
as countries are forced to consolidate
public finances strained by high
government debts and burgeoning
spending on pensions and health
care. In turn, slower overall growth
will make it harder to counter slow
wage growth, especially among the
unskilled, adding to the burden of
inequality and resulting resentments.
Many emerging-market and lowincome
economies will also face
headwinds.
Economic policymakers throughout
the world therefore face two major
challenges. First, can they act to
bolster output levels over the longer
term? Second, can they increase their
economies’ resilience and inclusiveness
while reducing the likelihood that the
current upswing ends in an abrupt
slowdown or even a new crisis?
These two challenges are closely
interrelated. Today’s favorable
economic conditions provide a
window of opportunity for policies
that can meet both.
The key to improving long-run
growth prospects and perceived
fairness is investment in people.
Educational investment increases
workers’ productivity and ability to
navigate structural transformation,
whether due to trade or technology.
Apprenticeship programs, moreover,
can save resources wasted through
high youth unemployment, while
counseling and retraining can
prolong working lives. Conversely,
failure here would be destabilizing,
as weak job prospects and income
inequities would fuel a stronger voter
backlash against multilateralism in
international relations and prudent
economic policies at home.
As essential as these investments
are, they require fiscal outlays. To
avoid inflating already-high publicdebt
burdens, governments will need
to reform tax regimes, enhancing
revenues without discouraging
growth.
Tax systems should be designed
to increase inclusion, not least by
promoting labor-force participation.
And citizens will have more
the channels for tax avoidance used
by big corporations and the rich are
.
Greater economic resilience is
.A
wane, financial instability poses an
increasing threat. Many countries
improved their macro-prudential
frameworks after the crisis, including
by raising banks’ capital and liquidity.
The prolonged period of low interest
rates following the crisis has,
however, led to a search for yield and
global debt buildup that could prove
problematic for some borrowers
once interest rates rise.
Several economic studies,
including from the IMF, suggest
that even if debt booms are
associated with faster growth in
the short run, they often end in
tears. Some countries must rein in
excessive credit growth and reduce
issuance, while others still need to
address the bad loans left behind by
previous recessions. Countries should
strengthen financial oversight as
OUR ECONOMIES
well as their international regulatory
cooperation, thereby avoiding a race
to the bottom in prudential policy.
Emerging and low-income
economies face some challenges
that resemble those in advanced
economies.
China’s leaders, for example,
have recognized the imbalances
in the country’s financial system
and are moving to address them.
But several challenges are distinct.
Notwithstanding the recent uptick
in commodity prices, commodityproducing
countries need to diversify
their economies’ export mixes to
support future growth.Because the
current upswing is broad, the moment
is also ripe for action on a range of
multilateral priorities. Probably the
most urgent of these is to slow longterm
climate change resulting from
dependence on fossil fuels.
IMF research shows how
vulnerable low-income countries are
to the likely temperature increase
over the rest of this century, even
if the 2015 Paris climate agreement
achieves its goal of holding the
increase to less than 2º Celsius above
pre-industrial levels. But advanced
economies are vulnerable as well,
including through the spillovers of
political instability and mass migration
originating in warmer regions. It is
in their interest to embrace more
ambitious emissions targets and aid
low-income countries’ adaptation
.
The bottom line is that reveries of
an economic sweet spot risk lulling
policymakers into a false sense of
security. Current good times are most
likely temporary – indeed, the forces
producing this upswing may not last
much longer. To make the recovery
more durable, policymakers should
seize the current opportunity and
reform while they still can. Otherwise,
the future may be closer than we
think.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
57

OUR ECONOMIES
Rediscovering Public
Wealth Creation
By Mariana Mazzucato
At the cusp of the new year, a decadesold
debate among economists is
heating up again: Does austerity help
or hurt economic growth? Broadly speaking,
the debaters fall into two camps: conservatives
who call for limited public spending, and thus
a smaller state; and progressives who argue
for greater investment in public goods and
services such as infrastructure, education,
and health care.
Of course, reality is more complex
than this simple demarcation implies, and
even orthodox institutions such as the
International Monetary Fund have come
around to the view that austerity can be
self-defeating. As John Maynard Keynes
argued back in the 1930s, if governments
cut spending during a downturn, a shortlived
recession can become a full-fledged
depression. That is exactly what happened
during Europe’s period of austerity after the
.
And yet the progressive agenda cannot be
just about public spending. Keynes also called
on policymakers to think big. “The important
thing for Government is not to do things which
individuals are doing already,” he wrote in his
1926 book The End of Laissez Faire, “but to do
those things which at present are not done at
all.” In other words, governments should be
thinking strategically about how investments
can help shape citizens’ long-term prospects.
The economic historian Karl Polanyi went
even further in his classic book The Great
Transformation, in which he argued that
“free markets” themselves are products of
state intervention. In other words, markets
are not freestanding realms where states
can intervene for good or ill; rather, they are
Mariana
Mazzucato
Mariana Mazzucato
is Professor in
the Economics
of Innovation
and Public Value
and Director of
the Institute for
Innovation and
Public Purpose at
University College
London.
outcomes of public – not only private – action.
Businesses that make investment
decisions and anticipate the emergence
of new markets understand this fact. Top
managers, many of whom see themselves
as “wealth creators,” take courses in decision
sciences, strategic management, and
organizational behavior. They are encouraged
.
But if value is created collectively, those
who pursue a career in the public sector
should also be taught how to think like risk
takers. As it stands, they aren’t. Instead, public
policymakers and civil servants have come to
regard themselves not as wealth or market
at worst, as impediments to wealth creation.
This difference in self-conception is
partly the result of mainstream economic
theory, which holds that governments
should intervene only in cases of “market
failure.” The state’s role is to establish and
enforce the rules of the game; ensure a
infrastructure, defense, and basic research;
and devise mechanisms to mitigate negative
externalities such as pollution.
When states intervene in ways that exceed
their mandate to correct market failures,
they are often accused of creating market
distortions, such as by “picking winners” or
“crowding out” the private sector. Moreover,
the emergence of “new public management”
theory, which grew out of “public choice”
theory in the 1980s, led civil servants to
believe that they should take up as little space
as possible, fearing that government failures
might be even worse than market failures.
This thinking has caused many
governments to adopt accounting
mechanisms from the private sector, such
as cost-benefit analysis, or to outsource
functions to the private sector altogether, all
.
has not only failed to achieve its goals; it has
and left them ill equipped to work with
challenges such as climate change and
health-care provision for aging populations.
It was not always like this. In the postwar
58 2018 | OUR WORLD

OUR ECONOMIES
period, two US government agencies,
NASA and the Defense Advanced
Research Projects Agency (DARPA),
created what would later become the
Internet. Both agencies were founded
in the 1950s, and were given ample
funding and clear goals. Their missionoriented
approach allowed them
to attract top talent, and their staff
were told to think big and take risks.
Similarly, the US Advanced Research
Projects Agency-Energy (ARPA-E), set
up in 2009, has been responsible for
significant innovations in the field
of renewable energy, particularly
in battery storage. The National
Institutes of Health (NIH) has funded
the development of many blockbuster
drugs. In the United Kingdom, the BBC’s
ambitious computer literacy project
in the 1980s led to its investment in
the Micro computer. Procurement of
that device’s parts enabled companies
like Advanced RISC Machines, later
renamed Arm, to scale up and become
national powerhouses.
Today, the opposite is happening,
Public value does
not mean simply
redistributing
existing wealth or
correcting issues
affecting public
goods. Instead, it
means co-creating
value in different
spaces.
Monopoly money sits on the board of the popular table-top game.
with many mission-oriented public
institutions being weakened. NASA
increasingly has to justify its existence
in terms of immediate economic
value, rather than the pursuit of
bold missions. The BBC is also
evaluated according to increasingly
narrow metrics, which may justify
investments in high-quality content,
but fail to support public value
creation independent of the format.
Public value does not mean
simply redistributing existing wealth
goods. Instead, it means co-creating
value in different spaces. When
mission-driven public-sector actors
collaborate to tackle large-scale
problems, they co-create new markets
its direction.
But co-creating value and directing
growth require experimentation,
exploration, and trial and error. It
cannot work if civil servants are too
risk-averse, owing to fears that a
failed project might become frontpage
news, or are demotivated, owing
to the expectation that successes
will be interpreted as the work of
the private sector. While market
NEW EUROPE
fundamentalists heaped criticism
on the US government for funding
the solar startup Solyndra, which
eventually failed, they never mention
the fact that the Tesla S, now a major
success, received roughly the same
amount of public support.
In this intellectual climate, it has
become much easier for politicians to
call for public-sector downsizing than
to defend public-sector risk taking.
Not surprisingly, US President Donald
Trump has targeted ARPA-E, and
congressional Republicans routinely
threaten the public broadcaster PBS.
In the UK, the BBC’s prestige has
attacks.
The debate about growth in 2018
must include a focus on promoting
risk-taking and experimentation.
Such an approach can reawaken the
progressive agenda, making all actors
feel like they are in the driver’s seat
and preventing that narrow group
of self-acclaimed wealth creators
from simply extracting value. And
it will generate a more dynamic
conversation within civil society on
which missions might be the best
ones to bet on together.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
59

OUR ECONOMIES
Can
Economic
Policy
Solve
Economic
Problems?
By Jason Furman
The past year has witnessed several attacks,
including a few near misses, on the rules-based
global order that has undergirded prosperity in
the world’s advanced economies and the rapid growth of
many emerging economies. A lively debate has ensued
about whether the fundamental cause of such populist
attacks is economic or cultural. I suspect the answer is
a bit of both, especially because cultural explanations
raise the question of why now, whereas economic
explanations provide a ready answer: the significant
slowdown of income growth.
A tougher question is what can be done about it. The
challenge we face consists in the disconnect between
the economic aspirations of the discontented and the
policy tools we have at our disposal to meet them. And
in some cases, the tools themselves may be politically
counterproductive.
Still, we must try, because surveys of life satisfaction
reveal some disturbing trends. Life satisfaction in the
United States, as measured by the General Social Survey,
peaked in 1990 and has been largely trending down, even
as household incomes have risen (albeit tepidly). Other
major economies have also experienced declining levels
of self-reported wellbeing, including Italy, where Pew’s
measure of life satisfaction peaked in 2002, and France
as well. President Donald Trump won the 2016 election
partly by promising to address the drivers of these trends
– promises that neither he nor anyone else could keep.
He promised to restore manufacturing jobs, even though
manufacturing employment is falling worldwide as
machines replace humans, propelling record production
without commensurate job creation.
Similarly, Trump promised to restore the coal industry,
which has also been declining for decades, not only for
some of the same technological reasons, but also because
of the fall in the price of natural gas and, to a much lesser
degree, increased regulation of coal-based energy. More
broadly, his promise of substantial job creation, wage gains,
deep factors, like demographic trends and slow productivity
growth worldwide, that are at the root of today’s economic
challenges.
The right policy agenda is one that would foster
stronger, more inclusive growth. Although the details vary
from country to country, they generally include improving
education, increasing infrastructure investment, expanding
trade, reforming tax systems, and ensuring that workers
have an adequate voice in their economic futures.
But I worry that in advanced economies, all of these
policies combined would make only a small dent in today’s
problems. Developing countries can undergo large swings
in growth as a result of major policy and institutional
60 2018 | OUR WORLD

OUR ECONOMIES
TORBAKHOPPER|FLICKR
changes – witness China’s transition to a
market economy, India’s reforms to end
the license raj, or economic liberalization in
Latin America. But advanced economies are
all growing at very similar rates, and nothing
in the last several decades suggests that
structural policies can have a major impact
on medium- and long-term growth (in certain
circumstances, short-run demand policies can
.
If advanced economies did everything
right, their growth rate might increase by,
say, 0.3 percentage point. That is certainly
worth doing; much of economic policy is
.I
our politics will change radically if the median
US or French household gets an extra $1,800
after a decade.
Similarly, we should be making a much
.I
some countries, that means strengthening
workers’ bargaining power – higher minimum
wages and stronger unions would be a good
start – while tackling issues that weaken it,
like employer collusion and restraints on
Jason
Furman
Jason Furman,
Professor of the
Practice of Economic
Policy at the Harvard
Kennedy School and
Senior Fellow at the
Peterson Institute
for International
Economics, was
Chairman of
President Barack
Obama’s Council of
Economic Advisers
from 2013-2017.
employees’ ability to change jobs.
Policies that promote competition
and reduce inefficient rents also have an
important role to play. This includes more
reduce entry barriers, for example, by giving
people ownership of their personal data. But,
again, the plausible impact of such policies
would fall well short of overcoming people’s
concerns with inequality and slow income
growth.
Some other policies are economically
sensible, but may be politically
counterproductive. For example, while I
strongly agree with the widespread view
that a robust social safety net is needed
to protect the “losers” of globalization and
market-based competition, I worry that
creating one may be as likely to weaken as
to reinforce social cohesion. In the US, the
ACA
the largest expansion of the social safety net
in almost 50 years, and it is hard to imagine
another as large in the next 50 years. But
increased funding for health insurance and
the greatly reduced chance of becoming
uninsured have not dramatically changed
US politics or alleviated concerns about
job losses due to trade. If anything, the
Affordable Care Act may have increased
polarization, given that some of what fuels
populism is the resentment felt by those
to others at their expense.
Nonetheless, such economic policies are
the right steps to take, and they just might
help defuse a little of the anxiety. But we must
also be humble about our understanding of
which solutions could address our current
economic problems, particularly the need to
promote higher levels of employment.
In fact, the solution to our political
problems, in 2018 and beyond, may lie not
in any new policies or materially changed
circumstances, but in finding better ways
to communicate about the challenges we
face, the efforts being made to address
them, and the inherent limits that confront
all policymakers. There has to be a better
answer than just lying to people about what
our policies are capable of accomplishing.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
61

EUROPE’S FASTEST GROWING
POLITICAL MOVEMENT
www.acreurope.eu
Rue du Trône 4, 1000 Brussels +32 (0) 228 06 039 info@acreurope.eu www.acreurope.eu @ACREurope

SCIENCE &
TECHNOLOGY
TAMA66

Safeguarding Elections
in the Digital Age
By Jimmy Carter
Technology threatens to fundamentally
change the nature of elections and
democratic governance.
New media, including social media,
are fueling political polarization as people
communicate with general audiences and
narrowly focused groups, without the
deliberation typical of traditional forms of
communication. Hacking, misinformation,
“fake news” and cybersecurity threats
are expanding the power of a few while
of mass media and information. Politicians
are using detailed voter information to play
to their bases, allowing them to ignore the
rest of their constituents.
Democratization, which had advanced
steadily for decades, is now threatened by the
rise of authoritarian governments and the
closing of the political space to civil society,
journalists and others.
Advances in election technology are also
bringing new opportunities and new fears
— founded and unfounded — about the
security of the election process. Technology
is being introduced into electoral processes
to promote efficiency, but it also moves
voting and counting into the unobservable
digital realm. In the Netherlands, electronic
voting has been abandoned amid concerns
about foreign interference in elections.
During the 2016 presidential campaign in
the United States, Russian hackers broke into
the Democratic National Committee’s email
election’s outcome.
We must accommodate these changing
times while holding true to our unchanging
principles — equality, justice and freedom for
all. This means building political processes
that are inclusive and transparent and that
hold those in power accountable.
Jimmy
Carter
Jimmy Carter,
Former United
States President
Jimmy Carter
founded the
C
Center to advance
peace and health
worldwide.
Democratization,
which had advanced
steadily for
decades, is now
threatened by the
rise of authoritarian
governments and
the closing of the
political space to civil
society, journalists
and others.
In the United States, our path has been
nonlinear and riddled with failures, including
slavery, racial and sexual discrimination,
and abuse of indigenous peoples. The gap
between rich and poor has grown wider in
recent decades, while longstanding barriers
to voter participation, equal justice and
economic opportunities for all remain.
Nevertheless, we persevere, striving to
correct and improve our democracy.
Internationally, globalization has
contributed to increasing wealth, but billions
of people still struggle under crushing
poverty. We now face the threat of that
and subsequent government decisions.
Our society has worked to develop
global norms and an international system
to protect human rights for decades, from
the development of the United Nations and
the adoption of the Universal Declaration of
Human Rights in 1948 to current worldwide
efforts to secure political, economic and
social rights. At The Carter Center, we helped
strengthen the United Nations’ system.
During the course of observing more than 100
elections, we also worked to build consensus
on international election standards that are
66 2018 | OUR WORLD

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
rooted in human rights commitments.
Genuine elections are essential
for people to express their
political will, but elections
cannot guarantee democratic
governance. This will be even more
true as digital technology advances.
It’s essential that we manage
these changes within the broader
framework of strengthening our
commitment to human rights and
democracy — not to threaten selfgovernance,
but rather to safeguard it.
This means improving systems
for inclusive and effective political
participation, including full and
easy (or even automatic) access to
voter registration processes and
.T
especially critical for groups that have
faced obstacles to full participation,
including women, racial and ethnic
minorities, indigenous persons, the
elderly, the disabled and those living
in extreme poverty.
Transparency in elections and
political processes is needed to build
.
must be able to freely examine key
information about governance and
about electoral processes and results.
For example, in the United States,
voting technologies should include
AYMAN OGHANNA/THE NEW YORK TIMES.
BRYAN DENTON/THE NEW YORK TIMES.
paper trails that can be audited;
there should be fewer barriers to
independent nonpartisan observers;
and the results of audits and reviews
should be readily available to the
public.
Effective voter participation in
governance and policy making in
the digital era will require additional
protections for rights and freedoms
such as freedom of expression and
association and access to information
— including the internet. Citizens will
need better tools to assess the quality
and accuracy of information, such as
fact-checking apps that crosscheck
information against recognized
sources and databases.
We must also develop legal
frameworks and technological
systems that protect privacy and the
security of our personal information,
with processes for independent
oversight. People must be able to
learn what data is being gathered
about them and who has access to it.
We must understand how all of
this information is being used by
media, corporations, governments
and others to shape political views
and behavior, and develop and
implement standards and codes of
practice to ensure that this does not
undermine our common principles.
In these and other challenges, the
enduring principles of democracy and
human rights must be our guiding
lights, or the digital future could be
dark indeed.
TYLER HICKS/THE NEW YORK TIMES.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Jimmy Carter. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
67

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Contemporary
challenges and
opportunities
for our societies
The political
problem is that in
Europe we have
lost the bond
between people and
science.
By Carlos Moedas
Our society is constantly changing.
Some of this change is a result of
the storm of crises we have endured
in the past few years. Financial shocks,
terrorism, refugees, and now the imminent
E
States.
But some of the biggest changes in our lives
are the result of the keenest minds working
hard to give us fresh opportunities. These are
from today and who take it upon themselves
to make that future happen. Tim Berners-Lee,
the creator of the world-wide web once said:
II
.I
need and he decided to make something that
nobody had ever seen before.
This is the power of research and
innovation – to create something where once
there was nothing. Europe has an amazing
opportunity to create its own future and
.
overcome two problems – a political problem,
and a technical problem.
The political problem is that in Europe
we have lost the bond between people
and science. The vast majority of articles
focus on the negative potential outcomes.
The same is true for driverless cars. Critical
innovations such as vaccines are now widely
Carlos Moedas
Carlos Moedas
is the European
Commissioner for
Research, Science
and Innovation. He
is a former member
of the Portuguese
Parliament and the
former Secretary of
State to the Prime
Minister of Portugal.
derided online, even while measles makes a
comeback across Europe. For me, a technooptimist,
this is shocking.
Because this link has been broken,
E
innovation. It is talked down as a priority.
EU investment in research and innovation
has fallen considerably behind other World
Regions. The US alone invests €150 billion
more each year, and without closing this gap,
Europe risks becoming a passive observer of
technological change.
The second problem, the technical
problem, is that Europe missed the second
wave of the internet.
Steve Case, one of the pioneers of the
internet, argues that there are three major
.I
we built the infrastructure of the internet.
E
Tim Berners-Lee, and companies like Nokia,
Siemens and Ericsson.
In the second wave, entrepreneurs built
the applications on top of that infrastructure.
This is the world of Google, Facebook, Uber
and Twitter. This opened up many avenues
for innovation and opportunities for society.
To illustrate this, Robin Chase, CEO of Zipcar
remarked that now "your smartphone can be
your preferred mode of transport". However,
in this second phase Europe lost its edge and
fell behind.
68 2018 | OUR WORLD

Now we are moving into the
third wave. This is when
the digital revolution finally
moves to highly regulated sectors like
.
intelligence, genetics, blockchain, and
other highly complex science and
tech challenges, at the intersection
of the digital and physical worlds.
In this third wave I believe that
Europe has a great opportunity to
regain the initiative. Leaders and
policy makers can do a number
of things to help us to seize this
opportunity.
The first will be to practice
intelligent regulation. Jo Johnson,
the UK’s research minister, told me
a good illustration of this. He told
me about the laws in the UK in the
late 19th century, when cars first
arrived on British streets. They were
called the Locomotive Acts, and they
walk in front of cars that had more
than one wagon. The analogy for
bad, innovation-killing regulation is
perfect. A man carrying a red flag,
preventing progress. This must
not be us. We need to be smart, to
protect consumers, workers and
competition, while not standing in
the way of the development and
uptake of new technologies.
Secondly, research and innovation
profoundly affect our economy,
our society, and our lives. We have
to start to treat them with the
seriousness that they deserve, and
to put the discussion at the level of
Heads of State and Government.
Strong talk should be backed up by
strong investment – for fundamental
science, for market-creating
innovations, and by using public
loans to attract private money.
Finally, we also need to restore
the sense of purpose that was
once so central to publicly-funded
science. John F Kennedy knew
the uniting power of a common
scientific goal when he launched
the US’s quest to put a man on the
moon. We all remember the Human
Genome Project in the 90’s, and
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
how it captured out imagination. It
seemed incredible – to crack life’s
great code, to understand the very
core of our biological being and the
cause of so much that ails us. Dr
James Watson, co-discoverer of the
structure of DNA, rightly declared
it “a giant resource that will change
mankind, like the printing press.”
Fusion energy, the Human Brain
Project, cracking the secrets of the
universe in the Large Hadron Collider,
and defeating climate change by
invention and innovation – these
things and more we can achieve if we
E.A
we are courageous in accepting the
challenge.
Barack Obama once said:
"Traditionally, wealth was defined
by land and natural resources. Today
the most important resources is
between our ears." In this way more
than any other Europe is truly rich,
I see it every day in my role. Our
society is bubbling over with great
ideas, now we need to be serious
about supporting them.
A laboratory
assistant takes a
carriage with test
tubes containing
cell cultures from
an incubator at
the Robert Koch
Institute in Berlin,
Germany.
EPA/BRITTA PEDERSEN
OUR WORLD | 2018
69

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Tackling ‘digital’ at the
state level in a post-
DSM world?
By Krzysztof Szubert
As the year 2018 sets in, it’s a
are at building the Digital Single
Market and unlocking barriers for Europe’s
digital growth.
A number of proposed DSM-based
initiatives have already been adopted, while
others are still subject to negotiations. In
C
opening of publicly funded data and data
sharing, combating platforms-to-business
unfair practices, tackling illegal content
online, addressing the topic of boosting
disinformation.
However, while keeping up the work on
all the proposals on the table, we should
also take a closer look at the big picture.
We live in a world where almost every
aspect of daily and business life has a digital
component to it. This process is gathering
pace, and we will rely on digital technologies
even more in the future. To make full use
face derailing challenges that come our way
head-on at full speed.
We need to realise that we are dealing
with a complete alteration of the global
economy. Digitalisation has changed
the way businesses operate, states are
governed and the way people socialize and
communicate with each other. This is a
new reality and, as policymakers we need
to react accordingly. Technologies have a
way of evolving very fast. As such, they have
to be followed by prompt modifications
Krzysztof
Szubert
Krzysztof Szubert
is the Secretary
of State / Deputy
Minister of Digital
A
government of
Poland. He is
the Government
Plenipotentiary for
the Digital Single
Market. In the past,
he has served as
a member of the
Digitization Council
at the Ministry
A
Strategic Advisor
to the Minister
in the Ministry of
A
Plenipotentiary of
the Minister for
IA.
He holds his current
post since March
2017.
of regulations and policies that frame
.
profound transformation three decades
ago came with back-breaking experience
of generations. What came out of it can
.
As a country which had to transit from a
centrally-planned economy to a free-market
one in a short time, we could see the change
was necessary to go through if we wanted to
.
What Europe needs now is a stronger
than ever political will to tackle the hurdles
both in the way we cooperate and in what
we cooperate on. First comes the need to
have a coherent approach in managing
digital. To start with, there could be more
centralisation of digital management. Right
now not only many of the digital initiatives are
scattered across the European Commission,
but also different government bodies
coordinate their implementation at national
level. Establishing reliable mechanisms of
coordination, faster decision making and
swift implementation are then a must, if we
want to keep up with the rest of the world.
We do not have the luxury of waiting for the
administration to catch up; administration
should be one of the facilitators, rather
than resembling a passive pencil pushing
desk officer. The fairly slow-to-respond
system of dispersed entities overseeing the
digital dossier that we have now should be
replaced with a clear structure that, above
all, favours swift dialogue between the EU
institutions and EU Members. The European
Commission may be a good place to start.
The 2019 election opens a rare window of
opportunity to design a more centralized
digital commissioner’s dossier, so that there
is only one door out there to knock on. That
should be paired with the same move back
at national level. The Polish model of a
digital representative is one way to go here.
It was the decision of the Polish government
last year to appoint a plenipotentiary in
charge of overseeing the DSM strategy
and ensuring coherence in adoption of the
policies throughout government. It might
be considered as a good example to follow
for other governments as well. We remain
70 2018 | OUR WORLD

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Bitcoin miner Huang inspects a
malfunctioning mining machine
during his night shift at the Bitcoin
mine in Sichuan Province, China
open to share our experience in this
regard. One of the most important
principles here is to make sure that
such a post is located as close as
and gets full support from the state’s
leaders.
Secondly, there is an
unprecedented need for unity. With a
market of 500 million people, the EU
wins only if it stands undivided in the
political sense of the word.
The unique qualities of the digital
economy make a clear case for that,
as the truly European market needs
all barriers to be removed. The EU did
realize that with the Digital Agenda for
Europe, but it has never been more
true than today with the emergence
of the data economy and its immense
potential. The data economy simply
needs room for data to flow free.
Failing to deliver on that will leave us
missing our best chance of becoming
the global technological leader and
risks the Union itself crumbling apart.
We are already being left behind by
the US and China. We have to do
more than simply follow their lead.
OUR WORLD | 2018
The EU needs transformation as
well as courage to push smart ideas
forward. One of those was bringing
together the EU heads of states and
To make full
use of what
digitalisation
has to offer
is then to
face derailing
challenges that
come our way
head-on at full
speed.
governments in Tallinn last September
to discuss the digital agenda.
As one of the strong advocates
of digital summits, as well as one
of those behind the first meeting, I
am calling on the Presidency of the
Council of the EU to follow suit. There
are ideas to be explored - many of
them relating to data and how we
free it, make it accessible, reusable
and open. These tough questions lay
ahead, and we will need our leaders
as trailblazers.
The change needs to work for
everyone. This is true for a nation and
becomes critical for a union. Poland
wants a Europe that is truly united
and undivided, thus strong globally.
Here comes the all-embracing digital
revolution whose multifaceted
characteristic has been showing
us the potential unseen before in
economy, society, and politics.
Whoever learns to use this tool
and whoever shows the courage
to take the most of it, will benefit
in all three areas. As clichéd as it is,
to fully embrace this fact is to truly
understand the task before us.
71
EPA

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
How IT Threatens
Democracy
By Kofi A. Annan
The Internet and social media
were once hailed for creating new
opportunities to spread democracy
and freedom. And Twitter, Facebook, and
other social media did indeed play a key role
in popular uprisings in Iran in 2009, in the
Arab world in 2011, and in Ukraine in 2013-
2014. Back then, the tweet did at times seem
mightier than the sword.
But authoritarian regimes soon began
cracking down on Internet freedom. They
feared the brave new digital world, because
it was beyond the reach of their analogue
security establishments. Their fears proved
unfounded. In the event, most social mediaenabled
popular uprisings failed for want of
and military organizations retained the
upper hand.
In fact, these regimes have begun to
wield social media for their own ends. We
have all heard the allegations that Russia
covertly used social media to influence
electoral outcomes in Ukraine, France,
Germany, and, most famously, in the United
States. Facebook has estimated that Russian
content on its network, including posts and
paid ads, reached 126 million Americans,
around 40% of the nation’s population.
We should recall earlier accusations
by Russia of the West’s role in fomenting
the “color revolutions” in Ukraine and
Georgia. The Internet and social media
surreptitious manipulation of public opinion.
If even the most technologically advanced
countries cannot protect the integrity of
the electoral process, one can imagine the
challenges facing countries with less knowhow.
In other words, the threat is global.
In the absence of facts and data, the mere
Kofi A. Annan
KA.A
CK
Annan Foundation,
and former
Secretary General of
the United Nations.
possibility of manipulation fuels conspiracy
theories and undermines faith in democracy
and elections at a time when public trust is
already low.
Social media’s ideological “echo
chambers” exacerbate people’s natural
biases and diminish opportunities for
healthy debate.
This has real-world effects, because it
fosters political polarization and erodes
leaders’ capacity to forge compromises, the
basis of democratic stability. Likewise, the
hate speech, terrorist appeals, and racial
and sexual harassment that have found a
home on the Internet can lead to real-world
violence.
But social media are hardly the first
communication revolution to challenge
political systems. The printing press, radio,
and television were all revolutionary in their
day. And all were gradually regulated, even in
the most liberal democracies. We must now
consider how to submit social media to the
same rules of transparency, accountability,
and taxation as conventional media.
In the US, a group of senators has
introduced the “Honest Ads Act,” which
would extend the rules that apply to print,
radio, and television to social media. They
hope it will become law before the 2018
midterm election. In Germany, a new law,
the Netzwerkdurchsetzungsgesetz, requires
social-media companies to remove hate
speech and fake news within 24 hours or
.
As useful as these measures may be, I am
not sure that national laws will be adequate
to regulate online political activity. Many
poorer countries will not be able to put up
such resistance, and enforcement will be
data are stored and managed outside the
regulating country.
Whether or not new international
norms are necessary, we should
be careful that in seeking to curb
the excesses, we do not jeopardize the
fundamental right to freedom of expression.
Indeed, open societies should not over-react,
lest they undermine the very freedoms on
72 2018 | OUR WORLD

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
A young woman looks at Apple’s new iPhone 8 Plus at the Apple Store of Omotesando shopping district in Tokyo, Japan, 22
September 2017. Apple launched the iPhone 8 and the Apple Watch Series 3 on 22 September.
EPA-EFE/FRANCK ROBICHON
which they base their legitimacy.
But nor can we remain idle. A
few major players, in Silicon Valley
and elsewhere, hold our fate in their
hands; but if we can get them on
board, we can address the failings of
the current system.
In 2012, I convened the Global
Commission on Elections, Democracy,
and Security to identify and tackle the
challenges to the integrity of elections
and promote legitimate electoral
processes.
Only elections that the population
generally accepts as fair and
credible can lead to a peaceful and
democratic rotation of leadership,
conferring legitimacy on the winner
and protecting the loser.
Under the auspices of the Kofi
Annan Foundation, I will now convene
a new commission – this time, with
the masterminds of social media and
information technology, as well as
political leaders – to help us address
these crucial new issues. We will set
serve our democracies and safeguard
the integrity of our elections, while
harnessing the many opportunities
new technologies have to offer.
We will produce recommendations
that will, we hope, reconcile the
disruptive tensions created between
technological advances and one of
humanity’s greatest achievements:
democracy.
Technology does not stand still,
and nor should democracy.
We have to act fast, because
digital advances could be just the
start of a slippery slope leading to
an Orwellian world controlled by Big
Brother, where millions of sensors in
our smartphones and other devices
collect data and make us vulnerable
to manipulation.
Who should own all the data
collected by our phones and watches?
How should such data be used?
Should its use by others require our
consent? To whom are those using
our data accountable? These are
the big questions that will shape the
future of freedom.
Technology does
not stand still,
and nor should
democracy.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
73

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
The Internet of Things
– Delivering a Connected World
By Karim Lesina
Consumers today expect to be
connected from nearly anywhere, to
just about anything. We’re moving
to a world that will require instantaneous
and ubiquitous connectivity. For AT&T,
that means investing to be the premier
integrated communications company in the
world. Around the globe, we’re making cars,
homes, machines, shipping containers, and
more, smarter.
Our industry has experienced a dramatic
shift over the past 10 years. The pace of
change and innovation has been incredible.
And the pace of new players entering the
market has been just as staggering. AT&T
is not only no longer defined as a voice
T
an edge provider, or an equipment maker;
but as an integrated communications
provider, we’re all of these and more.
The new reality is this: We are all in the
communications business. Now, legacy
voice companies provide video; legacy video
companies provide voice; and companies
that didn’t exist a few short years ago
provide both, and more. Innovation and
competition is all around us. And that’s great
for consumers, and great for the industry.
The Internet of Things (IoT) is one of
these key innovative and hyper-competitive
frontiers. IoT is transforming how we live,
and it’s enabling new businesses ventures
and new methods of service delivery—
driving innovation in established industries
such as automotive and package delivery.
With data derived from devices, the
IoT is helping enable better allocation
of resources, improved awareness, and
enhanced services including:
• asset tracking for businesses;
• environmental and livestock monitoring
Karim
Lesina
Karim Lesina is
Vice President of
AT&T, covering
International
EA
the European Union,
Caribbean, Central
and Latin America
Regions and in
charge of Trans-
Atlantic Relations.
for farming operations;
• smarter cities and communities
with monitoring of public infrastructure
resources – roads & transit, parking, utilities;
• healthcare monitoring and service
delivery;
• wearables, activity monitors for
individuals; and
• improved safety and convenience of
connected cars.
Rapid change brings challenges
as well as benefits
Policy challenges. The issues engendered
by the IoT are as diverse and complex
as the ecosystem itself, presenting both
challenges unique to a particular industry
(e.g., automotive safety), and challenges
that apply across the board. Adapting policy
frameworks to the cross-jurisdictional and
cross-sectoral nature of IoT technologies
and solutions can have positive effects,
including:
• Ensuring a coherent approach to the
IoT across various government agencies
.
• Ensuring a consistent and open
approach across countries to enable
global IoT solutions. First, with numbering
.A
support continued permanent machine-tomachine
(M2M) roaming, without mandated
because International permanent roaming is
particularly suited to the global deployment
of M2M or Internet of Things (IoT) solutions.
This approach is also critical to areas such
as regulatory approaches and data privacy
requirements. Privacy and security span
all sectors. We all have a shared interest in
promoting consumer trust in IoT.
74 2018 | OUR WORLD

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
• Encouraging innovation and
adoption of IoT within governments:
Government users/customers of IoT
– from Smart Cities to government
agencies – will be significant
beneficiaries of the IoT, but the
customary acquisition models are
often an obstacle.
E
balanced pipeline of licensed and
unlicensed spectrum to keep up with
the growing demand for spectrum
posed by the IoT.
Recommended policy
frameworks for IoT
1.Governments should encourage
a comprehensive and consistent
policy framework. In any individual
country, this requires coordination
across the dozens of agencies that
could have a role in regulating IoT.
In absence of a well-coordinated,
low-touch framework, there is a risk
OUR WORLD | 2018
that duplicative and inconsistent
sector-based regulation will impede
growth of IoT – especially as we
look to industries such as food
and drug, aviation, transportation,
communication, and energy.
Government agencies should work
cooperatively with one another and
with industry to coordinate process,
streamline regulation and avoid
duplication or inconsistency.
2. Promote international,
interoperable policy frameworks.
Many IoT solutions will only reach
their optimal economic scale if they
can operate around the globe. The
economics of IoT devices are very
.
It’s important that manufacturers
can achieve scale, so they can “build
it once, use it everywhere.” Foremost,
regulatory policy must also allow for
cross-border data flows and allow
IOT providers to choose from a range
AT&T’s ‘Flying COW’. Exploring the capabilities of LTE-connected drones in the
wake of Hurricane Maria’s devastation will help temporarily restore connectivity
.
AT&T
of business models, including ability
for IoT roaming that is optimal for
their business model.
3. Support voluntary, collaborative
initiatives to promote consumer trust.
Government and the private sector
have a shared interest in promoting
IT.
industry deeply understands that
consumer trust in security and privacy
is a critical component of commercial
success.
As governments around the world
grapple with how best to address
cybersecurity and to promote trust
and security, it is important that they
engage in a transparent process that
looks to existing privacy and security
frameworks and standards that
support technological innovation
and growth that will ultimately lead
to better security. By collaborating
with the private sector and obtaining
cooperation and “buy-in” from all
stakeholders, governments can often
develop the best security policies and
can help ensure companies be vested
in developing highly secure systems.
4. Overall, adopt a light touch,
flexible regulatory regime that
protects innovation and facilitates
rapid market developments. Let’s
recognize ways in which IoT is
regulation to new technologies and
services.
5. Apply regulatory requirements
and responsibilities consistently
to IoT services on an end-to-end
basis. Rules should be technology
neutral and not single out individual
companies, sectors or business
models.
The critical goal for policymakers
is to address these issues in a way
that facilitates the progression of the
IoT to enable consumers, businesses,
and government institutions across
the globe to realize the economic
IT.
75

A Big
Data
Dystopia
By Chelsea Manning
For seven years, I didn’t exist.
While incarcerated, I had no bank
statements, no bills, no credit history.
In our interconnected world of big data, I
person. After I was released, that lack of
information about me created a host of
problems, from difficulty accessing bank
and renting an apartment.
In 2010, the iPhone was only three
years old, and many people still didn’t see
smartphones as the indispensable digital
appendages they are today. Seven years later,
virtually everything we do causes us to bleed
digital information, putting us at the mercy of
invisible algorithms that threaten to consume
our freedom. Information leakage can seem
innocuous in some respects. After all, why
worry when we have nothing to hide?
..
We send emails. Tax records are used to
keep us honest. We agree to broadcast our
location so we can check the weather on our
smartphones. Records of our calls, texts and
NYTCREDIT KIM STEELE/NEW YORK TIMES
Chelsea
Manning
Chelsea E. Manning
is an advocate
of government
transparency, a
transgender rights
activist and a former
United States Army
intelligence analyst.
In 2013 she was
convicted under the
Espionage Act for
documents about
the wars in Iraq
and Afghanistan.
Her sentence was
commuted by
President Obama in
January and she was
released in May.
our billing information. Perhaps that data is
analyzed more covertly to make sure that
of national security, we’re assured.
Our faces and voices are recorded by
surveillance cameras and other internetconnected
sensors, some of which we now
willingly put inside our homes. Every time we
load a news article or page on a social media
site, we expose ourselves to tracking code,
allowing hundreds of unknown entities to
monitor our shopping and online browsing
habits. We agree to cryptic terms-of-service
agreements that obscure the true nature and
scope of these transactions.
According to a 2015 study from the Pew
Research Center, 91 percent of American
adults believe they’ve lost control over how
their personal information is collected and
used. Just how much they’ve lost, however, is
more than they likely suspect.
The real power of mass data collection
lies in the hand-tailored algorithms
capable of sifting, sorting and identifying
patterns within the data itself. When
enough information is collected over time,
governments and corporations can use
or abuse those patterns to predict future
human behavior. Our data establishes a
“pattern of life” from seemingly harmless
digital residue like cellphone tower pings,
76 2018 | OUR WORLD

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
credit card transactions and web browsing histories.
The consequences of our being subjected to constant
algorithmic scrutiny are often unclear. For instance,
artificial intelligence — Silicon Valley’s catchall term for
deep thinking and deep-learning algorithms — is touted
by tech companies as a path to the high-tech conveniences
of the so-called internet of things. This includes digital home
assistants, connected appliances and self-driving cars.
Simultaneously, algorithms are already analyzing social
media habits, determining creditworthiness, deciding which
job candidates get called in for an interview and judging
whether criminal defendants should be released on bail.
Other machine-learning systems use automated facial
analysis to detect and track emotions, or claim the ability
to predict whether someone will become a criminal based
only on their facial features.
These systems leave no room for humanity, yet they
.I
summer, I painfully discovered that they have no time for
them. I came out publicly as transgender and began
hormone replacement therapy while in prison. When I was
existing as a trans woman. Credit and background checks
automatically assumed I was committing fraud. My bank
accounts were still under my old name, which legally no
longer existed. For months I had to carry around a large
folder containing my old ID and a copy of the court order
declaring my name change. Even then, human clerks and
bank tellers would sometimes see the discrepancy, shrug
and say “the computer says no” while denying me access
to my accounts.
Such programmatic, machine-driven thinking has
become especially dangerous in the hands of governments
and the police. In recent years our military, law enforcement
and intelligence agencies have merged in unexpected ways.
They harvest more data than they can possibly manage, and
MICHAEL KAMBER/NEW YORK TIMES
With no apparent boundaries
on how algorithms can use and
abuse the data that’s being
collected about us, the potential
for it to control our lives is evergrowing.
usually windowless buildings called fusion centers.
Such powerful new relationships have created a
foundation for, and have breathed life into, a vast police
and surveillance state. Advanced algorithms have made
this possible on an unprecedented level. Relatively
minor infractions, or “microcrimes,” can now be policed
aggressively. And with national databases shared among
governments and corporations, these minor incidents can
follow you forever, even if the information is incorrect or
lacking context. At the same time, the United States military
uses the metadata of countless communications for drone
attacks, using wireless pings emitted from cellphones to
track and eliminate targets.
In literature and pop culture, concepts such as
“thoughtcrime” and “precrime” have emerged out of
.T
anyone who is flagged by automated systems as a
potential criminal or threat, even if a crime has yet to
.
becoming reality. Predictive policing algorithms are
already being used to create automated heat maps of
future crimes, and like the “manual” policing that came
before them, they overwhelmingly target poor and
minority neighborhoods.
The world has become like an eerily banal dystopian
novel. Things look the same on the surface, but they are
not. With no apparent boundaries on how algorithms can
use and abuse the data that’s being collected about us, the
potential for it to control our lives is ever-growing.
Our drivers’ licenses, our keys, our debit and credit cards
are all important parts of our lives. Even our social media
accounts could soon become crucial components of being
fully functional members of society. Now that we live in this
with society without surrendering to automated processes
that we can neither see nor control.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Chelsea Manning. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
77

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Creating
the Policy
Environment
for AI
Innovation and
Citizens’ Trust
By Naveen Rao
The positive impacts artificial
intelligence (AI) will have on our
society are nearly endless. AI is the
next big compute evolution, enabling
computers to perform tasks and make
decisions that normally require humans.
The benefits range from increasing
efficiency of agricultural production, to
and smarter automobiles.
While today much of AI involves codifying
relatively common skills into algorithms,
future advances will cause a seismic shift
within technology and within our society.
We should be proactive in thinking through
these implications as we encourage the
innovation to continue.
The innovation across the AI ecosystem,
including within my own company is
astounding. Intel’s technology is being used
to supply the compute from the data center
to the edge, enabling automated cars and
drones.
We are taking our decades of leadership
in developing the leading computational
hardware, and are now optimizing it for AI.
We recently introduced the Intel® Nervana
Neural Network Processor, purpose built
Naveen Rao
Naveen G. Rao is
Corporate Vice
President and
General Manager
A
Intelligence Products
Group at Intel
Corporation.
from the ground up explicitly for AI deep
learning training. These innovations will
support the next advances in AI applications.
Yet advances without accounting for
the societal effects are not sustainable.
We, as a society, need to create a public
policy environment that supports industry
also mitigating unintended consequences
and recommending regulatory solutions
where needed.
There is no doubt, for example, that
change the job market. We need to find
a useful framework to analyze the coevolution
of AI’s application along with these
employment concerns. Intel is a problemsolving
company; we don’t just raise the
.
To that end, last October we published
a white paper describing our AI Public
Policy recommendations, intended to
trigger discussions among policymakers,
technologists, academics, data scientists,
and the public.
represent the backbone of future public
policies:
78 2018 | OUR WORLD

1) Foster Innovation and Open
Development: To better understand
how impactful AI can be in our
lives and continue to explore the
spectrum of applications, policy
should encourage investment in AI
R&D.
Governments should support
intelligent systems to help industry,
academia, and other stakeholders
improve AI systems.
2) Create New Human
Employment Opportunities and
Protect People’s Welfare: AI will
change the way many of us work.
Public policy in support of adding
skills to the workforce and promoting
employment across sectors should
enhance our workforce while also
protecting people’s welfare.
3) Liberate Data Responsibly:
AI is powered by access to data.
While maintaining security and data
privacy, machine learning algorithms
improve by absorbing more data
over time; data acquisition is
imperative to achieving enhanced
model development. Making data
accessible will help AI reach its full
potential.
4) Rethink Privacy: Many privacy
frameworks like the 1980s OECD
Fair Information Practice Principles
and industry approaches like Privacy
by Design have withstood the test
of time and the evolution of new
technology. We have had to “rethink”
how these models apply in the
new AI technology landscape. Data
security also has a major role to play
to protect citizens’ rights.
5) Require Accountability for
Ethical Design and Implementation:
The social implications of computing
have grown and will continue
to expand as more people have
access to smart systems. Policies
should work to identify and mitigate
discrimination in algorithms,
clarify the need for oversight and
OUR WORLD | 2018
explainability, encourage diversity,
mitigate data bias and include
different value systems in design
thinking.
As a neuroscientist, processor
architect, and entrepreneur, I
am excited that the community
continues to deliver on the promises
of AI. I am mindful, however, that no
evolution comes without thoughtful
change.
The more we can do now to
ease adoption and integration into
people’s lives, the better and more
successful we all will be. Artificial
intelligence is driving economic
progress while solving some of the
.A
AI innovation is just beginning, it is
crucial now to shape the right public
policy environment for AI to bloom.
Our focus for 2018 will continue to
be twofold: continue to advance AI
technology and work closely with
AI
society.
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
…no evolution
comes without
thoughtful change.
The more we can
do now to ease
adoption and
integration into
people’s lives, the
better and more
successful we all
will be.
79

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Making Social Media Safe for Democracy
By Samantha Bradshaw
and Philip N. Howard
In the run-up to multiple votes around
the world in 2016, including the United
Kingdom’s Brexit vote and the United States
presidential election, social media companies
like Facebook and Twitter systematically
served large numbers of voters poor-quality
information – indeed, often outright lies –
about politics and public policy. Though those
companies have been widely criticized, the
junk news – sensational stories, conspiracy
on through 2017.
While a growing number of countryspecific
fact-checking initiatives and some
interesting new apps for evaluating junk
news have emerged, system-wide, technical
the platforms. So how should we make social
media safe for democratic norms?
We know that social media firms are
serving up vast amounts of highly polarizing
content to citizens during referenda, elections,
and military crises around the world. During
the 2016 US presidential election, fake news
stories were shared on social media more
widely than professionally produced ones,
and the distribution of junk news hit its
highest point the day before the election.
Other types of highly polarizing content
from Kremlin-controlled news organizations
such as Russia Today and Sputnik, as well
as repurposed content from WikiLeaks and
hyper-partisan commentary packaged as
news, were concentrated in swing states like
Michigan and Pennsylvania. Similar patterns
Samantha
Bradshaw
and Philip N.
Howard
Samantha Bradshaw
is a researcher on
the Computational
Propaganda Project
at the University of
Oxford. Philip N.
Howard is Professor
of Sociology and
Director of the
Oxford Internet
Institute at the
University of Oxford.
occurred in France during the presidential
election in April and May, in the UK during
the general election in June, and in Germany
throughout 2017 as the federal election in
September approached.
A
to use social media as a conduit for junk
news has fueled cynicism, increased divisions
the broader media agenda. The “success” of
with which they have spread.
A
toward controlling a communicable disease
is to understand how it is transmitted. Junk
news is distributed through automation and
the proprietary black box algorithms that
determine what is and is not relevant news
and information. We call this “computational
propaganda,” because it involves politically
motivated lies backed by the global reach
and power of social media platforms like
Facebook, Google, and Twitter.
Throughout the recent elections in the
Western democracies, social media firms
actively chased ad revenue from political
campaigns and distributed content without
considering its veracity. Indeed, Facebook,
GT
Trump’s digital campaign headquarters in San
Antonio. Foreign governments and marketing
firms in Eastern Europe operated fake
Facebook, Google, and Twitter accounts, and
spent hundreds of thousands of dollars on
political advertisements that targeted voters
with divisive messages. To understand the
how pervasive these problems are, we took
80 2018 | OUR WORLD

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
an in-depth look at computational propaganda in nine
countries – Brazil, Canada, China, Germany, Poland, Russia,
Taiwan, Ukraine, and the United States – and a comparative
look at 28 others. We have also analyzed the spread of
elections during the last year (and in the past, we have
studied Mexico and Venezuela). Globally, the evidence
doesn’t bode well for democratic institutions.
a significant role in political engagement. Indeed, they
are the primary vehicle by which young people develop
their political identities. In the world’s democracies, the
majority of voters use social media to share political news
and information, especially during elections. In countries
where only small proportions of the public have regular
access to social media, such platforms are still fundamental
infrastructure for political conversation among journalists,
civil-society leaders, and political elites.
Moreover, social media platforms are actively used to
manipulate public opinion, though in diverse ways and on
.I
platforms are one of the primary means of preventing
popular unrest, especially true during political and security
crises.
Almost half of the political conversation over
Russian Twitter, for example, is mediated by highly
automated accounts. The biggest collections of
and Ukraine.
A
are actively used for computational propaganda, either
experiments on particular segments of the public. In Brazil,
R
her impeachment in early 2017, and amid the country’s
ongoing constitutional crisis. In every country, we found
civil-society groups struggling to protect themselves and
respond to active misinformation campaigns.
Facebook says that it will work to combat these
information operations, and it has taken some positive
steps. It has started to examine how foreign governments
use its platform to manipulate voters in democracies.
Before the French presidential election last spring, it
removed some 30,000 fake accounts. It purged thousands
more ahead of the British election in June, and then tens of
thousands before last month’s German election.
F
fundamental shift from defensive and reactive platform
tweaks to more proactive and imaginative ways of
A close-up image showing the Facebook app on an iPhone
in Kaarst, Germany, 08 November 2017 (reissued 31 January
2018). EPA-EFE/SASCHA STEINBACH
supporting democratic cultures. With more critical political
moments coming in 2018 – Egypt, Brazil, and Mexico will
all hold general elections, and strategists in the US are
already planning for the midterm congressional election
in November – such action is urgent.
Let’s assume that authoritarian governments will
continue to view social media as a tool for political
control. But we should also assume that encouraging
civic engagement, fostering electoral participation, and
promoting news and information from reputable outlets are
crucial to democracy. Ultimately, designing for democracy,
in systematic ways, would vindicate the original promise
of social media.
Unfortunately, social media companies tend to blame
their own user communities for what has gone wrong.
Facebook still declines to collaborate with researchers
seeking to understand the impact of social media on
democracy, and to defer responsibility for fact-checking
the content it disseminates.
Social media firms may not be creating this nasty
content, but they provide the platforms that have allowed
computational propaganda to become one of the most
powerful tools currently being used to undermine
democracy. If democracy is to survive, today’s social media
giants will have to redesign themselves.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
81

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
The End of Twitter
Diplomacy?
By Rob Worthington
Within the first few days of 2018,
Donald Trump had appeared to
threaten Kim Jong Un with nuclear
war, take credit for 2017 being the safest
year in commercial aviation worldwide, and
reassured his 46.3 million followers that he
was a “very stable genius”. Since beginning
his run for President, Trump’s late night social
media escapades have made for amusing,
concerning, and at times embarrassing
reading. With just a few characters, he has
insulted political heavyweights, undermined
entire countries – allies of the US, and
appeared to endorse right-wing extremist
sentiment in the US and beyond.
Twitter appears to be the President’s
sole communications method, with no
overarching strategy in sight. It’s been widely
reported that he refuses to engage directly
with media, with his last press conference
over 320 days ago; the Washington Post is
counting. He has shown little respect for
fundamental public relations principles,
with a shambolic interview given to the Wall
Street Journal. Similarly, his appointment
of Anthony Scaramucci, an ex-hedge fund
manager, as White House spokesperson
last year, shows little understanding for how
R.
To ensure longevity however, in 2018
Trump would do well to expand and overhaul
his communications strategy. Taking a step
back from Twitter is not a bad way to start.
Establishing an echo chamber
Trump’s almost exclusive use of Twitter
as a communications tool does make some
sense, however. It’s a powerful interactive
tool that allows him to share his messages
directly with the public, side-stepping media
bias. As a seasoned salesman, he also uses
Rob
Worthington
Rob Worthington
is a director and
head of both
Project Associates’s
International
Practice and Political
Advisory Practice.
Based out of the
R
is also responsible
for pan-European
activities and work
with the European
Union’s political
institutions. He has
specialist interest
and expertise
in advising on
and international
political trends, with
particular focus on
the European Union
and the Middle East.
Social media itself can
be used intelligently,
even put to good
diplomatic and political
use. Influential
leaders such as
Barack Obama,
Justin Trudeau, and
Emmanuel Macron
know this well.
Twitter to keep himself in the limelight,
control the news agenda, and establish an
endless echo chamber that confirms his
own preferences. Highlighting this, a graph
published by a user on Reddit last year
amusingly examines the link between the
frequency of Donald Trump’s tweets, and
the hours when he’s watching his favourite
morning news show, Fox and Friends,
widely considered to be a propaganda
.T
his highest number of tweets, often praising
the show and commenting on its guests.
With these tweets, he sets the tone for the
day, and even the news agenda. Aware of
his allegiance to the show, Fox and Friends
closely monitor Trump’s tweets, allegedly
choosing their guests to align with Trump’s
own interests, feeding the cycle further.
Breaking the cycle
Social media itself can be used intelligently,
even put to good diplomatic and political
use. Influential leaders such as Barack
Obama, Justin Trudeau, and Emmanuel
82 2018 | OUR WORLD

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
A woman passes by a
banner depicting US
President Donald J.
Trump with logos of
Twitter, in Belgrade,
Serbia, 12 February
2018.
EPA-EFE/ANDREJ CUKIC
Macron know this well. Obama – or
rather his team of communications
experts – was responsible for the
most popular tweet of 2017. Macron
and Trudeau partnered last May
to validate rumours of a budding
bromance, shooting a viral video of
F
posted on Macron’s Twitter.
The French President is also a keen
Periscoper, broadcasting all his foreign
visits and important speeches live
online, sometimes to the detriment of
traditional TV crews who aren’t given
access.
However, these leaders are not
popular because of their social
media presence alone. They have
carefully and painstakingly cultivated
public images through clever and
comprehensive communications
strategies. Importantly, they recognise
that Twitter is not the be all and end
all of external communications,
tune their political image. The use of
traditional communications tactics
cannot therefore be underestimated.
Social media, for all its immediacy
and people power, still does not
have the same gravitas as traditional
engagement with journalists. While
OUR WORLD | 2018
this has started to change among
younger generations, there is still
some way to go.
Macron may carry out headlinegrabbing
PR moments, but
he also supplements them
with the solemn staging of occasions
that he knows will help him build his
statesmanship, without attracting
.T
most evident during the recent
funerals of two of the most loved
F
Jean d’Ormesson, and the rockstar
Johnny Hallyday. Both times, Macron
his sadness on Twitter in the middle of
the night. But he did not stop there,
and asked that national ceremonies
be organised, where he spoke at
length, as all French TV stations were
broadcasting live… He struck the
right tone to lead the French people’s
tribute; and it was a masterclass in
political communications.
Another case in point: at
the recent climate summit
in France, the French
created a big Twitter splash, with
#MakeOurPlanetGreatAgain trending
globally. But this was only one aspect of
the President’s communications plan.
He spoke passionately to national and
international news journalists about
France’s – and his position - in the
debate, showing the public and his
political counterparts how serious he
is about climate change. The story was
covered by publications all over the
world.
2018 promises to be just as, if not
more, challenging for Europe and the
European project more than ever.
Brexit will test the European Union’s
reputation.
Angela Merkel, still striving to pull
together a government is no longer in
the strong position she once was, able
to protect the European project as she
did. The pressure from immigration
continues, again putting the Union’s
reputation to the test.
More than ever, creative and
diverse communications solutions are
needed to overcome public scepticism
and counter the frivolity of Twitter
diplomacy.
After all, diplomacy cannot be
made with a click, but it takes just
one to crush a reputation, end a
relationship, or destroy a nearly done
deal.
83

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
The Social Media Threat
to Society and Security
By George Soros
The current moment in world history is a
painful one. Open societies are in crisis,
and various forms of dictatorships and
Russia, are on the rise. In the United States,
President Donald Trump would like to establish
the Constitution, other institutions, and a
vibrant civil society won’t allow it.
Not only is the survival of open society in
question; the survival of our entire civilization
is at stake. The rise of leaders such as Kim Jongun
in North Korea and Trump in the US have
much to do with this. Both seem willing to risk
a nuclear war in order to keep themselves in
power. But the root cause goes even deeper.
Mankind’s ability to harness the forces of
nature, both for constructive and destructive
purposes, continues to grow, while our ability
now at a low ebb.
The rise and monopolistic behavior of the
giant American Internet platform companies is
contributing mightily to the US government’s
impotence. These companies have often
played an innovative and liberating role. But
as Facebook and Google have grown ever
more powerful, they have become obstacles
to innovation, and have caused a variety of
problems of which we are only now beginning
to become aware.
C
their environment. Mining and oil companies
exploit the physical environment; social media
companies exploit the social environment.
This is particularly nefarious, because these
companies influence how people think and
behave without them even being aware
of it. This interferes with the functioning of
democracy and the integrity of elections.
Because Internet platform companies are
networks, they enjoy rising marginal returns,
George
Soros
George Soros,
Chairman of Soros
Fund Management
and of the Open
Society Foundations,
is the author of
The Tragedy of the
European Union:
Disintegration or
Revival?
which accounts for their phenomenal growth.
T
transformative, but it is also unsustainable. It
took Facebook eight and a half years to reach
a billion users, and half that time to reach the
second billion. At this rate, Facebook will run
out of people to convert in less than three
.FG
over half of all digital advertising revenue. To
maintain their dominance, they need to expand
their networks and increase their share of users’
attention. Currently they do this by providing
users with a convenient platform. The more
time users spend on the platform, the more
valuable they become to the companies.
Moreover, because content providers
cannot avoid using the platforms and must
.I
of these companies is largely a function of their
avoiding responsibility – and payment – for the
content on their platforms.
The companies claim that they are merely
distributing information. But the fact that they
are near-monopoly distributors makes them
public utilities and should subject them to
more stringent regulation, aimed at preserving
competition, innovation, and fair and open
access. Social media companies’ true customers
are their advertisers. But a new business
model is gradually emerging, based not only
on advertising but also on selling products and
services directly to users. They exploit the data
and use discriminatory pricing to keep more
to share with consumers. This enhances their
services and discriminatory pricing undermine
.
Social media companies deceive their users
by manipulating their attention, directing it
toward their own commercial purposes, and
deliberately engineering addiction to the
services they provide. This can be very harmful,
particularly for adolescents.
There is a similarity between Internet
platforms and gambling companies. Casinos
have developed techniques to hook customers
to the point that they gamble away all of their
84 2018 | OUR WORLD

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
The signage of Facebook illuminated at the company stand during
the 2nd press preview day of the International Motor Show IAA in
Frankfurt Main, Germany, 12 September 2017.
EPA-EFE/MAURITZ ANTIN
money, even money they don’t have.
Something similar – and potentially irreversible – is
happening to human attention in our digital age. This is
not a matter of mere distraction or addiction; social media
companies are actually inducing people to surrender their
autonomy. And this power to shape people’s attention is
increasingly concentrated in the hands of a few companies.
I
Stuart Mill called the freedom of mind. Once lost, those who
.
This would have far-reaching political consequences.
People without the freedom of mind can be easily
manipulated. This danger does not loom only in the future;
it already played an important role in the 2016 US presidential
election. There is an even more alarming prospect on the
horizon: an alliance between authoritarian states and large,
data-rich IT monopolies, bringing together nascent systems
of corporate surveillance with already-developed systems of
state-sponsored surveillance. This may well result in a web of
totalitarian control the likes of which not even George Orwell
could have imagined.
The countries in which such unholy marriages are likely
RC.CIT
in particular are fully equal to the US platforms. They also
enjoy the full support and protection of President Xi Jinping’s
regime. China’s government is strong enough to protect its
national champions, at least within its borders.
US-based IT monopolies are already tempted to
compromise themselves in order to gain entrance to these
vast and fast-growing markets. These countries’ dictatorial
leaders may be only too happy to collaborate with them,
in the interest of improving their methods of control over
their own populations and expanding their power and
.T
is also a growing recognition of a connection between the
dominance of the platform monopolies and rising inequality.
The concentration of share ownership in the hands of a few
individuals plays some role, but the peculiar position occupied
by the IT giants is even more important. They have achieved
monopoly power while also competing against one another.
Only they are big enough to swallow start-ups that could
develop into competitors, and only they have the resources
to invade one another’s territory.
The owners of the platform giants consider themselves
the masters of the universe. In fact, they are slaves to
preserving their dominant position. They are engaged in an
existential struggle to dominate the new growth areas that
.
The impact of such innovations on unemployment
depends on government policies. The European Union, and
particularly the Nordic countries, are much more farsighted
than the United States in their social policies. They protect the
workers, not the jobs. They are willing to pay for retraining
or retiring displaced workers. This gives workers in Nordic
countries a greater sense of security and makes them more
supportive of technological innovations than workers in the
US. The Internet monopolies have neither the will nor the
inclination to protect society against the consequences of
their actions. That turns them into a public menace, and it
is the regulatory authorities’ responsibility to protect society
against them. In the US, regulators are not strong enough
.TE
is better positioned, because it doesn’t have any platform
giants of its own.
TE
from the US. Whereas US law enforcement focuses primarily
on monopolies created by acquisition, EU law prohibits the
abuse of monopoly power regardless of how it is achieved.
Europe has much stronger privacy and data protection laws
than America.
Moreover, US law has adopted a strange doctrine that
measures harm as an increase in the price paid by customers
for services received. But that is almost impossible to prove,
given that most giant Internet platforms provide a majority
of their services for free. Moreover, the doctrine leaves out
of consideration the valuable data that platform companies
collect from their users.
The EU Commissioner for Competition Margrethe
Vestager is the champion of the European approach. It took
the EU seven years to build a case against Google. But, as
a result of its success, the process of instituting adequate
regulation has been greatly accelerated. Moreover, thanks
E
.
It is only a matter of time before the global dominance
of the US Internet companies is broken. Regulation and
taxation, spearheaded by Vestager, will be their undoing.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
85

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
The logo of Google at the eigth annual Global Entrepreneurship Summit.
PA-EFE/JAGADEESH NV
The Self-Regulation
Mistake
By David Ibsen
In 2018 the public and policymakers
will have to reckon with the evergrowing
power of the tech industry.
Alphabet, Google’s parent company,
is now valued at $730 billion (€605
billion), a little under the GDP of the
Netherlands. Facebook is valued at
$500 billion (€415 billion), and 66
percent of its two billion users rely
on the social media platform as their
daily news source. The power of these
companies and their potential for
misuse was on full display in 2017.
Incitement of terrorism and violence
by terrorists and racists, nefarious
manipulations of voters and the
democratic process, and the scourge
of fake news are just a few of the
problematic issues that have come to
be associated with these platforms.
So what should be done in 2018 to
protect the public from this rampant
misuse?
Not much according to the tech
industry. In fact tech companies have
been pushing for a paradigm of “selfregulation”
wherein policymakers
GF
and Twitter to address their manifold
problems independently and free
from the oversight and interference
of regulators. Such an arrangement is
Google,
Facebook, and
other tech firms
are for-profit
corporations first
and foremost.
And like every
other business,
they are driven
by market share
and profits.
86 2018 | OUR WORLD

deemed unacceptable for any other industry.
But for Silicon Valley and its admirers, the idea
that the most powerful companies in the world
should be left to their own devices makes
perfect sense. It is no secret that the tech
industry views itself as distinct (albeit superior)
to other business sectors. This self-image relies
not engaged in business activities per se, but
rather activities imbued with inherent social
benefit and positive progressive attributes
that transcend traditional business practices.
This self-belief is reflected in their slogans
taglines and statements. Alphabet’s (Google)
motto after all is, “do the right thing.” And
Facebook CEO Mark Zuckerberg stated in
February 2017, “Our job at Facebook is to help
people make the greatest positive impact…”
This is nonsense of course. Google,
F
.A
other business, they are driven by market
.
Tech firms’ behaviour throughout 2017
bears this out. When faced with increased
scrutiny and skepticism from lawmakers in
the U.S. and EU, Facebook and Google reacted
like any corporation, i.e. they ramped up their
lobbying expenses. Facebook doled out €1.25
million (up nearly 79% from the same period in
2016), and Google spent €5.5 million (up 23%).
Similarly, when confronted with its corporate
tax obligations, Apple has sought ways to
exploit the tax code structures as published
a report showing that tech companies paid
less than half the tax of brick-and-mortar
businesses in Europe Google is no stranger
to this practice either.
Lobbying, influence peddling, and
unscrupulous tax-avoidance. In other words,
standard corporate behaviour.
There is one major way in which Silicon
Valley is different, it relies on the public.
Specifically, the public provides these
firms with their thoughts, pictures, videos,
jokes, insights—in essence their intellectual
.I
and aggregate this information to sell it for
advertisements. Facebook would simply not
work if members of the public did not agree
to provide their content to Mark Zuckerberg
OUR WORLD | 2018
David Ibsen
David Ibsen serves
as Executive Director
for the Counter
Extremism Project
(CEP), which works to
combat the growing
threat of extremism
and extremist
ideology.
Previously, David
served as a Policy
Analyst for the U.S.
Department of State
and as a U.S. delegate
to the United Nations.
Prior to the UN, David
worked as an advisor
for the United Nations
Children’s Fund
(UNICEF).
SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
for free. But while the content is provided for
the tech companies. Meanwhile any fallout—
whether terrorism, incitement, or elections
interference—lies at the feet of the individuals.
This is simply inequitable and wrong.
Historically, whenever powerful new
industries emerged, the government
intervened and regulated to limit negative
externalities that impacted the public good. In
turn, corporations traditionally resisted such
evidence of a negative or dangerous impact
on society. Viewed in this context, resistance
to regulatory attempts and promotion of a
“self-regulatory” framework isn’t a surprise.
How many other industries would not wish for
the same, whether auto, tobacco, chemical,
As we look ahead into 2018, we cannot
give into tech’s demands for self-regulation,
especially when the consequences of
regulatory failure are so high. ISIS propaganda
materials readily available online have been
linked to real world tragedies in across the
globe. Surely there will be additional deadly
attacks in 2018 if appropriate action is not
taken to reign-in the misuse of tech services
and platforms by terrorists.
It is time for lawmakers and the public
to demand that these platforms finally
implement industry-wide standards and
policies that ensure the timely and permanent
removal of dangerous extremist and terrorist
material, especially content produced
by groups and individuals sanctioned by
the European Union, United States, and
United Nations, as well as individuals with
demonstrable links to violence. Additionally,
tech must establish measurable best practices
and transparently deploy proven technologies
to prevent the re-upload of materials already
determined to violate company policies. If
tech fails to act, then it is time for regulators
to promulgate measures to force the industry
to take necessary action to protect the public.
These platforms are in this business to
make money. It is up to regulators to protect
the public and ensure general welfare.
Allowing these companies to self-regulate is
not just unwise, but dangerous in this case.
87

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
Is this the end
of the era of
science?
By Dr Rick Phillips
It is commonly said that those who do not
learn from history are doomed to repeat
it. In 1633, Galileo was tried and convicted
for his support of the theory that the Earth
revolves around the Sun. This theory, which
Galileo came to support as a result of his
the planets and moons in our solar system,
contradicted the doctrine of the day, which
said that humanity, and by extension the
Earth, stood at the centre of the universe.
After being found guilty, Galileo was placed
under house arrest until his death in 1642.
Thankfully, our attitudes towards science
and scientists are a little bit more enlightened
in 2018. Just as we stopped burning witches,
sacrificing animals and killing heretics, so
too did we stop persecuting scientists for
reporting facts about the natural world.
Indeed, most people nowadays believe
science is a force for good, which makes
many aspects of our lives easier and more
pleasant. However, we would be wise to learn
the lessons from how science was misused
in the past, lest we inadvertently end up
repeating them.
Policymakers in particular should be
careful to heed these lessons. Too often,
scientific evidence is ignored or distorted
by politicians for electoral purposes, and
a lack of transparency allows lawmakers
a politically favoured result. In the EU, this
problem is epitomised by the Comitology
process. Comitology is the mechanism for
passing secondary EU legislation, an outdated
and opaque procedure that has been badly
Dr Rick
Phillips
Dr Rick Phillips is the
president and CEO
of Anitox, a global
leader in the control
of pathogens. He is a
poultry veterinarian.
year, and, if left unchecked, will seriously
undermine the status of science in the EU
for years to come.
A perfect example of this dysfunctional
system in action was in the Commission’s
recent handling of the authorisation of
formaldehyde in animal feed. People may
balk at “formaldehyde” as a scary chemical,
but in fact it is a highly useful substance,
especially for treating the dangerous
Salmonella bacteria. Often in science we
deal with substances and chemicals which
can be dangerous, but we all know how
useful substances such as bleach and petrol
can be safe as long as they’re used correctly.
Formaldehyde is naturally present in both
animal and plant cells. The science around
formaldehyde is likewise unambiguous: it is
the best treatment for Salmonella in animal
feed, and when used correctly poses no risk
to workers or consumers.
You shouldn’t just take my word for it: take a
C.
The Commission’s food safety authority,
EFSA, found that the use of formaldehyde
in feed poses no risk to consumers. The
Commission’s body responsible for workers’
safety in handling chemicals, SCOEL, set
safe exposure levels for workers using
formaldehyde. These limits have been
incorporated into the Commission’s draft
revision of the Carcinogens and Mutagens
at work Directive, the canonical piece of
legislation protecting workers from exposure
to carcinogens or mutagens in the workplace
in the EU.
Equipped with this scientific evidence,
the Commission backed a full 10 year
authorisation when formaldehyde’s
authorisation came up for renewal in 2014.
However, in the face of opposition from a
small number of member states who did not
use the product, and who wanted it removed
for partisan reasons, the Commission was
favour of the proposal.
Discussions on the proposal lasted almost
three years with no resolution. During
this time Poland denied authorisation of
88 2018 | OUR WORLD

SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
A visitor looks at test tubes which are placed on magnetic stirrers, at the
Biotechnica trade fair in Hanover, Germany.
formaldehyde until the matter
was resolved in Brussels. Roughly
6-months post their decision to ban
formaldehyde use in feed, Poland
experienced a massive outbreak of
salmonella that affected many EU
member states. The majority of states
and political considerations began to
.I
of standing by its evidence-backed
proposal, the Commission decided
to make a bold political move,
completely reversing its position and
proposing a denial of authorisation
remaining unchanged. Ignoring the
pleas from major feed manufacturers
and stakeholders throughout the EU
to perform an in-depth impact study
on the consequences of removing the
use of formaldehyde, the Commission
blindly pushed ahead with its proposal
for denial. This gambit, which
shocked the scientific community,
OUR WORLD | 2018
EPA/CHRISTOPH SCHMIDT
came to a head in December, when
the Commission put forward a
vote on the matter at its scientific
committee composed of member
state representatives (SCOPAFF).
With meetings closed to the public
and stakeholders and no transcripts
of the meetings available, a decision
with ramifications throughout the
food supply was made in secret.
We’ve obviously come a long
way since Galileo’s trial in 1633, but
the position of science in society
is still far from secure. With the
recent rise of movements seeking
to undermine science in the eyes of
citizens, from anti-vaccination groups
to homoeopathists, it becomes more
incumbent on our policymakers to
stand up for evidence and science in
politics. In 2018, it is high time for our
political leaders to learn the lessons
of the past. If they do not then they
are allowing us to slip back towards
the society that imprisoned Galileo
Just as we
stopped burning
witches,
sacrificing
animals and
killing heretics,
so too did we
stop persecuting
scientists for
reporting facts
about the natural
world.
for pointing out what he could see
in the night’s sky, and which stifled
science in favour of superstition. For
the sake of all citizens in Europe, let us
hope the world in 2018 leans forward
and does not slip back into the social
consciousness of 1633.
89

STUDY THE EU
IN THE UNITED STATES
GRANTS FOR TRANSATLANTIC RESEARCH
The Fulbright Commission offers grants to EU citizens to study, lecture or research in
the U.S. on the development of the EU, EU policies, or the U.S.-EU transatlantic agenda,
either independently or in affiliation with American universities or other U.S. institutions
such as think tanks for a period between three months and one academic year.
Benefits include: a monthly stipend, a one-time travel allowance, sickness and accident
inssurance, J-visa sponsorship and membership to the prestiguous Fulbright alumni
network.
The application cycle opens on September 15 and closes on December 1.
More info: www.fulbrightschuman.eu

ENERGY &
CLIMATE
ZEITFAENGER.AT|FLICKR

ENERGY & CLIMATE
The Energy Union
in 2018: the year
of engagement
By Maroš Šefčovič
We are living transformative times.
Only three years ago the Energy
Union was still a concept, a
political vision. Since then it has evolved
into a range of legislative proposals and
real commitments under five pillars –
enhancing our energy security, building
a fully-integrated internal energy market,
putting energy efficiency first, achieving
global leadership in renewable energies,
and investing in research and innovation.
But our work is not done. We are set to
make the Energy Union a living reality by
2019, when the mandate of the current
Commission draws to an end. Here’s how.
Aiming for the finishing
line on the legislative front
Back in the Energy Union Strategy of 2015,
we promised to provide every European
with secure, sustainable, competitive and
affordable energy. After less than three
years, the Commission has tabled nearly all
proposals and initiatives needed to make
this happen.
The last missing pieces which we will
present in early May concern mobility.
They include proposals on CO2 emissions
standards for lorries and on the future of
connected and autonomous driving.
Equally important, we would like to see all
the Energy Union legislation, which we have
already presented – turn into law before we
.
Maroš
Šefčovič
the Vice President
of the European
Commission. He is
currently leading the
project team Energy
Union.
the EU rotating presidency, which was taken
over by Bulgaria in January and will turn to
Austria in July. With their support we intend
pieces. Our ambition is crystal clear: Europe
should not only follow the global transition
to a smart, clean, and sustainable economy;
Going local
In order for the Energy Union to succeed,
it is not enough that we make decisions at
European and national levels. We need to
go local and increase ownership by all parts
of society. That is why we have decided
to make 2018 the Energy Union’s Year of
Engagement. Now is the time for all societal
actors to get involved.
Cities have an incredible potential in
the global fight against climate change
and we see more and more mayors acting
as forward-looking pioneers. Let’s not
forget that the majority of the world’s
population and two thirds of Europeans
live in cities. Urban innovation therefore
has the potential of smartening services,
improving life standards, and reducing our
environmental impact.
One of the main obstacles that local
assistance. They sometimes struggle to
improve the quality and bankability of their
investment plans and navigate them to the
.T
is why the Commission and the European
Investment Bank have recently launched
the so-called URBIS, a dedicated support
service where cities can get a tailor-made
.
The shift to a clean energy economy
will require some tough choices along the
way. But we are set to ensure that during
this process no region is left behind. The
Platform for coal regions in transition is a
one concrete measure we are putting in
place to deliver on this promise.
In addition, we will soon launch an EUwide
Energy Poverty Observatory, which will
serve as a crucial tool for monitoring the
transition’s impact on consumer welfare
92 2018 | OUR WORLD

ENERGY & CLIMATE
and respond in a way that protects
the most vulnerable.
Future-proof infrastructure
as a backbone of secure
energy
By better interconnecting our
internal energy markets, we can
achieve much greater security of
supply, based on solidarity and trust
between Member States. This way
when supply of renewable energy is
low in one country, instead of turning
to fossil fuels, it can buy its missing
supply from its neighbours where
supply is high.
That is why we invested and
will continue to invest in concrete
projects on the ground. For example,
the Baltics countries, which were
almost entirely isolated from the rest
of Europe’s energy market, are now
making their ‘historic comeback’. The
gas (LNG) terminal, in the Lithuanian
K
regional hub for gas trade. And the
recent electricity connection between
Lithuania and Poland (through
LitPol Link) and to Sweden (through
NordBalt) ended the isolation of the
region. They were made possible
thanks to the Baltic Energy Market
Integration Plan initiative, or the socalled
BEMIP.
Another emblematic example
is the High Level Group on Central
and South Eastern Europe Gas
Connectivity, better known as
CESEC. The Group was established
AN
of Kavarna, Bulgaria, 15 September 2017. Saint Nikola Wind Farm brings 156
megawatts of electricity.
EPA-EFE/VASSIL DONEV
The Energy Union is no longer a
concept, a vision, or a mere idea. The
Energy Union is a living process which
is changing the lives of millions in
Europe and around the world.
order to facilitate cross border
gas infrastructure projects across
its 15 members, both within the
European Union and in our eastern
neighbourhood.
These efforts will continue until
the very last day of our mandate.
Key CESEC projects are ongoing,
connecting Bulgaria, Romania,
Hungary, and Austria through the
BRUA corridor, the Krk LNG terminal,
the gas interconnector between
Greece and Bulgaria, etc.
Of course, energy security also
E.
of the most ambitious projects in this
regard is the Southern Gas Corridor
which will bring gas all the way from
the Caspian Sea to Europe’s shores by
route and the overall framework will
be tested, which will make it easier to
expand the Southern Gas Corridor
beyond the initial volumes of 10 bcm.
The Energy Union is no longer
a concept, a vision, or a mere idea.
The Energy Union is a living process
which is changing the lives of millions
in Europe and around the world.
Now is the time for you to be part
of that change, to play your role, to
be part of the European and global
energy transition.
OUR WORLD | 2018
93

ENERGY & CLIMATE
A Year of Renewed
Climate Commitments
By Laurence Tubiana
For the growing share of the world’s
population that understands the
existential threat posed by climate
change, the beginning of 2017 brought a
sense of trepidation. In fact, collective angst
was already apparent at the 2016 United
Nations Climate Change Conference in
Marrakech, Morocco, which had just started
when Donald Trump was elected president
of the United States.
At that time, speculation was swirling
about what Trump’s election would mean
for the US and the world. But there was little
doubt that it would be bad for America’s
formal commitment to reduce greenhouse-
of climate change.
Throughout the course of 2017, questions
about what a Trump presidency would entail
began to be answered. And it turned out
that while Trump certainly holds the most
ordering military strikes, his power to refute
change, and to resist the global transition to
a green economy, is rather limited.
In Marrakech, the obstacles that Trump
would confront were already apparent.
Trump’s criticisms of the 2015 Paris climate
agreement were widely rejected, and all
countries in attendance reiterated their
commitment to the accord. They promised
to continue reducing greenhouse-gas
emissions, regardless of whether Trump
followed through on his campaign’s vow to
“cancel Paris.”
Of course, the question of whether Trump
would actually keep this campaign promise
of 2017, with a veritable soap opera – or
rather, a domestic farce – playing out in the
White House. Trump’s daughter Ivanka and
Laurence
Tubiana
Laurence Tubiana,
a former French
ambassador to
the United Nations
Framework
Convention on
Climate Change, is
CEO of the European
Climate Foundation
and a professor at
Sciences Po, Paris.
If there was one
thing that 2017
made clear, it is
the devastation that
awaits us if we do
not do more.
her husband, Jared Kushner, reportedly
supported the Paris accord. But Scott Pruitt,
the administrator of the Environmental
Protection Agency, and his fellow climatechange
deniers convinced Trump to withdraw
the US from the agreement.
on June 1, it was certainly disappointing.
But it also gave new momentum to the task
at hand. Within hours, Washington state
Governor Jay Inslee declared: “We heard the
of surrender. We wanted to send a strong
message to the world: We’re not going to
surrender.” And in response to Trump’s claim
that he was “elected to represent the citizens
of Pittsburgh, not Paris,” Pittsburgh Mayor
Bill Peduto announced that the “Steel City”
would be shifting to 100% renewable-energy
sources by 2035.
Peduto’s vocal rebuke of Trump opened a
window onto a quiet revolution that has been
taking place across the US. He, along with 382
other US mayors, is a member of the Climate
Mayors coalition, which represents 68 million
Americans. Similarly, 14 US states and the
hurricane-ravaged territory of Puerto Rico
have banded together to form the United
States Climate Alliance. All of these cities
and states are committed to implementing
the Barack Obama-era Clean Power Plan,
.
more than 1,000 US companies have vowed
to meet America’s commitments under the
Paris agreement.
This trend is not limited to the US.
President Xi Jinping of China, the world’s
largest producer of greenhouse-gas pollution,
94 2018 | OUR WORLD

ENERGY & CLIMATE
also has reaffirmed his country’s
commitment to the Paris accord, and
is encouraging all other signatories to
do the same. At the Communist Party
of China’s 19th National Congress in
October, he reiterated that China is
in the “driver’s seat” of international
cooperation on climate change.
And in July 2017, all of the G20
governments, with the exception of the
US, signed a statement emphasizing
the importance and irreversibility of
the Paris agreement.
This declaration echoed an earlier
joint statement from the German,
Italian, and French governments,
issued in direct response to Trump’s
announcement in June. While
German Chancellor Angela Merkel
called Trump’s decision to withdraw
the US from the accord “extremely
regrettable,” French President
Emmanuel Macron delivered a speech
– in English, so that no American
would misinterpret him – describing
it as a dangerous “mistake.”
More important, governments
have gone beyond words, creating
facts on the ground. In October, India
and the EU strengthened a partnership
to develop clean-energy sources in
pursuit of the Paris agreement’s goals;
and Nicaragua and Syria announced
that they would join the agreement,
making the US the only country to
have spurned it.
Since Trump was elected, 66
countries – including Australia, Italy,
Spain, and, despite the disruption
caused by its Brexit decision, the
United Kingdom – have ratified the
accord.
Still, while the surge in diplomatic
support for the Paris agreement
should be celebrated, we must not
lose sight of the fundamental issue
at hand: global greenhouse-gas
emissions, which have effectively
flatlined for the past three years.
Unfortunately, this is nowhere near
the level of reductions that we need.
European Space Agency (ESA) undated handout artist impression of their
Environment Satellite, or Envisat would look like in space.
If there was one thing that 2017
made clear, it is the devastation
that awaits us if we do not do
more. With unprecedented intensity
and frequency, a series of hurricanes
laid waste to Caribbean countries,
Houston and the Gulf Coast of
Texas, and large parts of Florida.
In southern Europe, Australia, and
the American West, wildfires tore
across the countryside, claiming
lives and causing extensive property
damage. In South America, the Indian
subcontinent, and other regions, heat
waves, crop failures, and flooding
reached crisis levels. And at the poles,
ice sheets continued to collapse, as we
witnessed most dramatically with the
rupture in the enormous Larsen C Ice
Shelf in Antarctica.
Sadly, Trump seems unmoved by
either natural or economic realities. At
this point, the US economy has twice
as many jobs in renewable energy
as in the coal industry, which Trump
nevertheless insists on trying to prop
up.
But whether Trump likes it or
not, the growth of the renewableenergy
sector is changing the course
EPA PHOTO PA/ESA
not just of the US economy, but of
all economies worldwide. In 2017,
renewables were the top form of
energy to come online; and the shift to
electric cars continued to accelerate,
with almost every major automaker
announcing plans to move away
from internal combustion engines.
And around the world, the threat of
climate change is becoming a key
driver of infrastructure investment.
At the 2017 UN Climate Change
Conference in Bonn in November,
China and the EU continued to
fill America’s shoes, by leading on
global climate action. In 2018, we can
expect to see more evidence of the
impact of climate change, as well as
.
To be sure, these efforts will
have to be much larger and more
ambitious than in the past if we
are to meet the goals of the Paris
agreement. But, as we learned in
2017, those goals are still very much
within reach.
Trump or no Trump, the shift to
renewable energies is irreversible,
and it is driving change everywhere
– including the US.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
95

ENERGY & CLIMATE
A Truly Global Response
to Climate Change
By Akinwumi Adesina, Suma Chakrabarti, Bandar M. H. Hajjar, Werner Hoyer, Kundapur Vaman Kamath,
Jim Yong Kim, Jin Liqun, Luis Alberto Moreno, and Takehiko Nakao
Climate action is not just about
controlling global temperatures. It
can also be a driver of development
and poverty reduction all over the world.
At the COP 23 Climate Conference in
Bonn, Germany, in November, multilateral
development institutions showed themselves
to be more committed than ever to the
urgent and central issue of supporting and
.
Today’s political climate is uncertain. But
climate change is not. Partnership around
the world must be maintained in the global
carbon and climate-smart development.
Multilateral development institutions have
never been more relevant.
Climate-smart development also makes
good economic and business sense,
particularly when it comes to sustainable
infrastructure. We have already witnessed
tremendous growth in renewable energy,
creating with it new business opportunities
and jobs. Many climate-smart investments
can also reduce air pollution and congestion.
Building resilience now saves money later.
We are committed to supporting a climatesmart
future.
As multilateral development institutions,
climate agreement. Our role is to facilitate
Akinwumi Adesina
is President
of the African
Development Bank.
Suma Chakrabarti
is President of the
European Bank
for Reconstruction
and Development.
Bandar M. H. Hajjar
is President of the
Islamic Development
Bank. Werner Hoyer
is President of the
European Investment
Bank. Kundapur
Vaman Kamath is
President of the
New Development
Bank. Jim Yong Kim
is President of the
World Bank. Jin Liqun
is President of the
Asian Infrastructure
Investment Bank.
Luis Alberto Moreno
is President of the
Inter-American
Development Bank.
Takehiko Nakao is
President of the Asian
Development Bank.
part of the climate solution.
That is why, two years after the Paris
accord was successfully negotiated, we are
increasingly aligning actions and resources
in support of developing countries’ goals.
In July, the G20 Sustainability Action Plan
embedded the Paris agreement in G20
institutions is key to innovation and private
investment in climate action.
In 2016 alone, multilateral development
institutions committed over $27 billion in
up our work, determined to broaden the
private and public finance mobilized for
climate action at COP 23.
We commit to:
• Deliver on the promises that we made
in 2015 to increase our support for climate
investments in developing countries by
• Increase mobilization of private-sector
investment by supporting policy and
regulatory reforms. This includes aligning
price signals, making innovative use of
policy and finance instruments and, as
applicable, leveraging concessional (below-
96 2018 | OUR WORLD

ENERGY & CLIMATE
Visitors looking at a giant world map during the open doors day of the new permanent exhibition of the International Red Cross
and Red Crescent Museum in Geneva, Switzerland, 18 May 2013.
EPA/LAURENT GILLIERON
up public and private investment
in climate projects.
• Strengthen international
efforts by working together
and with other development
finance institutions, to increase
transparency and consistency in
tracking climate finance tracking
and reporting greenhouse-gas
emissions;
• Put climate change at the heart
of what we do, bringing climate
policy into the mainstream of our
activities, and aligning financial
• Support countries, cities, and
territories with their own climate
action plans and build the conditions
for an ambitious next generation of
such contributions; and
• Work with our clients to
support initiatives that protect the
most climate-vulnerable areas,
including small island developing
states, while mobilizing more
finance for developing countries
to build resilience and to adapt
their infrastructure, communities,
ecosystems, and businesses to the
consequences of climate change.
Each of these measures
supports our strong commitment to
the UN’s Sustainable Development
Goals. By pursuing them, climate
action will become a key part of
the international community’s
work to place infrastructure and
the rollout of new technologies
and policies for energy, water, and
mobility at the core of sustainable
development.
This is a serious response to a
serious challenge. Climate change
poses a grave threat to the natural
environment, to economic growth,
and to the lives of all people
around the world, especially the
poorest and most vulnerable. It is
economies and to every person
on earth, and the opportunity
to counter it, should be tackled
with the backing of multilateral
development institutions. We call
on others to join us in placing
climate action at the center of
their business, stepping up climate
finance, and tracking its impact
around the world.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
97

ENERGY & CLIMATE
A thermoelectric power station emits smoke in front of
the main building of Moscow State University, as the air
temperature in the Russian capital fell to minus 13 degrees
Celsius in Moscow, Russia, 03 February 2017. EPA-EFE/SERGEI ILNITSKY
Russian gas in Europe: new highs
and political intrigues
By Konstantin Simonov
Gas exports by Gazprom to
Europe and Turkey in 2017
were again successful. The
R
these positive results for propaganda
purposes. Yet, challenges are
growing, and a new high is unlikely
to be recorded. Besides, there will be
the Nord Stream-2 project.
According to the data Gazprom
posted in January 2018, last year
the company supplied 193.9 bcm of
natural gas to countries outside the
CIS. It was 14.6 bcm (8.1%) higher
than the previous maximum reached
in 2016. In 2016 Gazprom increased
gas exports to countries outside the
CIS by 12% to 179 bcm compared
to 2015. Gazprom achieved two
absolute highs for two years in a
row, which is impressive on the
background of permanent anti-
Gazprom propaganda in the West
and among some Russian experts
claiming that Europe does not need
gas of Gazprom. According to our
calculations, some 170 bcm of Russian
gas was delivered to the European
Union in 2017, which was 16 bcm
more than in 2016. Reverse supplies
from Europe to Ukraine rose just by
3.1 bcm. Therefore, net exports of
Russian gas to the EU advanced by
approximately 13 bcm. Increase was
almost equally distributed between
Northwestern Europe (deliveries
through Germany) and Southeastern
Europe (transit via Ukraine).
Competitors of Gazprom also
demonstrated good results in Europe.
Norway added 7.6 bcm (6.8%). LNG
98 2018 | OUR WORLD

imports went up by almost 7 bcm (14%).
Though, only piped gas supplies from
Northern Africa failed to reach the 2016 level.
The reasons are understandable – cheap gas
encourages its consumption in Europe, while
declining domestic output seriously increases
imports that reached a new absolute high of
382.6 bcm last year.
Very important story for European market
in 2017 was Explosion at Baumgarten gas
hub. The accident may make stakeholders
E
gas strategy that stipulates active
development of exchange trade, gas hubs
and the spot market, as well as focuses
on creation of alternative gas receiving
capacities. Interruptions of Russian gas
supplies to some European countries caused
by the explosion in Baumgarten provided a
of the new arrangement. However, the result
is absolutely opposite. The exchange trade
option did not work – it turned out there was
no extra gas at hubs during this unexpectedly
emerged peak demand. During abnormally
cold weather European consumers usually
address Gazprom for additional gas
quantities. It is the advantage of long-term
contracts – such a supplier guarantees
to cover seasonal peaks. There is no such
guarantor on the spot market; therefore,
there is nothing to cover the unexpected
demand with.
It is remarkable that the crisis occurred in
IE.
In addition to Russian and Norwegian gas,
Italy can receive the fuel from Northern
Africa, and it also has several LNG terminals.
piped gas supplies from Northern Africa
helped Italy on the day of the Baumgarten
blast, while spot prices jumped very
.
Therefore, the situation in Italy leads to the
a guarantee of gas availability, let alone lower
gas prices, and the new European gas market
arrangement has evident weaknesses. Spot
pricing becomes a potential pitfall, if there
.A
accident that results in decline in physical
OUR WORLD | 2018
Konstantin
Simonov
Konstantin Simonov
is a leading Russian
“new generation”
political scientist
and public expert
on energy. He
holds a PhD in
political science
from Moscow
State University
(MSU) and an MA
from Manchester
University. Currently
holding the title of
Associate Professor
at MSU, he has been
engaged in academic
research in the
and economic
studies for over 15
years. Simonov has
founded several
research initiatives
in the sphere
of international
relations, the latest
being the Russian
National Energy
Security Foundation,
established in 2006.
He is presently the
Director General of
the Foundation.
ENERGY & CLIMATE
amounts of the fuel on the exchange sends
prices sharply upwards. And no additional
gas quantities appear at hubs.
A remarkable event happened in 2017.
After several years’ lull caused by political
pressure from Brussels on the system of
long-term contracts in general and on the
position of Russia as the largest supplier, a
new 10-year contract was signed with the
Croatian company Prvo Plinarsko Drustvo
for supplying 1 billion cubic metres of gas.
The agreement was reached as an extension
of a short-term contract signed in late 2016
for supplying 1.5 billion cubic metres over
nine months to Croatia. This means that the
Croatian company decided to have a longterm
contract for approximately half of its
annual gas import requirements, which is
also connected with a decline in the internal
gas production in the country that went down
by approximately 1 billion cubic metres from
2010 to 2016.
The situation on the Italian market would
be easier, if the Southern Corridor project
had been implemented and the ITGI gas
pipeline through Greece had been laid. This
is why at present Russia is ready to supply
gas through the Black Sea – resources and
the required infrastructure are already in
place in Russia.
The accident at the Baumgarten gas
hub in Austria gave an additional impetus
to a very acute struggle for and against
bypassing gas pipelines leading to Europe,
and correspondingly the struggle of some
Western elites for preservation of natural
gas transit via Ukraine.
From the very beginning, the project to
build an additional run of the Nord Stream
gas pipeline caused active resistance on the
part of the US, the European Commission,
and a number of European Union countries,
Poland and Lithuania taking the most
irreconcilable position among them. The
project participants – Gazprom and five
major European companies (Anglo-Dutch
Shell, Engie of France, OMV of Austria, and
Germany’s Uniper and Wintershall) – in 2016
were not able to circumvent the barriers put
up by the government of Poland that made it
clear that it did not intend, for political
99

ENERGY & CLIMATE
…diversification of suppliers is not
a guarantee of gas availability, let
alone lower gas prices, and the new
European gas market arrangement
has evident weaknesses.
reasons, to give permission to set up
the Nord Stream 2 AG joint venture.
The project partners signed an
agreement in April 2017 in which
they made the commitment to
of the total cost of the project which
is estimated at €9.5 billion now. The
contribution of each of the European
companies will be up to €950 million.
In May last year the partners
signed an agreement on providing
Nord Stream2 a bridge loan for up to
6.65 billion euros (inclusive of interest)
is organised. A deficit financing
agreement was signed in June in case
.
The partners provided Gazprom
with mezzanine financing. This is
usually an unsecured loan that
gives the lender the right to buy a
certain number of shares or bonds
period or involves the use of another
mechanism giving the lender the right
to participate in the future success
of the project. The project will not
require funding in 2017 and project
2018.
All financing decisions were
passed and structured as US Congress
was actively discussing the bill on
expanding sanctions against Russia,
proposed by American senators in
early 2017. It was clear already that
in both houses the bill would be
passed by an overwhelming majority
that prevented Trump from using his
right of veto.
The new US President, Donald
Trump, introduced a new law in
August 2017 that directly states the
US intention to resist the construction
of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline that
is said to act against the interests of
Ukraine because it will strip it of its
status as a transit country for Russian
gas going to Europe.
After Congress had passed the law,
there began rumblings of discontent
in Europe. Even Jean-Claude
Juncker, President of the European
Commission, said that imposing
sanctions on European companies
was unacceptable and would cause the
European Union to respond. German
Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel and
Austrian Chancellor Christian Kern
issued a joint statement criticising
the US interference in the European
energy policy. The politicians said the
US action was intended to support its
own energy industry and American
LNG export at the cost of worsening
the position of the European economy
and European gas users. Even German
Chancellor Angela Merkel, an active
critic of Russia’s foreign policy, made
a public statement in support of Nord
Stream-2. Much will be determined
for Turkish Stream in 2018 too. The
failed coup attempt in Turkey which
Erdogan fairly reasonably suspects
his NATO partners to have supported
made the Turkish leader accelerate
the normalisation of relations with
Russia.
The potential for pressure on
Ankara was considerably reduced
for Washington and Brussels
thereafter, which had a positive
effect on the speed of the Turkish
Stream construction. There is a high
probability that as soon as next year
Turkey will start receiving gas along
the new route and the second run
of the gas pipeline may be launched
in 2019 that will enable supplying
Russian gas through Turkish territory
to the neighbouring countries,
primarily Bulgaria and Greece. The
infrastructure for that is already being
actively built with the support of the
European Union that has for a decade
considered the Southern Gas Corridor
through Turkey an important route
for diversifying its gas portfolio. At the
same time, the new sources of supply
are meagre enough.
The situation at the beginning
of 2018 looks quite positive for
Gazprom in the sphere of struggle
for the northern part of the European
market – statistical results are good,
and Germany continues to provide
political support to the pipeline
project. The Nord Stream 2 looks
economically substantiated on the
background of permanent attempts
of Ukraine to raise transit fees. Yet,
it does mean political risks of the
Nord Stream 2 are fully removed.
Therefore, the struggle will continue.
The situation will depend also on the
US stance and a political situation in
the European Union.
100 2018 | OUR WORLD

ENERGY & CLIMATE
Gazing into the Energy
Crystal Ball for 2018
By Kostis Geropoulos
In 2018, crude oil prices are likely to move
between $55 to $70 per barrel depending
on the geopolitical tensions but also on
whether an ongoing deal between the
Organization of Petroleum Exporting
Countries (OPEC) and non-OPEC members
to cut production holds as rising US shale
production may prompt Russian companies
to boost output to defend their market
share.
Chris Weafer, a partner at Macro-
Advisory in Moscow, told New Europe that
if the threats do not materialise and the
market quickly gets used to them, the oil
price would remain at current levels. If US
shale recovers rapidly then, prices would
slide back towards $55 per barrel. “If the US
output remains very modest and the threats
remain very credible or we see new threats
then I would say 65 to 70,” he said.
Weafer said he expects to see more
Russian output in the second half of the
year because the Russian companies are
losing patience with having to restrain their
new projects.
“If the Russian oil companies see
US output growing and gaining market
share, then they will move on with their
projects, they will not be restrained by the
government any longer. They have made
that clear that they are holding back on
new projects because the price of oil is
high. But their senior executives have all
made it clear that if they start to see US
price and therefore risking the future oil
price, then they will come in quickly with
their new projects and, of course, that will
guarantee that the price will go down,”
Weafer said.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Kostis
Geropoulos
Kostis Geropoulos
is the Energy &
RA
Editor of New
Europe newspaper.
A recovery in US oil production after a
recent drop contributed to the recovery
of oil prices. “US shale has adapted from
the much lower price to find themselves
Stewart, director at Seven Investment
Management in London, told New Europe.
“Whether that means a significance
increase in production or not, I can’t see
that necessarily. Actually at the moment
start new shale operations, increasing
production would be quite expensive. So I
think we already had the shale increase at
expansion and I’m not see where this would
come from,” Urquhart Stewart added.
Meanwhile, Weafer noted that Kazakhstan
has been incorrectly regarded as being a
fringe player and being ignored and that
really isn’t the case anymore since the
K
in late 2016.
“That project is now viable and is
improving so after years and years of failure
and breakdowns. It’s up to 250,000 barrels
a day on average and should get up to
about 400,000 barrels a day by the summer
whereas a lot of traders have forgotten that
Weafer said.
The Macro-Advisory partner noted
that US energy giant Chevron is planning
approximately a $36 billion expansion of
TK
would bring more oil into the market over
the coming years.
“You’re seeing strong growth in countries
like Kazakhstan, which they could easily add
a million barrels in the next few years over
what it was producing say two years ago,”
Weafer said.
He also noted that the Russian companies
from the low ruble and “they have new
production they are keen to bring on if they
see US shale rising”.
Weafer noted, however, that the deal
between OPEC and non-OPEC producers,
especially Russia, to cut oil production is
holding for now. “The Kremlin is playing
101

ENERGY & CLIMATE
Oil production in Kazakhstan. The former Soviet republic could bring more oil
into the market over the coming years.
FILE PICTURE
both politics as well as economics
and the political relationship in
particular is very important for the
Kremlin.
T
history been able to establish a
good relationship with the Saudis
and they see that as very important
verses geopolitical strategy in the
years ahead,” Weafer said, adding
that “the Kremlin was willing to
twist the arms of the oil executives
to comply” with the deal and
price.
“Clearly the Kremlin wants this
deal to continue because for them
it is very good politics having this
arrangement with the Saudis and
having this improved relationship
with Saudi Arabia. It helps Russia
refocus its geopolitical strategy
away from the West towards a
more global diversification the
Middle East, Asia and elsewhere,”
Weafer said.
Urquhart Stewart said, “It’s
fascinating that the policies that
we had of this year where the
agreement between OPEC and
Russia had broadly been sustained
would mean that actually the price
should stay roughly where it is.
However, it’s interesting to see
that the outages from Libya and
also from the Forties field have
pushed the price up. It just shows
how sensitive it is.
If the global economy keeps on
growing at the current rate - and
there’s a good reason to think that
it will do – actually there’s going to
be sustainability to the oil price.
I can’t see a push up to 80, but I
can see it standing at mid 50s with
spikes up into the mid 60s”.
In 2018, crude oil
prices are likely
to move between
$55 to $70 per
barrel depending
on the geopolitical
tensions, but also
on an ongoing
deal between the
Organization of
Petroleum Exporting
Countries (OPEC)
and non-OPEC
members.
102 follow the author on twitter @energyinsider
2018 | OUR WORLD

YANNIS DIMAS
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES

A More
Perfect
Union
By Joe Biden
I
I’ve observed a simple truth: America’s
ability to lead the world depends not just
on the example of our power, but on the
power of our example.
American democracy is rooted in the
belief that every man, woman and child
has equal rights to freedom and dignity.
While the United States is far from perfect,
we have never given up the struggle to
grow closer to the ideals in our founding
documents.
The constant American endeavor to
live by our values is a great strength that
has drawn generations of strivers and
dreamers to the United States, enriching
our population. Around the world, other
nations follow our lead because they know
that America does not simply protect its
own interests, but tries to advance the
aspirations of all.
This has stood as the foundation of
American foreign policy throughout my
political career — until recently.
Around the world, including in the United
States, we are seeing the resurgence of a
.
President Trump keeps longstanding allies
such as Germany at arm’s length, while
expressing admiration for autocrats like
Vladimir V. Putin who thwart democratic
institutions.
Rather than building from a narrative
of freedom and democracy that inspires
nations to rally together, this White House
Joe Biden
Joe Biden, a former
Democratic senator
from Delaware,
served as the 47th
vice president of
the United States.
He is the Benjamin
Franklin presidential
practice professor
at the University of
Pennsylvania, where
he also leads the
Penn Biden Center
for Diplomacy and
Global Engagement.
You cannot define
Americans by what
they look like, where
they come from,
whom they love or
how they worship.
Only our democratic
values define us.
— for the United States to succeed, others
must lose. Among the many problems that
plague the Trump administration’s foreign
policy, this line of thinking is perhaps the
most disturbing.
During a speech in July, Mr. Trump said:
“The fundamental question of our time is
whether the West has the will to survive.”
This statement divides the world into “us”
and “them.” Not since the period between
the world wars has a major American
political figure defined our interests so
narrowly.
Mr. Trump’s shameful defense of
the white nationalists and neo-Nazis
who unleashed hatred and violence in
Charlottesville, Va., further abnegated
America’s moral leadership. Not since the
Jim Crow era has an American president so
misunderstood and misrepresented our
values.
Most recently, the Trump administration’s
order to rescind Deferred Action for
Childhood Arrivals — punishing young
people brought to this country by their
parents, many of whom know no home but
the United States — betrays an unnecessary
cruelty that further undermines America’s
standing in the world.
106 2018 | OUR WORLD

When Secretary of State Rex W.
Tillerson said that it’s important to
very thing that makes the United
States exceptional.
And at a time when democratic
values are under siege around the
globe — from populist attacks that
institutions to leaders who try to
bolster their power by closing the
space for civil society and rolling back
citizens’ rights — the world cannot
A
to illiberalism and intolerance.
Placing American democratic
values back at the center of our
foreign policy does not mean we
should impose our principles abroad
or refuse to talk with nations whose
policies run counter to them.
There will always be times when
keeping Americans safe requires
working with those whom we find
distasteful. But even when we must
make those hard choices, we can
never forget who we are and the
future we seek.
Reclaiming our values starts
with standing up for them at home
— inclusivity, tolerance, diversity,
NEW YORK TIMES
KEITH MEYERS/THE NEW YORK TIMES
respect for the rule of law, freedom
of speech, freedom of the press. If
these are the democratic principles
we wish to see around the world,
A
them.
These are also the values that tie
us to our closest allies — the friends
we depend on to address major
global challenges. They must believe
that the United States will continue
to support them and to stand up for
democracy.
Leading with our values also
means that we speak out when
nations violate their citizens’ rights.
If leaders repress their own people,
we must make clear that it constrains
our ability to cooperate with them.
We can meet our national security
imperatives without giving a green
light to dictators who abuse universal
human rights.
Finally, a foreign policy built on
foreign powers that celebrate a
perceived withdrawal of American
leadership as an opportunity to
increase their influence. Without
the United States standing as a
bulwark for global democracy,
illiberal powers like Russia will take
increasingly aggressive steps to
disrupt the international order, bully
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
their neighbors and return to a more
divided world.
From shaping the Marshall Plan
after World War II to our postwar
alliances in East Asia, leaders of
both the Republican and Democratic
parties have long embraced a vision
of American leadership that fosters a
more secure, inclusive and generous
planet. That ideal made the world
safer and more prosperous — for
Americans and everyone else.
The international community still
needs a strong, democratic America
leading the way. And the good news
is that the United States remains
better positioned than any other
country to shape the direction of
the 21st century. But to succeed, we
cannot abandon the tenets that we
fought so hard to defend over the
past seven decades — ideals that
A
produced the greatest increase in
global prosperity in human history.
A
what they look like, where they come
from, whom they love or how they
worship. Only our democratic values
.A
in our conduct at home or abroad,
we jeopardize the respect that has
made the United States the greatest
nation on earth.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Joe Biden. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
107

OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
Agile Governance
for a Fractured World
By Klaus Schwab
As the Fourth Industrial Revolution
continues to reshape the global
political economy, many are
grasping for ideas about how to effect
positive systemic change. In a world where
technology is both a disrupter and the
driving force of progress, the best approach
may be to apply lessons from technology to
policymaking itself. Policymakers, like startups,
must look for more ways to iterate
what works and abandon what doesn’t.
To any observer of world affairs, it is
clear that after a relatively long period of
unprecedented peace and prosperity, and
after two decades of increasing integration,
openness, and inclusiveness, the pendulum
is now swinging back toward fragmentation,
.
Indeed, the post-world order has
already fractured in many ways. Ambitious
multilateral trade agreements have fallen
apart after key stakeholders walked away.
Unprecedented global cooperation on
climate change, embodied in the 2015
Paris climate accord, is being undermined.
Separatist movements are becoming more
vocal, as sub-national communities look for
sources of identity that will reestablish a
sense of control. And the president of the
United States has indicated that he will
pursue national self-interest above all else,
and that other national leaders should do
likewise.
These developments follow decades
of globalization, which ushered in an
astonishing period of progress across
many dimensions, from global health and
national incomes to inequality between
countries. But today’s fragmentation is
not about sterile statistics. Rather, it is a
visceral reaction to forces that have driven
Klaus
Schwab
Klaus Schwab
is Founder and
Executive Chairman
of the World
Economic Forum.
a wedge between economics and politics.
In the space between, there is now tension;
but there is also an opportunity to push for
cooperation and shared progress.
The underlying economic drivers of
integration remain powerful. The revolution
in information and communication
technologies (ICT) has drawn people from
around the world closer together; changed
the relationship between individuals
and their communities, employers, and
governments; and set the stage for a new
period of economic and social development
unlike anything that has come before.
And yet the human drive for freedom
– the chance to build a life of meaning
and achievement for oneself and one’s
community – remains undiminished.
At the same time, there has been a
political backlash against the economic
and technological forces of change. Power
has been won by those promising to
protect traditional identities and slow or
reverse change, rather than accommodate
it. For such politicians, the narrative is
straightforward: the system is rigged
and alien forces are complicating what
were once simpler but more satisfying lives.
Of course, no one denies that a
technology-driven global economy creates
imbalances, or that greater efficiency is
often achieved without greater fairness. The
system that produced the past few decades
of growth has emphasized the rights of
shareholders over other stakeholders, thus
concentrating wealth and locking out those
without capital.
More open trade has brought about
a shift in employment patterns between
and within countries. And now that a new
wave of technological change is poised to
overwhelm existing economic and social
structures, the nature of work itself is
changing.
Still, many of those who have gotten the
diagnosis right have gotten the prescription
wrong. For starters, none of the overarching
technological and economic forces at
work today can be regulated away at the
national level. When the forces driving the
108 2018 | OUR WORLD

global economy are larger than any
one country or stakeholder, the
simply cannot work. In the Fourth
Industrial Revolution, policies must
account for the global, regional, and
inter-sectoral industrial systems
that are shaping our world, and
all stakeholders – whether in
government, business, or civil
society – have no choice but to act
together, through new, innovative
forms of collaboration.
The formula for building inclusive
societies is well known: invest
in education, reduce barriers to
social and economic mobility, and
encourage competition. But, as
always, the devil is in the details, and
one size does not fit all. Whereas
some countries will need more
training or wage insurance, others
might have a need for minimumguaranteed-income
schemes and
measures to narrow gender gaps.
Government, business, and civil
society must work together to
experiment in these and many other
areas; and citizens need reasons to
believe that their leaders are acting
for the common good.
To that end, policymakers should
heed the lessons of the technology
sector. Given the complexity of
modern economic and social
systems, the outcome of a single
action can hardly be predicted with
certainty. An invaluable trait for
any effective organization, then,
is agility. Policymakers should be
asking themselves when to act, and
when to discontinue an action. And
they should craft policy experiments
with clearly discernible outcomes, so
that they can determine whether a
policy has worked or should end.
This kind of dynamism defines
the technical and creative economy,
where a start-up that is not prepared
to pivot when necessary won’t be
Leadership in a fractured world means
looking beyond the current discord to a
new, shared future.
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
IAC
William Kass, Kurt Moses.
FLICKR / SANTAOLLA
around for long. Those who are
successful understand clearly what
they want to achieve, and they reach
their goals by quickly adapting to
changing conditions.
Moreover, the technology sector
teaches us that collaboration
between stakeholders is the best way
an enabling, risk-taking environment.
Under perennially unpredictable
circumstances, leaders must be
willing to adapt, explore, learn,
and adjust endlessly. Leadership
in a fractured world means looking
beyond the current discord to a
new, shared future. It requires the
courage to try something novel, with
the knowledge that it might fail. We
have no choice but to take such
risks. The pendulum will not swing
back toward collective progress on
its own. We must push it, by showing
that stakeholder collaboration is still
possible, even in a fractured world.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
109

OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
JASON TESTER GUERRILLA FUTURES |FLICKR
Revolutionary Centrism
By Tony Blair
The center ground of Western politics is known
as the field of pragmatism, quiet reason, and
evolution, where political actors eschew extremes
and seek compromise. Because political centrists are
distrustful of loud-mouthed and divisive rhetoric, they
have taken a somewhat de haut en bas view of the way
the political world functions.
Now they are being overwhelmed. Populism of the
right and the left is rampant. The old rules no longer apply.
T
a few years back are now a passport to voters’ hearts.
Policy positions previously regarded as mainstream are
sneered at, and those regarded as outlandish are very
much inland today. And political alliances that have
endured for a century or more are breaking apart, owing
to profound social, economic, and cultural changes.
The right is fissuring. The prevailing sentiment is
nationalist, anti-immigration, and often protectionist,
giving rise to a new alliance. In the United Kingdom,
traditional Labour supporters in old industrial
communities and wealthy de-regulators and business
owners have united in their dislike of the way the world
is changing and “political correctness.” Whether this
coalition – and similar formations in other countries – can
survive its inherent economic contradictions is unclear,
though I would not underestimate the cohesive power
of a shared sense of cultural alienation.
But, as can be seen in the fighting within the
Republican Party in the United States, the Conservative
E
the right still sees itself as championing free trade, open
markets, and immigration as a positive force.
The left is also dividing. One part is moving to a much
more traditional statist position on economic policy, and
to a form of identity politics that is much more radical
on cultural norms. The other part clings to an attempt
to provide a unifying national narrative around concepts
of social justice and economic progress.
Of course, what used to be called the mainstream
of both the left and the right could take back control of
their political parties. For now, however, the extremes
are in charge, leaving many – socially liberal and in favor
110 2018 | OUR WORLD

of a competitive market economy alongside
modern forms of collective action –without
a political home.
Is this temporary, or are we at an
It is globalization that is changing
politics. The real division today is between
those who view globalization essentially as
an opportunity carrying risks that should
be mitigated; and those who believe
that, despite its apparent advantages,
globalization is destroying our way of life
and should be heavily constrained.
I have sometimes expressed this as
the difference between an “open” and
“closed” view of the world. But while that
language captures some of the essence
I
respect to the feeling that the “globalizers”
are ignoring genuine problems with the way
their creation is working.
The danger of Western politics is that,
without a broad and stable center ground,
The real division today
is between those who
view globalization
essentially as an
opportunity carrying
risks that should
be mitigated; and
those who believe
that, despite its
apparent advantages,
globalization is
destroying our way
of life and should be
heavily constrained.
Tony
Blair
Tony Blair, Prime
Minister of the
United Kingdom
from 1997 to 2007,
is Chairman of the
Africa Governance
Initiative.
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
the two extremes meet in uncompromising
confrontation. The degree of polarization in
both the US and the UK is frightening. In both
cases, the public is dividing itself into two
nations that don’t think like each other, work
with each other, or actually like each other.
This is dangerous, because if it persists,
democracy loses its appeal. Government
becomes paralyzed. The strongman model
becomes more attractive. When our
political and economic systems become a
competition animated by a winner-takeall
mentality, those who win at some point
begin to regard the losers as enemies,
rather than opponents.
Democracy has a spirit, not just a
form; and today’s level of polarization is
inconsistent with it. That is why we need
a new politics that seeks to build bridges
and bring people together – a politics that
in two respects.
First, we must understand the need for
radical change, not merely incremental
reforms. Technology alone will transform
the way we live, work, and think. We must
show those feeling left behind that there
is a way through the challenge of change
and that it is transformative. And we should
address their understandable anxieties
over issues like immigration, which are
complex and multilayered, and cannot
simply be dismissed as whining by nativist
“deplorables.”
In other words, we must show that
we have listened to the legitimate sense
of grievance about certain aspects of
globalization.
Second, we have to acknowledge that
contemporary politics is not operating
adequately to meet the challenge. While it
remains taboo for politicians occupying the
center ground in traditional parties to work
to say what they really believe, and unable
to represent those who urgently need to be
represented.
In short, in these times, revolution is too
much the zeitgeist to be left to the extremes.
The center should also become capable of
exploding the status quo.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
111

Reversing a
Democratic
Decay
By Marina Silva
Brazil, a nation rich in natural
resources, fertile lands and cultural
diversity, has struggled for decades
with underdevelopment. Some blame
it on the “custo Brasil,” or “Brazil cost” —
the accumulated price, in cash, time and
other resources, of doing business here
— pointing to the weight of bureaucracy,
high taxes and poor investment. Others cite
science, technology and education.
The root cause of our struggle, however,
is a decay of democracy in the face of
systemic, institutional corruption. Our
representative system has been so far
removed from its raison d’être that the will
to govern has been replaced by the goal of
remaining in power.
Nothing better illustrates the complex
web of Brazil’s democratic decay than
operation Car Wash, the wide-ranging
investigation into corruption.
Our governmental structure is coalitionbased,
which makes it vulnerable to
corruption. With dozens of parties vying
to form a majority in Congress, elections
are bloated and prohibitively expensive.
Gaining power allows a political party the
chance to appoint executives at state-run
companies. Executives receive kickbacks
from contractors, and some of that cash is
funneled back to the party.
It is a self-perpetuating cycle: Fraudulent
elections generate public administrations
that promote corruption, and are operated
by politicians who create electoral reforms
Marina Silva
Marina Silva
is a teacher,
environmentalist
and former senator.
She was Brazil’s
minister of the
environment from
2003 to 2008, and
ran for president in
2010 and 2014.
to grant themselves more and more
power, resources and control. As a result,
Brazil’s main political parties, which have
taken uninterrupted turns in authority for
decades, are focused not on governing the
country, but on building alliances to stay
in power.Ministers, advisers, senators,
representatives and even members of the
judicial branch collaborate with private
interests to make decisions about public
investments and push for the approval of
in power.
Some of Brazil’s largest economic groups
exemptions and loans from the Brazilian
Development Bank, and their failures have
shaken the foundations of the country’s
economy. Development resources intended
to improve quality of life and reduce social
inequality have been drained in order to
enrich certain groups and companies that
have been hailed as “national champions,”
.
Through misguided economic policy and
the misappropriation of public resources,
they have cost more than 14 million people
their jobs.
Even President Michel Temer, whose
agenda eschews the public interest and puts
our natural resources at risk, was recently
charged with bribery and is actively trying
to thwart potential investigations into his
operations. At the end of August he tried to
abolish 11 million acres of a preserve in the
Amazon — about the size of Denmark — so
the land could be opened to mining. This will
further encourage deforestation, the loss of
water resources and violence against local
communities and indigenous peoples.
But operation Car Wash has shown that
we can punish politicians and executives
for their crimes. The investigation has
been integral in exposing the corruption
that permeates our country, revealing
billions of dollars in illegal payments, jailing
executives and bringing a sitting president
into court on charges of violating campaign
.I
which corrupt businessmen and politicians
112 2018 | OUR WORLD

will fear justice because they know
that imprisonment may indeed be in
their future. The operation gives us a
glimpse of a possible political future
for the country — one that is less
conformist, has a high regard for the
values of citizenship and demands
equality for all.
Operation Car Wash also serves
as a warning for the business sector
and its deep-rooted practice of
influencing government decisions.
Businesses engaged in corruption
can now be dealt with by the justice
system, which will free us up to create
an environment in which competition
public works and services.
This tsunami sweeping Brazil
will allow space for a new political
paradigm founded on the principle
that justice means justice for all.
We’re not there yet, but operation
Car Wash is working, as evidenced
by the reaction of the political
establishment along the entire
ideological spectrum. A significant
number of political, party and
business leaders are using all their
assets to keep things as they are.
There are alliances between former
opponents aimed at stopping the
investigation, and there are attempts
to impose rules for the 2018 general
election that would guarantee
continuity for those currently in
power. Operation Car Wash’s main
task force was even shut down in
July, leaving the investigation to be
absorbed by a larger anti-corruption
division with a more limited scope.
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
MIGUEL SCHINCARIOL/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE -- GETTY IMAGES
Our hope of seeing Brazil
rejuvenated remains in the hands
of the press, the judicial branch and
the people. With a lot of pain, we are
.T
be the 2018 elections, when voters
will be able to conduct the biggest
“wash” ever seen in Brazilian politics
— when they will have a chance
to clean out corruption and open
the door to a reconstruction of the
country’s institutions.
It is a self-perpetuating cycle: Fraudulent
elections generate public administrations
that promote corruption,and are operated
by politicians who create electoral reforms
to grant themselves more and more power,
resources and control.
NEW YORK TIMES
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Marina Silva. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
113

What Makes Propaganda
More Dangerous Today?
By Samantha Power
When George Washington gave
his Farewell Address in 1796, he
urged the American people “to
be constantly awake” to the risk of foreign
.IR
in the 2016 election in the United States,
the president’s warning has a fresh, chilling
resonance.
The debate in the United States about
foreign interference concentrates on who
the need for democracies to strengthen their
cybersecurity for emails, critical infrastructure
and voting platforms. But we need to pay
far more attention to another vulnerability:
our adversaries’ attempts to subvert our
democratic processes by aiming falsehoods
at ripe subsets of our population — and not
only during elections.
In the Cold War era, Soviet attempts
to meddle in American democracy were
largely unsuccessful. In 1982 Yuri Andropov,
then the K.G.B. chairman, told Soviet
disinformation operations — the socalled
active measures meant to discredit
adversaries and influence public opinion
— into their standard work. They had an
ambitious aim: preventing Ronald Reagan’s
re-election.
in search of embarrassing information to
leak to the press, while Soviet propagandists
pushed a set of anti-Reagan story lines to
the Western media. Ultimately, they failed
R
defeated Walter F. Mondale, winning 49
states. Margaret Thatcher, who was similarly
targeted, also won re-election in a landslide.
What exactly has changed since then to make
Samantha
Power
Samantha Power
was the United
States permanent
representative to the
United Nations from
2013 to January
2017.
foreign propaganda far more dangerous
today?
During the Cold War, most Americans
received their news and information via
mediated platforms. Reporters and editors
serving in the role of professional gatekeepers
had almost full control over what appeared
in the media. A foreign adversary seeking to
reach American audiences did not have great
options for bypassing these umpires, and
Russian dezinformatsia rarely penetrated.
While television remains the main source
of news for most Americans, viewers today
tend to select a network in line with their
.E
the Pew Research Center has found that twothirds
of Americans are getting at least some
of their news through social media.
After the election, around 84 percent
of Americans polled by Pew described
in their ability to discern real news from fake.
T.
The sheer quantity of shares that
misleading stories get on Facebook is
staggering. Using a database of 156 electionrelated
news stories that fact-checking
websites deemed false, economists from
New York University and Stanford University
determined that these false stories had been
shared by American social media users 38
million times in the three months before the
2016 presidential election.
Russia has keenly exploited our growing
reliance on new media — and the absence
of real umpires. Last year the Russian
government supplemented the growing reach
of its state-owned, English-language media
outlets — RT and Sputnik — by employing
a network of trolls, bots, and thousands of
fake Twitter and Facebook accounts that
C.
Russia appears to have deployed similar
measures in Europe. Hackers’ attempts to
F
G
but interference has been widespread. In
Bulgaria, cyberattacks believed to originate
from Russia have hit the country’s electoral
commission, while in Sweden, Kremlin-
114 2018 | OUR WORLD

funded media outlets have been
accused of fabricating stories to
rally public opinion against NATO
membership. Russia has had time
overlooked disinformation campaigns
that accompanied Russia’s military
incursions into Georgia and Ukraine,
and the now-familiar mix of trolls,
bots and state-sponsored journalism
responsibility onto the United States
for the 2014 downing of Malaysia
Airlines Flight 17. In the United States,
is exacerbated by divisions within the
political establishment. During the
Cold War, the larger struggle against
communism created a mainstream
consensus about what America
stood for and against. Today, our
society appears to be defined by a
Democrats and Republicans alike. This
divisive environment can make the
media more susceptible to repeating
and amplifying falsehoods.
These days, the walls of our media
echo chambers are so soundproof
that, even after President Vladimir
Putin’s well-documented interference
TIMOTHY A. CLARY/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE — GETTY IMAGES
in the United States election, and his
his favorability among Republicans
rose substantially between 2015 and
President Trump’s inauguration, from
12 percent to 32 percent.
Most worrisome, many Americans
are questioning not only whether they
are obtaining objective facts — 60
percent believe news stories today
are “often inaccurate,” according
to Gallup, a major increase from 34
percent in 1985 — but also whether
objective facts exist at all. The sense
of an epistemological free-for-all
provides an opening to all comers.
Another reason for concern is
— political campaigns, companies,
foreign governments — can harvest
data (location, age, gender, likes,
shares) on its target audience,
personalizing messages to suit
the taste of those it aims to reach
and employing this customized
propaganda to skew the political
debate. Kremlin-linked ads have likely
reached millions of Americans, and
some were geographically targeted.
Because of the attention to last
year’s Russian election meddling,
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
there is a risk that going forward we
mobilizing our defenses with a focus
on Russia or on the next election cycle.
But we must be on our guard toward
all adversaries at all times.
At the height of its military
successes, the Islamic State was
releasing 38 pieces of news and
propaganda on social media daily,
the majority of which was used to
attract potential recruits by falsely, but
persuasively, depicting utopian life in
ISIS-held territory.
The bipartisan Alliance for
Securing Democracy, meanwhile, has
begun tracking and exposing Russia’s
extensive disinformation efforts in
the here and now. For example, the
alliance documented how on the same
day in August when Mr. Trump signed
on Russia, the top story promoted by
Russian-associated Twitter accounts
concerned Hillary Clinton’s links to
foreign arms sales. More recently,
the alliance showed how Russialinked
accounts promoted alt-right
conspiracies about the violence in
Charlottesville, Va., as well as stories
that slammed those — like Senator
John McCain — who had criticized Mr.
Trump’s equivocal response.
This new dashboard is evocative
of a series of special reports by the
United States State Department that
in the 1980s sought to undermine
Soviet fake news by exposing
American public.
It is a testament to our times that
it now seems unthinkable that the
State Department — much less the
president — would publicly call out
the misinformation being spread.
But now that there is a genuine risk
of foreign powers who, in George
Washington’s words, “practice the
arts of seduction, to mislead public
opinion,” it is incumbent on the rest
of us to enhance our vigilance.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Samantha Power. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
115

A Democracy
That’s Drowning
in Cash
By Celestine Bohlen
The tide of money swelling
around the American political
system continues to rise. In
2016, candidates running for federal
.
their campaigns, while lobbyists
spent $3.15 billion to influence the
government in Washington. Both
sums are twice that of 2000 levels.
So what does all that money buy?
No one seriously thinks that the
quality of American representative
democracy has doubled in value. Has
it instead become doubly corrupt?
The United States has long
maintained a freer approach to
democracies, in part because the
country is big, campaigns are long
and political advertising on television
is essential and expensive. In many
European countries, strict limits are
placed on campaign spending or
contributions, campaigns are kept
short and paid political advertising
on television is restricted or outright
banned. Since the Supreme Court’s
landmark 2010 ruling in the Citizens
United case, campaign spending in the
United States has become even more
unrestricted. Today, commentators in
Europe often describe the American
way as "legalized corruption." In the
United States, veterans of campaign
lost since the 1970s, when the
Watergate scandal ushered in a series
of controls on campaign contributions.
The flood of money unleashed
by the Citizens United decision has
swept away the effectiveness of
those controls, according to Fred
Wertheimer, president of Democracy
to campaign reform. He dismissed
as "illusory" the argument that
contributions from supposedly
independent groups known as “super
PACs” don’t corrupt the political
process because they don’t work
directly in concert with the campaigns
they support.
"The bottom line is we have
very serious problems with the
functioning of our democracy caused
seeking money into the elections," Mr.
Wertheimer said.
But is it corruption? Do the
gigantic sums doled out to campaigns
— and later lavished on elected
representatives as they are lobbied
for their votes — amount to attempts
to buy political power? Or is it, as
the Supreme Court agreed in the
STEPHEN CROWLEY/ THE NEW YORK TIMES
Citizens United case, an exercise in
constitutionally protected free speech?
Transparency International, the
Berlin-based anti-corruption group,
entrusted power for private gain." In
light of that, perhaps the American
system isn’t so crooked after all. In
fact, the United States performed
well on Transparency International’s
176-country Corruption Perceptions
Index from last year, ranking 18th,
behind Denmark (1st) and Germany
(10th), but ahead of France (23rd) and
Russia (131st).
While the United States is fairly
strict in cracking down on practices
such as bribery and kickbacks, Mr.
Wertheimer said, the American
system has opened the door to a
whole other kind of corruption.
"The corruption in the U.S. does
money in their pocket," he said. "This
is systemic corruption of the process
itself. When you are dealing with
116 2018 | OUR WORLD

billions and billions of dollars, much of that
the system, and it is much harder to defend
against and maintain representation for
ordinary Americans."
Still, tolerance of quid pro quo
transactions, which is more common in
some other countries, is even worse than a
political system awash in cash, according to
Yascha Mounk, a lecturer on political theory
at Harvard University. In his view, the former
discourages economic investment, skewers
attitudes toward local government and
corrodes faith in the justice system.
But he agrees that the vast sums spent
on political campaigns in the United States
are amplifying the sense among ordinary
A
politically and economically. The notion
that "all politicians are corrupt" is an old
one, and present in other democracies,
Mr. Mounk said. But the idea that the rich
are getting richer while everyone else falls
behind is becoming more prevalent in the
United States. This perception is borne out
by research from Martin Gilens, a politics
professor at Princeton University, which
shows that American economic policies
virtually no relationship to the preferences
of poor or middle-income Americans."
"Some argue that there is no causal
relation, but as numerous former
case," Mr. Wertheimer said. "Huge amounts
of money are not being given for charitable
.
The American system’s addiction to money
.A
Reuters, members of Congress can spend as
much time fund-raising as legislating — up to
.
Of course, it takes more than money to
win elections. In both the 2012 and 2016
presidential elections, the candidates who
spent the most money lost. And for every
candidate who loses, millions, even billions, of
dollars in contributions are spent for naught.
Nor are all contributions potentially venal;
they come in all forms — in support of causes
Celestine
Bohlen
Celestine Bohlen is
a columnist for the
International New
York Times, and a
fellow this fall at
the Shorenstein
Center on Media,
Politics and Public
Policy at the Harvard
Kennedy School. She
began her career
at local papers in
Massachusetts
and New Jersey,
and went on to
become a foreign
correspondent,
mostly for the New
York Times, but also
the Washington Post
and Bloomberg.
She has reported
from Moscow,
Budapest, Rome
and Paris, covering
the former Soviet
Union, Eastern
Europe, Italy and
the Vatican, Greece
and Turkey, France
and the European
Union. She lives in
Paris, France, and
for the past four
years has been an
adjunct professor
of journalism at
Sciences-Po, or the
Institute of Political
Science.
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
Each culture has its
own system of political
influence or, some
might say, corruption.
and issues, as well as corporate interests and
industrial lobbies.
Too sharp a focus on money also
overlooks the other ways politicians can be
.T
favor which work in more subtle ways," Mr.
Mounk said. "You are influenced by the
people around you — who you spend time
with, who you have dinner with."
Each culture has its own system of political
influence or, some might say, corruption.
Throwing around money is the American way.
In Russia, the Kremlin doles out business to
its favorite oligarchs, who in turn are in thrall
to their political masters, a system that Mr.
Mounk says is the most pernicious of all.
In France, where paid political advertising
on television is prohibited, campaign
spending and contributions are limited, and
public campaign funding is available, voters
this year punished a presidential candidate
who had placed his wife in a no-show job
on the public payroll, a questionable but
not uncommon practice among France’s
political elite. In the United States, however,
the immense sums of money swirling around
politics and the proliferation of super PACs
have yet to stir protests from voters, and
C.
that the threat to a healthy democratic
system isn’t real, Mr. Wertheimer said.
"The amounts are unprecedented and
provide an extraordinary advantage to the
very rich," he said. "When you are dealing
with huge amounts of money — and when
there are no laws to contain them — they
overwhelm the process in a way that small
.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Celestine Bohlen . Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
117

OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
Has dealing with Pride and Prejudice
become a challenge for media?
By Lieven Taillie
A
most moving event in 2017 was
when a crowd in Manchester, after a
minute’s silence to honor the memory
of 22 people killed by a terrorist bombing
following the concert given on May 22 by
US singer Ariane Grande in the Manchester
Arena, spontaneously began to sing the
Touching is also the comment given to The
Guardian’s reporter by the lady who struck
C
taken up by the crowd:
“I love Manchester, and Oasis is part
of my childhood,” she told the Guardian.
“Don’t Look Back in Anger – that’s what this
is about: we can’t be looking backwards to
what happened, we have to look forward
to the future.”
In 2017 mostly angry voices expressed in
separatist votes (Catalunya most explicitly),
politics of nationalists, shooting incidents,
terrorist attacks, populism …. came more
eminently to the forefront. One essential
element in nationalism in European
tradition is to revisit the past, to look back
and to capitalize on anger that comes out
of a lack of recognition.
“In traditional media we try to explain,
to see differences, but we have more
difficulty in understanding it.” It is the
interesting point of view Charlie Beckett
from Polis, media think tank of London
School of Economics(LSE), defends in an
interesting article http://blogs.lse.ac.uk/
polis/2017/08/28/journalisms-new-missionunderstanding-the-human/
.
In his eyes the journalism produced
is still very self-referential. This view
offers indeed a possible explanation for
the difficulties many correspondents
encounter to understand e.g. the success of
Lieven
Taillie
Lieven Taillie is
president of the
Belgian section of
the Association of
European Journalists
and writes this in his
personal capacity.
One essential element
in nationalism in
European tradition
is to revisit the past,
to look back and to
capitalize on anger
that comes out of a
lack of recognition.
Trump in the USA, the Brexit vote, the AFD
success in Germany, and so much more
that is emblematic for what is happening
today in (international) politics. For Beckett
there is a huge amount of innovation out
there with news brands moving onto new
platforms such as Instagram or Whatsapp
to reach out to where the public are having
their conversations and getting their
information. But even when it is done well
the primary motive for this engagement is
short-term commercialism.
Connect the user to your content in
the hope they stick around long enough
to sign up for a subscription. The danger
exists that, though journalists see the
potential advantages of understanding
what is going on in the streets of our cities
and in our communities, media give in to
a certain spirit of business that is pushing
and only as consumers, not as the more
complex persons they are. New evolutions
118 2018 | OUR WORLD

in big data and their use risk making
us, humans, objects rather than
subjects, a reduction into figures
and statistics for whom algorithms
preselect what is healthy, nice and
so much more that exists to make
us attractable and unique. Big
data was the buss word that is to
stay also in 2018 central in further
trends in the media and beyond. As
all innovations throughout history it
carries opportunities and risks that
impact on our living together and the
way we interact. But are journalists
conscient enough of the impact datagathering
has on the way they are
functioning? Do they not stick to
much in their own way into pride and
prejudices on the job?
Some among them do and stay
within their professional bubbles,
it, journalists in their majority, driven
by what is essential for a journalist,
maintain curiosity and openness
to what is happening, reporting
on it while it is happening. They
really are trying to adapt in the fast
changing media environment, as far
as working conditions are permitting
them to take the necessary time to
do so.
As the Responsible Data
Community mentions on its website
https://responsibledata.io : “In one
way or another, all data are shaped
by people and their decisions. How
we treat data, how we think about
what it tells us (or what it doesn’t),
how we choose what to collect and
what not to collect all have impacts
upon people.” This is certainly a
case to be considered by media
companies and even more in 2018
as on 25 May 2018, the General Data
Protection Regulation (GDPR) will
European Union. This regulation was
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
designed with the idea to give control
back to citizens and residents over
their personal data, and to create a
uniform data protection law across
member countries.
Journalists need to consider
how to reinvent the profession in
becoming more and more some kind
of news brokers working in team
with designers, artists, IT specialists
and other creative technicians to
bring people the news, the visuals
and the stories they deserve. It was
part of the discussion AEJ Belgium
organized with Gert-Jan Bogaerts of
Dutch public broadcaster VPRO in
Vilnius on the occasion of the AEJ
congress in Vilnius on big or thick
data, still to be consulted on www.
aej-belgium.eu .
Looking to the future is readiness
to open your mind, “to stand up
of Oasis…
Albert Rivera, the leader of the Spanish ‘Ciudadanos’ (Citizens) party, is framed by microphones pointed at him by reporters
as he addresses the media in Oviedo, Asturias, northern Spain, 20 October 2017.
EPA-EFE/ALBERTO MORANTEE
OUR WORLD | 2018
119

OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
Will the Center Hold?
By Lawrence Summers
The most important question facing
the United States – and in many
ways the world – after the events of
2017 is this: Will Yeats’ fearful prophecy that
“Things fall apart; the center cannot hold”
come true? Will it continue to seem that “The
best lack all conviction while the worst are
full of passionate intensity”? It is hard not to
be concerned, but it is too soon to anticipate
failure.
The US now has a president who regularly
uses his Twitter account to heap invective
on leaders of nuclear-armed states, the
American news media, members of his own
cabinet, and religious and racial minorities,
while showering praise on those who traduce
the values of democracy, tolerance, and
international law.
Countries such as China, Russia, Turkey,
and Saudi Arabia are more authoritarian,
more nationalist, and more truculent on the
world stage than they were a year ago. And
then there is the surely more belligerent and
possibly more erratic leader of North Korea, a
country on the brink of developing the ability
to deliver nuclear weapons at long range.
Europe also faced trials in 2017. Aside from
the United Kingdom’s decision to proceed with
its withdrawal from the European Union, the
far right won seats in the German Bundestag
for the first time in decades, and far-right
parties and candidates did better than ever
in a number of European elections. In mid-
November, 60,000 people marched through
Warsaw demanding a “White Europe.”
So there is plenty of passionate intensity.
And much of it is directed at the traditions
and understandings that have made the
last several decades the best in human
history, in terms of living standards,
minimization of premature and violent death.
Will things stay together? Can some kind
of center hold? Financial markets offer a
Lawrence H.
Summers
Lawrence H.
Summers, US
Secretary of the
Treasury (1999-
2001) and Director
of the US National
Economic Council
(2009-2010), is a
former president of
Harvard University,
where he is
currently University
Professor.
remarkably optimistic view. The US stock
market has broken one record after another
in the year since Donald Trump’s election as
president, while indicators of realized stockmarket
volatility and of expected future
volatility are at very low levels by historical
standards. And some stock markets around
the world have done even better.
While high equity prices and low volatility
may seem surprising, they likely reflect
the limited extent to which stock-market
outcomes and geopolitical events are
correlated. For example, Japan’s attack on
Pearl Harbor, the assassination of President
John F. Kennedy, and the 9/11 terrorist attacks
had no sustained impact on the economy. The
largest stock-market movements, such as the
1987 crash, have typically occurred on days
when there was no major external news.
Stock markets are buoyant because they
comprise individual companies, and, to a
have been both rising and predictable. How
is a risk that investors are increasingly taking
on leverage or pursuing strategies – such as
contemporary versions of portfolio insurance
– that will cause them to sell if markets
decline. It is worth remembering that, looking
back, markets do not appear to have been
remarkably bubbly prior to the 1987 crash.
There is also the question of financial
.
far better capitalized and far more liquid than
they were prior to the crisis, market indicators
of risk suggest we may not be quite as far
out of the woods as many suppose. Despite
apparently large increases in capital and
consequent declines in leverage, it does not
appear that bank stocks have become far less
capital had become abundant.
Financial markets are widely cited,
including by US President Donald Trump, as
providing comfort in the current moment. But
120 2018 | OUR WORLD

catastrophic political consequences,
sweeping into power even more
toxic populist nationalists. In such a
scenario, the center will not hold.
Beyond the kind of near-term
risks that markets price, there is the
question of an economic downturn.
The good news is that sentiment is
.I
seems unlikely to accelerate out of
control and force a lurch toward
contractionary fiscal and monetary
policies. Most forecasters regard the
near-term risk of recession as low.
But recessions are never predicted
successfully, even six months in
advance. The current expansion in
the US has gone on for a long time,
and the risk of policy mistakes there is
very real, owing to highly problematic
economic leadership in the Trump
administration. I would put the annual
probability of recession in the coming
years at 20-25%. So the odds are better
than even that the US economy will fall
into recession in the next three years.
The risk from a purely economic
point of view is that the traditional
strategy for battling recession – a
reduction of 500 basis points in the
federal funds rate – will be unavailable
this year, given the zero lower bound
on interest rates. Nor is it clear that the
will exist. This means that the next
recession, like the last, may well be
protracted and deep, with severe
global consequences. And the political
capacity for a global response, like that
on display at the London G-20 Summit
in 2009, appears to be absent as well.
Just compare the global visions of
US President Barack Obama and UK
Prime Minister Gordon Brown back
then with those of Trump and Prime
Minister Theresa May today.
I shudder to think what a serious
recession will mean for politics and
policy. It is hard to imagine avoiding
a resurgence of protectionism,
populism, and scapegoating. In such
crisis, the center will not hold.
But the greatest risk in the next
few years, I believe, is neither a market
meltdown nor a recession. It is instead
a political doom loop in which voters’
conclusion that government does not
self-fulfilling prophecy. Candidates
elected on platforms of resentment
delegitimize the governments they
lead, fueling further resentment and
even more problematic new leaders.
Cynicism pervades.
How else can one explain the
candidacy of Roy Moore for a US
Senate seat? Moore, who was twice
dismissed for cause from his post
on the Alabama Supreme Court, and
who is credibly charged with sexually
assaulting teenage girls when he was
in his 30s, could enter the US Senate
as many of his colleagues look the
other way. If a country’s citizens lose
confidence in their government’s
ability to improve their lives, the
government has an incentive to rally
popular support by focusing attention
on threats that only it can address.
That is why in societies pervaded
by anger and uncertainty about the
future, the temptation to stigmatize
minority groups increases. And it is
magnify foreign threats.
We are seeing this phenomenon
all over the world. Russian President
Vladimir Putin, Turkish President Recep
TEC
Xi Jinping have all made nationalism a
central part of their governing strategy.
So, too, has Trump, who has explicitly
rejected the international community
in favor of the idea that there is only
a ceaseless struggle among nationstates
for competitive advantage.
When the world’s preeminent
power, having upheld the idea of
international community for nearly
75 years, rejects it in favor of ad hoc
deal making, others have no choice
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
but to follow suit. Countries that can
If a country’s citizens
lose confidence in
their government’s
ability to improve
their lives, the
government has an
incentive to rally
popular support by
focusing attention on
threats that only it
can address.
no longer rely on the US feel pressure
to provide for their own security.
America’s adversaries inevitably will
US retrenches.
Changes in tax, regulatory, or
budget policy can be rescinded –
administration. A perception that the
US is no longer prepared to stand
up for its allies in the international
community is much less reversible.
Even if the US resumes its previous
commitments, there will be a lingering
sense that promises broken once can
be broken again. And once other
countries embark on a new path, they
may be unable or reluctant to reverse
course. So, will the center hold? Will
the international order remain broadly
stable? The answer will depend on the
Trump administration’s choices and
other governments’ responses. But
as other countries watch America,
they will be looking at more than its
president, especially as his popular
approval continues to decline. That is
why it is more important than ever that
all Americans proclaim their continuing
commitment to democracy and
prosperity at home and to leadership
of the global community.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
121

OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
Stealing
the
Populists’
Clothes
By Radosław Sikorski
Two cheers for US President
Donald Trump. Without him,
the West would still regard
populism as a problem unique to
Central and Eastern Europe. Yet
Trump’s presidency is as clear a
demonstration as there could be of
the fact that populism is not merely a
product of the alleged “immaturity” of
post-communist countries.
Leo Tolstoy supposedly said that
the further one is from events, the
more inevitable those events seem.
So it is with today’s populist surge. It
wasn’t inevitable that Poland’s Law and
Justice Party (PiS) would come to power
with 38% of the vote in 2015; nor was
it inevitable that Trump would win the
US presidency, despite having received
almost three million fewer votes than
his opponent. In both cases, luck and
the competition’s incompetence played
a role, just as they did in bringing
decidedly liberal forces to power in
France in 2017.
Still, as we head into 2018, we
should recognize that another year of
populist turbulence beckons. After all,
there is nothing new about populist
politics in democracies, whether young
or old. In the nineteenth century, the
“free silver” movement divided the
United States in much the same way
Right-wing populists demonstrate against Merkel in Berlin.
that Brexit divides Britain today.
Populists succeed by exploiting
citizens’ alienation from an
establishment that has failed or is
unable to respond to some salient
challenge – for example, low crop
the 1870s, or migration in the European
Union today. They usually propose
simple solutions to complex problems.
And once in power, they usually fail to
deliver on their promises, but only
after they have spent all the public’s
money. Wise establishmentarians
accommodate some populist
arguments within their own political
programs. After these concessions
are made, emotions tend to cool, and
social stability can be restored.
So, what are the foremost populist
grievances today? Judging by countries
like Poland and Hungary, there are
at least three: class resentment,
demographic despair, and threatened
EPA/PAUL ZINKEN
identities. Each of these grievances has
a legitimate basis, and all need to be
addressed.
Contrary to popular belief, none of
these grievances is strictly economic. In
Poland, incomes have been rising and
inequalities have been falling for 25
years. Yet at the same time, ordinary
people have become increasingly
Still, as we head
into 2018, we
should recognize
that another year of
populist turbulence
beckons.
122 2018 | OUR WORLD

suspicious of elites “feeding at the trough”
while everyone else allegedly struggles to
make ends meet.
Part of the problem is that expectations
have outrun reality. When expectations go
unmet, people begin to suspect that the
social compact itself is unfair. It is this sense of
unfairness, far more than income levels, that
has fueled support for populist movements.
After all, one can earn much more than the
Polish minimum wage and still resent the
fact that the global rich are squirreling away
trillions of dollars in tax havens, or that
transnational companies routinely shirk their
tax obligations.
Moreover, populists, despite their racist
rhetoric on the issue of migration, are not
wrong to intuit that a generous welfare state
is incompatible with open borders. There
are a billion people on the other side of the
Mediterranean Sea who cannot be blamed for
wanting to live in a European welfare state.
Many of them live in countries with neither
welfare nor even a functioning state.
Europe cannot accept everyone. There are
legitimate discussions to be had about
tolerable immigration rates, Western
countries’ absorptive capacity, and border
controls. Moreover, it is fair to ask if there are
better ways than mass migration to address
the problems associated with an aging
and parental leave. What has been most
irksome to populists and their sympathizers
is that merely raising such questions exposes
one to accusations of intolerance, or worse.
As to the third populist grievance, it was
predictable that those left behind in the age of
globalization and meritocracy would fall back
on collective identities as a source of dignity.
And in Poland and the US, in particular, this
trend has been reinforced by a decline in
religiosity. Nationalism is the last refuge of
those who fear losing a way of life. It is partly
a reaction of endangered majorities that do
not want to become minorities.
Now, alongside this list of grievances,
consider the fact that, historically, every
communications revolution has led to a
political revolution. In a world of unregulated
Radosław
Sikorski
R
is a former Polish
foreign minister.
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
social media, populist demagogues do not
have to do much to stoke the confusion,
paranoia, and cynicism that are already
smoldering within the electorate.
Looking forward, policymakers and political
leaders need to address the fundamental
concerns that populists have tapped. First,
we need to fix capitalism, by ensuring that
social contributions are rewarded more
appropriately than they are today. Even if we
contribution than doctors, are we really
expected to believe that they contribute a
thousand – let alone ten thousand – times
more? Likewise, it is time to freeze out
companies and individuals that maintain
accounts in OECD-designated tax havens.
The EU, for its part, is right to insist that
multinationals pay taxes wherever they do
business.
Member states need to support the
Commission’s proposals for tougher controls.
Second, governments need to reassert
control over national – or, in the case of the
EU, supranational – borders. Citizens want
a say over who comes to live in their midst,
and under what conditions. And they want to
ensure that those who do come plan to be
good neighbors.
Third, politicians must stop mining cheap
nationalism for tactical electoral advantages.
They owe it to voters to explain why their
interests will be better protected through
multilateralism. This is especially true for the
EU, which needs to cultivate more European
patriotism, perhaps through joint military
action on the periphery.
Finally, the Internet, social media, and other
new technologies need to be regulated, either
by pressuring companies to police themselves,
or by enacting new legislation. Like any worldchanging
invention, digital technologies have
obvious downsides that cannot be ignored.
These are difficult but achievable goals.
Contrary to the defeatism that has become
rampant nowadays, we can, through
democratic means, enact legislation and
adopt regulations that address the problems
populists have identified. But we need to
hurry. If we don’t act, the populists will – and
with far more damaging results.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
123

OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
The Venal Roots of
Political Turmoil
By Janine R. Wedel
In 2017, corruption became a byword for
politics on almost every continent, framing
as China, Saudi Arabia, and Brazil. Corruption
and its attendant scandals toppled presidents
and prime ministers, cut down political
opposition leaders, and fueled “populist”
revolts worldwide. Without accounting for
of political turbulence simply doesn’t make
sense. In Brazil, investigations have been
ongoing into what one judge has described
as a “scheme of systemic corruption” between
public officials and the Brazilian oil giant
Petrobras. As a result of the investigations,
President Dilma Rousseff was impeached
A
former President Luiz Inácio “Lula” da Silva was
convicted and sentenced to prison in July of
this year.
Similarly, in South Korea, a corruption
scandal led to President Park Geun-hye’s
impeachment and removal from office in
March, and to the imprisonment of Lee Jaeyong,
the heir apparent at Samsung, in August.
In Pakistan, Prime Minister Nawaz Sharif
was ousted by the country’s Supreme Court
in July. He is now facing corruption charges
for London real-estate purchases that he
companies and under his children’s names.
The assets had gone unreported until they
were revealed by the 2015 leak of the “Panama
Papers.”
In Russia under President Vladimir Putin,
corruption flourishes at the nexus of state
politics and big business, with loyal oligarchs
also reliably executing Putin’s political agendas.
But corruption is also being exported. Indeed,
Putin spreads his formula of illiberalism,
nationalism, and authoritarianism to former
Janine R.
Wedel
Janine R. Wedel
is an American
anthropologist and
university professor
in the Schar
School of Policy
and Government
at George Mason
University and a
Senior Research
Fellow of the New
America Foundation.
She is the author of
several books and
many articles[1] on
some key systemic
processes of the
.
anthropologist to
win the Grawemeyer
Award for Ideas
Improving World
Order, an honor
typically reserved for
political scientists.
In many countries
nowadays, civic activism
may be absent on most
issues. But corruption
isn’t one of them.
People cared enough
about it to upend
politics in 2016 and
again in 2017.
Soviet states, Europe, and even the US.
And in Hungary, allegations of cronyism
have dogged Prime Minister Viktor Orbán,
who has strengthened his hold on power
by cultivating close ties with the country’s
oligarchs. As I have documented over the
past decade, corruption is not just about
graft or illicit transactions. It also includes legal
violations of the public trust, often committed
by “shadow elites” who assume a tangle
of roles in the public and private sectors,
sometimes simultaneously.
T
own interests and escaping accountability
has not been lost on ordinary people. In the
US, what I call the “new corruption” was a
central concern of both the Tea Party on the
right and Occupy Wall Street on the left. Both
movements objected to the 2008 Wall Street
bailout, and saw it as evidence of a rigged
system.
In each of the last three years, Chapman
University’s “Survey of American Fears” found
that concerns about corruption weigh more
heavily on Americans’ minds than even
crime, terrorism, or deaths in the family.
Donald Trump won the presidency in 2016
partly by exploiting these concerns. Yet
despite his promise to “drain the swamp,”
he spent 2017 expanding and deepening it.
All manner of Trump associates have found
work and increased their cachet on K-street,
Washington’s lobbying hub. Some have sought
work lobbying for foreign powers, even though
candidate Trump railed against his rival for
124 2018 | OUR WORLD

OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
Then US Republican presidential nominee Donald Trump (C-L) poses with
campaign manager Kellyanne Conway (C-R) on stage at his 2016 presidential
Election Night event.
.
Trump assembled a team of advisers
sectors they are supposed to oversee,
as well as former lobbyists, including
some working for foreign regimes.
Trump himself has imbued public
unlike anything America has seen in
decades – if ever.
Among his many violations of
the public trust, Trump has
declined to fully divest from
his business holdings or release his
tax returns and has installed family
members in powerful official and
.
Moreover, some of Trump’s cabinet
members have tapped into public
resources for their own personal and
.
have been held accountable for this is
Tom Price, who resigned as Secretary
of Health and Human Services
in September, after news outlets
reported that he had billed taxpayers
.
Trump and his associates might
very well face serious corruption
charges eventually, depending on what
EPA-EFE/SHAWN THEW
former FBI Director Robert Mueller
into Russian interference in the 2016
election. Already, Mueller has brought
charges against Trump’s former
campaign chairman,
Paul Manafort, and Manafort’s
longtime associate, Rick Gates. Many
observers doubt that the Trump
administration will last until the end
of its electoral term in 2020. But
citizens should be forewarned that
senior officials, a lengthy period of
uncertainty often follows. For example,
the vast anti-corruption investigation in
Brazil has won international praise, but
stability. On the contrary, according to
the Council on Foreign Relations, Brazil
is suffering “unprecedented voter
dissatisfaction,” with no obvious leader
to rebuild public trust.
What follows from anti-corruption
investigations depends largely on
a country’s political and economic
context. For example, because political
among family members, Sharif, upon
being deposed, tried to name his
brother as his successor. In September,
parliamentary seat.
In other countries, anti-corruption
probes have been used by authoritarian
regimes to neutralize opponents. In
July, Poland’s government, controlled
by the illiberal Law and Justice (PiS)
to subordinate the judiciary to political
control, arguing that the courts had
been corrupted by “elites.”
And in China, President Xi Jinping
has made savvy use of an anticorruption
campaign to purge political
rivals and settle scores – a campaign
that Saudi Arabia’s Crown Prince
Mohammed bin Salman appears to be
power in his own hands. Owing to its
one-party system, China has been
able to keep up the appearance
of stability during its intensifying
crackdown. But some analysts argue
that widespread discontent is brewing
beneath the surface, and that endemic
corruption among the country’s ruling
elites is eroding the political system’s
sustainability.
T
this year: citizens pushing back
against corruption in all of its forms.
In Poland, widespread protests forced
the president to veto much of the
PiS’s attempted judicial power grab. In
Venezuela, protests against cronyism
were ongoing throughout the year.
And in Russia, thousands of citizens
took to the streets to protest Putin’s
kleptocratic regime – inspired, in part,
by the anti-corruption activist Alexei
Navalny, who has been mobilizing the
Russian opposition with his “crooks
and thieves” campaign targeting Putin’s
United Russia party.
In many countries nowadays,
civic activism may be absent on most
issues. But corruption isn’t one of
them. People cared enough about it
to upend politics in 2016 and again in
2017. There is no reason to believe that
.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
125

PRAKASH SINGH/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE -- GETTY IMAGES
As more and more
countries shed their
deference to the
West, the continuing
resurrection of strong
nationalist leaders is
inevitable.
The New
Democratic
Wave
By Kishore Mahbubani
The global spread of democracy,
a Western gift to the world, was
meant to result in the election
of liberal, pro-Western leaders. Instead,
a wave of strongmen rulers has been
elected, many of whom have clear non-
Western identities. This list includes
Shinzo Abe of Japan, Rodrigo Duterte of
the Philippines, Recep Tayyip Erdogan
of Turkey, Narendra Modi of India
and, looking back further, Vladimir V.
Putin of Russia. China’s Xi Jinping can
be added to this list, emerging as he
process within the 80 million-member
Communist Party of China.
T
a new chapter in history. For the past
200 years, the West has been unusually
powerful, dominating global history
even in the post-colonial era. However,
mistakes made by the West have given
rise to the sharp anti-Western edge of
leaders like Mr. Erdogan and Mr. Putin.
And as American and European power
recedes, a global resurrection of non-
Western attitudes is taking place. Even
pro-Western leaders, like Mr. Abe and
Mr. Modi, are asserting their non-
Western identities.
Europe humiliated Turkey for
decades. Under Mustafa Kemal
Ataturk, Turkey made the bold decision
to leave the Islamic world and join the
West. Turkey, a member of NATO,
applied to join the predecessor to the
European Union in 1987. The country
was denied, while smaller nations
like Slovakia, Latvia and Estonia
.TT
undermined the political standing of
the secular pro-Western Turks living in
and around Istanbul; they were seen
European insults.
The initial election of Mr. Erdogan in
2003 represented the Turkish people’s
strong desire for a leader who could
stand up to Europe, and his rule was
legitimized by solid economic growth.
While Mr. Erdogan’s popularity has
recently slipped — he barely won
the April 2017 referendum — he has
never been more politically powerful.
Mr. Erdogan has the ability to shape
Turkey’s future by moving it away
from its secular past and making its
Islamic identity more visible. Russia
suffered even greater humiliation
than Turkey. Mikhail Gorbachev’s
126 2018 | OUR WORLD

unilateral dissolution of the Soviet Union was
an unimaginable geopolitical gift to the West,
especially America. The Russia that remained
was a small shell of its former empire. After
C
West would have been wise to heed Churchill’s
advice: “in victory, magnanimity.” Instead, it did
the exact opposite. Contrary to the implicit
assurances given to Mr. Gorbachev and Soviet
leaders, the West expanded NATO to include
former member nations of the Warsaw
Pact, embarrassing Russia as its geopolitical
territory shrank. This humiliation has led to
an inevitable blowback.
After Mr. Putin was elected in 2000, the
West threatened to expand the Atlantic
alliance into Ukraine, even though eminent
American statesmen like Henry Kissinger
and Zbigniew Brzezinski cautioned against
the move. Their warnings were ignored, and
Mr. Putin was left with no choice but to take
back Crimea, which had been part of Russia
from 1783 to 1954. Even Mr. Gorbachev, a pro-
Westerner, supported Mr. Putin, saying that
the Crimean referendum showed that “people
really wanted to return to Russia.” Given a
choice, 95.5 percent of the voters elected to
join Russia.
The Crimean episode shows that there
is only so much humiliation any nation can
..
the Russian people. They wanted a strongman
who could stand up to the West. He did this
by invading Crimea and supporting President
Bashar al-Assad in Syria. There are no saints
in geopolitical games; if the West had shown
respect for Russia instead of humiliating it, Mr.
Putin might not have come to power.
Neither Japan nor India has been humiliated
by the West in recent times. Indeed, both
have drawn geopolitically closer to America
since the rise of China. Yet, even in these
countries there is a clear desire to support
strong leaders who can forcefully enhance the
nation’s identity.Outwardly, Mr. Abe appears
to be a pro-Western leader, especially with
his dapper Western suits. Inwardly, however,
he is an ardent Japanese nationalist. His
grandfather Nobusuke Kishi was accused as
a “class-A war criminal” after World War II. Mr.
Abe believes he was unjustly accused. Mr.
Kishore
Mahbubani
Kishore Mahbubani
served in
Singapore’s
diplomatic service
for 33 years. He is
the dean of the Lee
Kuan Yew School of
Public Policy at the
National University
of Singapore and the
author of “The Great
Convergence: Asia,
the West and the
Logic of One World.
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
Abe has also allowed his fellow members of
parliament to visit the controversial nationalist
Yasukuni Shrine, drawing the ire of China and
South Korea. Outwardly, Mr. Abe maintains
deference to America. Inwardly, he is dying to
break free from his geopolitical shackles. For
example, even as America and Europe were
trying hard to isolate Moscow, Mr. Abe worked
behind the scenes in Moscow in April 2013 to
try to reach a private deal with Mr. Putin on
the disputed Kurile Islands, which Russia had
taken over at the end of World War II.
Mr. Modi’s forceful emergence on the world
stage demonstrates that India is no longer a
second-tier power. Mr. Modi has shed many
of the pro-Western trappings that the Indian
establishment was once so proud of. Despite
visit to the United States in September 2014,
Mr. Modi fasted for nine days in observance of
the Hindu festival of Navratri. Mr. Modi seldom
wears Western clothes and speaks mostly in
Hindi. His support of some loud right-wing
voices, including the chief minister of Uttar
Pradesh, Yogi Adityanath, is worrying. But
Mr. Modi is no demagogue. He is a pragmatic
nationalist focused on economic growth. In
Mr. Modi’s mind, there is no doubt that we
are moving toward a G-3 world, with India
securing an equal place alongside America
and China.
While the Chinese president, Xi Jinping,
functions in a very different political
environment from that of Mr. Abe and Mr.
E
in his respective national identity. A hundred
years ago, Indian, Japanese and Chinese
leaders called upon their people to emulate
the West to move ahead. Voices like Sun Yatsen
in China and Raja Ram Mohan Roy in India
spoke of the need to mirror the West. Today,
such a thought wouldn’t even cross the minds
of Mr. Abe, Mr. Modi and Mr. Xi. Instead, all
three are telling their people to remember
their own glorious histories.
As more and more countries shed their
deference to the West, the continuing
resurrection of strong nationalist leaders is
inevitable. Our geopolitical future likely lies
with this new wave.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Kishore Mahbubani. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
127

An artist’s rendering of a castle under siege.
Mirko Ilic
Why We
Need
Political
Parties
By Moisés Naím
In less than a decade, the world
went from worrying about financial
crashes to worrying about crashing
democracies. Starting in 2008, we
were distressed over which economy
would topple next, or whether the next
banking crisis would wipe out peoples’
savings. Yet the Great Recession was
not as prolonged as we feared — the
hardest-hit economies have recovered,
or are in the process of doing so.
What has not returned to precrisis
mode is politics.
Today political parties — essential
to strong democratic systems — are
becoming something of an endangered
species.
The aftermath of the economic
downturn paved the way for the success
of nontraditional political leaders like
Donald Trump and made viable some
once unimaginable ideas, like Brexit.
Longstanding trends also took a
stronger hold in the West. As salaries
stagnated or even declined in the United
States, Britain and other economically
advanced democracies, the embattled
middle class blamed automation
and globalization. Immigration and
international trade were seen as costly
downsides to international integration.
Surprisingly, even emerging markets
with fast-growing economies and stellar
records of lifting people out of poverty,
like Brazil, faced challenges from angry
populations disappointed with their
governments and empowered by social
media and other new technologies.
In developing countries, it is
common for people’s expectations to
grow at a faster pace than the capacity
of the state to meet them. Money is
always short, and public institutions
128 2018 | OUR WORLD

.
of hundreds of millions of people in Asia, Latin
America and Africa are improving, that doesn’t
mean that people are content. And it became
clear that economic progress and prosperity do
not always buy political stability.
The global wave of political anger sweeping
many rich and poor countries alike is also fed
by a newfound impatience with corruption. In
the last decade, societies in which corruption
used to be treated as a fact of life developed
ousted once untouchable politicians. In Brazil
and India, Russia and Spain, people took to
the streets to denounce corruption by the
powerful.
And too often those in power were also
leaders of traditional political parties. When
such leaders are caught stealing, it becomes
another stain on parties, whose prestige and
allure has been steadily waning. These days,
political parties are seen not as natural habitats
for idealists but for fast-talking and often
hypocritical opportunists and careerists.
The disdain for politics as usual — and
therefore for parties locked in the status quo —
is intense, widespread, global. This is why antipolitics,
the rejection of traditional politics and
its practitioners, is such a popular instinct today.
The case of Tiririca vividly illustrates
why. In 2010 Francisco Everardo Oliveira
Silva, known professionally as Tiririca the
clown, ran for a congressional seat in Brazil,
campaigning in costume. His message was
honest and straightforward: “I don’t know what
a representative in Congress does, but if you
send me there I will tell you.” He also explained
that his goal was “to help people in need in this
country … but especially my family.”
At the time, it was easy to dismiss Tiririca’s
run as an extreme anti-political gesture that
could happen only in a rowdy young democracy
like Brazil’s. But not for long. The sentiment
that propelled Tiririca to victory is similar to
that which drove the political success of the
comedian Beppe Grillo in Italy, or that of Mr.
Trump, a reality TV show host.
Both men were able to undermine the
power of dominant parties. While Mr. Grillo’s
Five Star Movement sought to displace Italy’s
political machine by positioning himself as a
Moisés
Naím
Moisés Naím is a
distinguished fellow
at the Carnegie
Endowment for
International
Peace, Venezuela’s
former minister of
Trade and Industry
and author, most
recently, of “The
End of Power: From
Boardrooms to
Churches to States,
Why Being in Charge
Isn’t What It Used
to Be.
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
radical outsider, Mr. Trump took on traditional
politics as a radical insider, staging a hostile
takeover of the Republican Party.
Mr. Trump’s appeal to “drain the swamp” in
Washington. Mr. Grillo’s scorching denunciation
of the “caste” that in his view ran Italy to the
ground. Demonstrators’ banners in Brazil
imploring voters to “throw them all out.” These
examples resonate in similar ways.
These days, calls for a new political order
usually require the ouster of political parties
and elected leaders, and in many cases that
is the correct call. Corrupt and ineffectual
ones.
Yet many activists harbor the misconception
that the answer lies in nongovernmental
organizations, or in loose, nonhierarchical
movements.
Democracies, however, need political
parties. We need permanent organizations
that earn political power and govern, that are
forced to articulate disparate interests and
viewpoints, that can recruit and develop future
government leaders and that monitor those
already in power.
Political leaders need to have a stance on
preschool education and nuclear weapons,
health care and agriculture, and have wellarticulated
views on fighting terrorism and
regulating banks, among myriad other policy
issues. And political parties are the training
camps of these leaders.
To survive, political parties must regain
the ability to inspire and mobilize people —
especially the young — who might otherwise
disdain politics or prefer to channel whatever
political energy they have through single-issue
groups. Parties must be willing to overhaul their
structures, mind-sets and methods to adapt
to a new world. We also need to bring party
renewal to the foreground in any discussion of
contemporary politics.
I
everything we do — eating, reading, shopping,
dating, traveling and communicating — was
disrupted by new technologies and innovation.
Everything, that is, except the way we govern
ourselves.
We need a disruptive innovation that pulls
democratic parties into the 21st century.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Moisés Naím. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
129

OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
Roadmap
to a New
Convergence
By Francisco Jaime Quesado
The New Year is mostly about a New
Convergence. The Year in which
I
Competitive Advantage. In this way it´s
essential to learn the lessons that more than
ever emerge from a world that is trying to
its dynamic role in a complex and global
dimension. We must be reinvented in this
Year of New Convergence.
In the New Global Economy and
I
a central role to play towards a new attitude
connected with the creation of value and
focus on creativity. In a time of change,
.T
a very demanding world, introducing in the
society and in the economy a capital of trust
and innovation that is essential to ensure a
central leadership in the future. The actors
from this world should be more and more
global, capable of driving to the social
matrix a unique dynamic of knowledge
building and selling it as a mobile asset on
the global market.
This Year of a New Convergence must be
supported by some strategic proposals that
demand a new operational agenda from all
the political, economical and social actors.
First of all, citizens and firms must know
how to integrate in a positive way it society.
Social cohesion is done with the constructive
participation of the citizens and it is more
.E
be the right tool for this strategic ambition
for a New World.
Francisco
Jaime
Quesado
Francisco Jaime
Quesado is the
General Manager
of the Innovation
and Knowledge
Society in Portugal,
a public agency
with the mission
of coordinating
the policies for
Information Society
and mobilizing
it through
dissemination,
research activities. It
operates within the
Ministry of Science,
Technology and
Higher Education.
Secondly, Innovation and Creativity
must be the “enablers” for competitiveness.
Universities and Companies must perform
a new strategic partnership centered in the
objectives of the added value, creativity and
knowledge.
This is the basis for a future effective
implementation of the New Strategy 2020.
Economy and society have still a strong
opportunity to implement an agenda of
innovation – the opportunity is more and
.
Thirdly, the excellence of the new world is
more and more the excellence of its regions.
The development of strategic projects like
the Poles of Competitiveness, Clusters
of Innovations and Knowledge Cities and
R
the basis for a new agenda in the world
depends on the capacity of its regions. A
New Time in the New Year is more and more
capacity of the local actors performing an
AC.
F
identity based on its strong culture. Culture
is a unique asset.
C
other global partners in the construction
of integrated projects focused on the
development of culture as a driver for
development. The reinvention of culture is
itself a very innovative way to involve more
and more the global actors in this project
for the future.
We need a New Year of the citizens.
Where people know who they are and have
a strong commitment with the values of
freedom, social justice and development.
This is the reason to believe that a new
standard of Democracy, more than a
possibility, is an individual and collective
necessity for all of us, effective global
citizens. Habermas is more than ever
the exercise of the capacity of the individual
participation as the central contribution to
the reinvention of the collective society.
This is a process that is not determined
by law. It is a real roadmap for a New Year
of Convergence.
130 2018 | OUR WORLD

The time beckons
By Sri Sri Ravi Shankar
There is an old saying that time and tide
waits for no man. Yet, there are some
to it and there are others who have the ability
to change it. People look towards leaders to
bring about this change. Every new year they
wish for a better life and a better society to
be in.
Consciously or unconsciously, people
hold the leaders responsible for the state
that they are in. Whereas often, leaders feel
that they are not in control of the factors
contributing to their challenges. And there
goes the blame game. In this ping pong of
responsibilities, both leaders, and the society
are at a loss. What to do in this situation, is a
question that weighs heavily on one’s mind.
While greed of a few and unethical practices
have caused economic turmoil in the world;
the arms and the pharmaceuticals lobbies
are further fueling unrest and compromising
peace. Egotistic attitude of power hungry
people has caused destruction for decades
and has inflicted immense suffering in the
lives of millions. Here, the political parties,
media houses, business enterprises, and faithbased
organizations, have a great role to play.
They can make a big impact, either positive
or negative, on the human psyche. However,
some political leaders thrive on creating alarm.
A few religious zealots prey on guilt. Negative
bias in society is further instigated by a section
of media selling sensationalism. Short-sighted
and profit hungry business approaches
compromise sustainable and inclusive growth.
In this divisive and self-serving atmosphere,
there are very few who are striving to uplift the
human spirit. It is hardly surprising then, that
our population is reeling in depression and
the opioid crisis – the two foremost challenges
facing us this decade. With this bleak picture
around, the onus of bringing hope lies on the
leaders. A leader has to maintain high levels
of enthusiasm and conviction to pull people
.T
is indeed an uphill task. Leaders can only do
this, if they can tap into their inner strength.
There are many ways of doing so and I would
say making yoga and meditation part of one’s
.T
help one to start each day with a clean slate,
OUR WORLD | 2018
Sri Sri Ravi
Shankar
Sri Sri Ravi Shankar
is a revered global
humanitarian
and a renowned
ambassador of
peace.
He is the founder
of The Art of Living
Foundation (1981)
and the International
Association for
Human Values
(1997), both active
in 155 countries
and engaged in
diverse humanitarian
projects including
trauma and stress
relief in crisis areas
and for victims of
violence, prisoner
rehabilitation and
environmental
care. He is also the
founder of the World
Forum for Ethics
in Business, which
regularly convenes
in conferences at the
European Parliament
and around the
world. All three
organizations hold a
special consultative
status with the United
Nations.
OUR POLITICAL SOCIETIES
drop pre-conceived impressions, enhance
intuitive awareness and strengthen resilience.
Mahatma Gandhi had envisioned “Ram
Rajya” - a society that is just and equitable.
Education in human values, faith in nonviolence,
and creating a more humane
society are integral to realizing this. So, can
we still hold onto such a vision in the current
scenario? Can a stress-free violence-free
society become a reality? Yes, the very goal of
democracy is to provide that hope – to provide
a platform to create a just, prosperous and
happy society. For this to happen, the four
pillars of democracy, politics, media, business
and faith based organizations all have to work
together in collaboration, with the broader
social interest in mind. They all have to stay
at arm’s length and be strong pillars to hold
the roof called democracy. When all these
RR
within reach. There is another burning issue
today - immigration. Though, we live in an
increasingly globalized world, connected by
technological advances, we seem to live in
isolation of culture and civilization. Unlike in
middle ages, when immigrants wiped out the
host culture; today immigrants have to adapt,
while preserving their roots. They cannot
become a threat to society. Terrorism is yet
another problem the world is facing, which
is ideology and theology driven. It needs to
.F
in combatting terrorism. Many times, a soft
.
In my travels around the world and
interactions with people across diverse
cultures, religions and languages, I see a
lot of goodness in society. The number of
service projects undertaken by faith based
organizations, NGOs and the public is a
testimony to this fact. It is our responsibility
as the global leadership community to inspire,
.
I see our volunteers in 155 countries,
.I
optimistic and hopeful for the times to come.
Every new year presents us an opportunity
the lives of people in our societies happier,
healthier and more peaceful. As the new year
unfolds, let us resolve to be unshakable from
within. Let us be that person who can change
the times. My heartfelt wishes and blessings
to everyone in the new year.
131

www.acreurope.eu/event/afutureforeurope
events@acreurope.eu

GLOBAL
VS. LOCAL
WORLDS
STOKPIC

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
A New Balance for
the Global Age
By Gordon Brown
Protectionist and “bring-back-control”
long as globalization remains leaderless,
lacks a human face, and advances like a
runaway train careening out of control.
Sadly, there are good reasons why
globalization has become a dirty word for
millions of people. The pillars of the 30-year-old
Washington Consensus have been collapsing.
Most now agree that free trade without fair
trade creates millions of losers, in addition
.
especially short-term speculative flows, can
destabilize economies. And rising social
inequalities can be bad for growth.
These realizations are punching holes in
the free-market fundamentalism – focused on
liberalization, deregulation, privatization, taxcutting,
and the shrinking of the state – that has
prevailed in policymaking circles over the last
.T
crisis, we can now accept that individuals and
corporations acting solely in their own selfinterest
do not always serve that of the public.
And yet a new economic paradigm for the
global age still has not emerged. In the resulting
vacuum, protectionism, anti-trade populism,
and illiberal – often xenophobic – nationalism
have gained ground, fueled by anxieties about
stagnant wages, technological unemployment,
and rising insecurity. Make no mistake: those
left out and left behind by globalization are
actively searching for something and someone
to articulate their discontent and shelter them
from change.
But neither nationalism – whether that
espoused by US President Donald Trump or
its other manifestations – nor overly formulaic
or elaborate systems of global governance
will meet the needs and desires of people
Gordon Brown
Gordon Brown,
former Prime
Minister and
Chancellor of the
Exchequer of the
United Kingdom,
is United Nations
Special Envoy for
Global Education
and Chair of the
International
Commission
on Financing
Global Education
Opportunity. He
chairs the Advisory
Board of the Catalyst
Foundation.
for prosperity, security, equity, and selfdetermination.
The former fails to confront the
realities of a world where our independence is
limited by our interdependence; the latter runs
counter to a strong current in public opinion
favoring more local control.
If we are to tame globalization and respect
national identities, we must strike the right
balance between the national autonomy
most citizens desire and the international
agreements most countries so patently need.
Trump’s “America First” nationalism
proposes to cut imports, restrict immigration,
and withdraw the US from the Paris climate
agreement, international organizations like
UNESCO, and free-trade deals. For a country
that benefits hugely from its leading role in
global supply chains, this is a self-defeating
strategy.
Trump doesn’t know – or perhaps doesn’t
want to know – that cutting imports threatens
to cut exports, because billions of dollars in
US exports rely on imported components.
He forgets that the profitability of many US
corporations depends more on Asian workers
using American technology than on more
expensive American workers using the same
production techniques. These companies will
supply chains.
The progressive alternative that is usually
advanced – “responsible nationalism” – is
essentially a program to compensate the
squeezed middle classes through re-training
and wage subsidies. But even professedly
generous European welfare systems lift no
more than one-third of the poor out of poverty.
In the US, inequalities are now so glaring
that the federal earned income tax credit
provides only 2.5% of what would be needed
to restore the distribution of income between
the bottom 80% and top 20% to 1980s levels.
Former US Secretary of the Treasury Lawrence
H. Summers has calculated that the top 1%
would be required to pay $1 trillion extra in tax
($700,000 each) per year to close the gap that
has emerged.
Addressing high levels of inequality
will almost certainly require international
cooperation to repatriate billions from tax
havens. And even then, we would still have to
134 2018 | OUR WORLD

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
deal with Asian and African countries
out-competing the West on price,
because of a race to the bottom in labor
standards – a root cause of Western
wage stagnation.
The battle against environmental
degradation poses the same problem:
sustainable progress against pollution
cannot be made if nation-states fail
to take seriously their responsibilities
to reduce carbon dioxide emissions
and switch to renewable energy. Yet,
without concerted international action
to force free riders into line, pollution
will cross borders, and environmental
damage will spread and multiply.
So there is a limit to national-level
solutions. While it is sensible to oppose
the wrong kind of global cooperation,
the right kind of cooperation is vital
to achieve national prosperity in this
hyper-connected era. With market
power still expanding at the expense
of governments, policies focused
OUR WORLD | 2018
exclusively on pulling the levers of the
nation-state will fail to deal not just with
pollution and inequality, but also with
macroeconomic imbalances, beggarthy-neighbor
trade policies and their
spillover effects, cyber attacks, and
pandemics – each of which now poses
a transnational problem that requires
an international response.
Striking the right balance between
autonomy and cooperation
comes down to being clear about
the distinction between nineteenth- and
sovereignty. In the former, power is
centralized, held by a single state that is
seen as indivisible; the latter is focused
on popular self-government, with
citizens making their own democratic
choices about whether power resides
locally, nationally, or internationally.
In some areas, citizens will choose
their national government as sole
FLICKR / Lars Plougmann
decision-maker. In others, they may
choose to share decision-making power
in regional blocs like the European
Union or in international organizations,
such as the United Nations and NATO,
that agree to share responsibilities,
resources, and risks.
Getting the balance right is the
unstated issue at the heart of the
argument not just about the limits
and extent of global cooperation, but
also, and more immediately, about
the future of the UK’s relationship with
E.R
America First-style strategies, and overly
intricate frameworks of supranational
governance are all inadequate to
satisfy the modern world’s imperatives
to cooperate across borders and to
uphold the pride people have in their
distinctive national identities.
Striking the balance between
national independence and crossnational
cooperation will more likely
135

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
be achieved on an issue-by-issue basis,
and the boundaries will shift as the
world economy and popular opinion
change.
Harvard University economist Dani
Rodrik, whose writings expose the
weaknesses of neoliberal globalization,
suggests that, in some areas, we should
be expanding or consolidating the
nation-state’s power. Such an approach
would recognize, for example, domestic
preferences when it comes to food- and
product-safety standards, or the need
to moderate so-called Investor-State
Dispute Settlement processes, which
are frequently criticized for undercutting
domestic laws.
If we are to tame globalization and
respect national identities, we must
strike the right balance between
the national autonomy most citizens
desire and the international
agreements most countries so
patently need.
National governments must
also recognize the value of
self-imposed restrictions on
resist currency manipulation. But
macroeconomic imbalances may be
best reduced by reciprocal, cooperative
agreements.
Of course, nation-states will want
to make their own tax decisions to suit
local cultures and circumstances. But
a failure to cooperate to tackle unfair
tax competition and to close down
offshore tax havens will irrevocably
damage every country’s revenue base
and its domestic plans for spending on
education, health care, and security.
In 2018 and beyond, we should
establish realistic plans for responding
to the backlash against globalization by
managing globalization better. No one
has a complete roadmap for balancing
national autonomy and international
cooperation. But the best way to begin
is to focus international cooperative
greatest, or the costs of non-cooperation
are the highest. But we will also have
to deal directly and forthrightly with
distributional questions, whether in
trade, climate change, investment, or
the development and deployment of
technologies.
First, it is time to create a worldwide
early warning system for financial
markets that is based on globally
applicable standards for capital
adequacy, liquidity, transparency, and
accountability, and includes agreed
trigger points for action when risks
multiply. For example, New York
University economist Roman Frydman
has proposed a mechanism to impose a
ceiling on new debt creation when asset
prices escalate too quickly.
More broadly, we need to expand
the scope of post-crisis financial-
.
next crisis hits, we will still not know
what is owned or owed by whom,
where, and on what basis. Critics will
be right in asking why we failed to learn
.
Second, we need to reform global
supply and value chains. Of course we
should have fair intellectual-property,
tariff, and non-tariff rules. But we
must also address the fundamental
injustices that are at the heart of global
supply chains, fueling today’s antiglobalization
protests. Intelligent reform
of global supply chains should stamp
out environmental free riders; reverse
the current race to the bottom in labor
laundering; eliminate transfer-pricing
and tax-avoidance schemes that allow
for goods to be taxed – at a lower rate –
in countries they never enter; and shut
down the tax havens that now hold
trillions of dollars.
Third, we need to improve
macroeconomic cooperation. For
the past decade, growth in global
output and trade have been much
lower than they should and could
have been. Proposals such as the G20
Mutual Assessment Process (MAP)
and the International Monetary Fund’s
“imbalances” initiative have made only
token progress.
In 2009, I proposed a nominal
growth target for the world economy,
as a way to secure a faster recovery
from the post-crisis recession. Then, in
2010, the G20 reached an agreement
under which major exporting countries
such as China would limit their currentaccount
surpluses to 4%, and major
importing countries such as the US
.
Robert Skidelsky of Warwick
University recently updated this
Keynesian idea with a detailed proposal
136 2018 | OUR WORLD

requiring both creditors and debtors
to make adjustments wherever
imbalances arise. And Nobel laureate
economist Joseph E. Stiglitz has called
for an IMF scheme to insure emerging
countries against risk, thereby freeing
them from having to hold excessive
reserves, which are unproductive in
normal times.
Generally speaking, reducing
macroeconomic imbalances and
boosting growth will require a stronger
G20. The premier forum for economic
cooperation should have an executive
capacity and a broader and more
representative membership.
When I was prime minister
of the United Kingdom, the
British government fought
hard for a world trade deal, while India
and America remained at loggerheads
over curbing agriculture imports to
protect Indian farmers’ livelihoods.
TA
rim countries are discussing their own
multilateral trade deals, which suggests
that we should be planning for a time,
post-Trump, when a new world trade
deal might be possible once again.
In the meantime, as Nobel laureate
economist Michael Spence has
eloquently argued, the IMF should
be intensifying its focus on global
surveillance, in order to identify and
remove structural weaknesses in a fastchanging
world economy.
It would also help if plans for
financing the UN Sustainable
Development Goals for 2030 included
recapitalizing the World Bank to give it
more borrowing power.
The Bank’s resources could be
increased substantially by merging
its low-income-country fund, the
International Development Association,
with its middle-income-country fund, the
International Bank for Reconstruction
and Development, and by encouraging
more cooperation between it and other
regional development banks.
As participants discussed at the
pioneering Billions to Trillions forum
in Addis Ababa, Ethiopia, almost three
years ago, development targets for the
environment, health, gender equality,
and employment call for innovative
delivery plans to make the best use of
the world’s $160 billion aid budget.
The International Commission on
Financing Global Education Opportunity,
which I chaired, has proposed a privatepublic
financing facility that could
complement existing institutions and
GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
raise an additional $10 billion annually
for education worldwide. More to the
point, we must develop mechanisms
that go beyond simply holding out a
begging bowl. Only through innovation
can we adequately provide for the
world’s 20 million refugees and 60
million displaced people, who have
the UN, under Secretary-General
António Guterres, is working so hard
to help.
It is right for the international
community to set ambitious
development goals. But our failure to
deliver on those goals will invite charges
of betrayal. Nationalists will continue to
argue that mainstream leaders cannot
be trusted, and extremists of all stripes
will insist that coexistence among
countries, cultures, and religions is
impossible.
With America in retreat and Brexit
threatening to isolate Britain, 2018 will
almost certainly have setbacks. But
waiting in the wings is a new agenda that
can ensure prosperity for all countries,
not just through national actions, but
also through enhanced international
cooperation, starting in the areas with
the most promise, and then spreading
across the board.
FLICKR | VINYLERASER
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
137

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
East Asia’s Rising Star
By Sri Mulyani Indrawati
At the World Bank Group’s Annual
Meetings in Washington, DC, in
October, there was notable optimism
in anticipation of an upswing in the global
economy. The International Monetary Fund’s
latest World Economic Outlook projects
that global growth will accelerate to 3.6% in
2017, and to 3.7% in 2018. Not surprisingly,
investment, trade, industrial production,
and business and consumer confidence
have continued to increase in several key
economies and regions.
Indonesia intends to capitalize fully on
this upswing. In 2017, it consistently posted a
respectable growth rate of around 5% – better
than most emerging economies – owing to
increased investment and consumption, and
a recovery in exports, partly owing to the
pick-up in commodity prices. In fact, exports
are becoming an increasingly reliable third
engine of growth for the country.
Better still, Indonesia’s macroeconomic
indicators are sound. The country is
experiencing solid growth in new jobs and
around 4%. Moreover, food prices are steady,
consumer confidence is strong, interest
rates are low, and the exchange rate has
remained consistent. Domestic and foreign
direct investment have been picking up, too,
thanks to increased infrastructure spending.
These positive trends have added
momentum to ongoing reforms. After all,
the best time to mend one’s roof is when
the sun is shining.
Accordingly, President Joko Widodo’s
government is pushing ahead with key
measures that will create a strong foundation
for higher long-term competitiveness.
And alongside structural reforms, we are
pursuing prudent fiscal and monetary
policies, with our sights set well beyond the
horizon. The proof of Indonesia’s progress is
Sri Mulyani
Indrawati
Sri Mulyani
Indrawati is
Finance Minister
of Indonesia and
Chair of the World
Bank Group’s
Development
Committee.
in the pudding. Indonesia has gained growing
international recognition, with three major
rating agencies having issued the country
an investment-grade credit rating. According
to an OECD/Gallup poll, 80% of Indonesians
– the highest among all countries surveyed.
Moreover, Indonesia’s standing in the
World Bank’s “Ease of Doing Business” ranking
has skyrocketed 34 places since the current
.
improved business and investment climate
under President Joko Widodo’s leadership,
Indonesia has been named a top-ten reformer.
Toward the end of 2017, the Indonesian
parliament approved a robust 2018 national
budget, which aims to boost confidence
further, increase productivity, and enhance
the country’s competitiveness. For the past
three years, the government has pushed
hard to invest in the future by closing the
country’s infrastructure and human-capital
gaps. The new budget will continue that work
by increasing investments in both areas to
unprecedented levels.
Even more than our natural resources
and strategic location, our people are the
most precious assets of all. As the world’s
fourth most populous country, Indonesia
has a large and vibrant young workforce
that will fuel inclusive growth well into the
future. Indonesian millennials are more
previous generation. They are our future
entrepreneurs, job creators, professionals,
civil-society leaders, and taxpayers. And they
are already competing vigorously in the digital
economy, where technological innovations
will continue to introduce new opportunities
and challenges.
The next generation will have to start
preparing today for the jobs and opportunities
of tomorrow. To that end, the government
has placed special emphasis on investments
in human capital. More than 20% of the
138 2018 | OUR WORLD

2018 national budget is allocated for
education and vocational training; and
another 5% is dedicated to the health
sector.
Furthermore, the government is
providing support for the country’s
poorest and most vulnerable
communities. Through social safety
nets, cash transfers, cash-for-work
programs, and other innovations, we
are lifting people out of the vicious
cycle of poverty. The government’s
I
program will ensure that around 20.3
million school-age children stay in
school. The “Indonesia Sehat” health
initiative is expanding access to basic
health services for the masses. And
large-scale microcredit programs have
been introduced to kick start local
economies.
With more than 17,000 islands
spread over three time zones, Indonesia
is the world’s largest archipelago.
Fortunately, ongoing investments in
infrastructure will leave the economy
A girl holds an
Indonesian
the Indonesian
President to
arrive at the
Presidential
Palace in Kabul,
Afghanistan, 29
January 2018.
GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
more interconnected than it has
ever been. As logistical costs fall and
the emergence of new growth centers
beyond the main islands.
Lastly, the government is working
hard to strengthen Indonesia’s
institutions. We have introduced a
comprehensive tax-reform plan to
make collection more effective, and
to broaden the tax base. And we
are taking steps to ensure financial
inclusion, and to improve trade and
investment policies, all of which will
fuel competitiveness.
Any businessperson or investor
who overlooks Indonesia risks missing
global economic success story. As a
member of the G20, Indonesia is the
largest economy in Southeast Asia, and
economy in the world by 2030. When
I.
Indonesians are doing their part
to contribute to the dynamism of
East Asia. As the Indonesian economy
continues to gain momentum, so, too,
establish a strong foundation for the
future.
EPA-EFE/MASSOUD
HOSSAINI
Any businessperson
or investor who
overlooks Indonesia
risks missing out
on the opportunities
offered by a global
economic success
story.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
139

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
Asia’s Cities Against North Korea
By Yuriko Koike
As Tokyo – and towns and cities across
Japan – look ahead to 2018, they
are dusting off long-neglected civildefense
infrastructure and nuclear-attack
procedures. Schoolchildren are practicing
the kinds of nuclear-safety drills that I
endured during my childhood, at the height
C.
responders are brushing up on measures
that had fallen into disuse since the 1990s.
Hospitals are undergoing stress tests of
their readiness. Fallout shelters are being
inspected and restored. And the potential of
new innovations and resources to reinforce
civilians’ security is being explored.
Much of this preparation – spurred
by North Korea’s increasing belligerence,
including launches of missiles over Japan –
is occurring on the local level. And, beyond
Yuriko Koike
Yuriko Koike,
Governor of Tokyo,
has been Japan’s
defense minister,
national security
adviser, and a
member of the
National Diet.
Japan, plenty of other Asian cities are pursuing
similar initiatives to strengthen their civil
defense. But cities can do more than lead the
way in emergency-response preparedness;
we can – and therefore must – play a central
tensions.
Like Tokyo’s governors during the Cold
War, I do not believe that we will actually face
the horrors of a nuclear attack. But when it
comes to the safety and wellbeing of Tokyo’s
citizens, my government and the agencies
that it directs can never be too careful – or
.A
at preparedness would not only be reckless;
it would also be an insult to the memory of
those who died in the nuclear firestorms
that followed the bombing of Hiroshima and
Nagasaki in 1945.
Despite Japan’s uniquely intimate history
with nuclear attacks, this vigilance is not
Picture dated 17 July 2008
showing the city skyline
around the Tokyo Tower
(C), in Tokyo, Japan.
140 2018 | OUR WORLD

limited to my country, much less to
Tokyo. Though Tokyo is my primary
responsibility, and the focus of all
my thoughts and plans, I am also
concerned with the fate of the capital
of next-door South Korea, Tokyo’s
great sister city.
I know the Korean people well,
and I have no doubt that they, too,
are preparing with their characteristic
rigor and stoicism. Yet Seoul remains
particularly vulnerable to the whims of
North Korea’s impetuous and ruthless
leader, Kim Jong-un – and that should
concern all of Asia’s municipal leaders.
No city is an island, safe unto
itself. That is why the leaders
of Asia’s megacities should
to neutralize the threat to the entire
region, not just our own homes.
National governments will listen to us.
After all, cities account for most of an
economy’s dynamism; without their
catalytic force, Asia’s rapid economic
growth over the last four decades
would not have been possible. And
cities are the beating cultural heart of
modern Asian societies.
It is time for Asia’s urban leaders
to use this influence, by banding
together to help mitigate the threat
posed by the rogue Kim regime. For
that, unlike in the past, the United
Nations sanctions imposed on North
Korea are enforced to the letter.
At the same time, Asia’s municipal
leaders must use their own policing
powers to prevent illicit wealth
transfers from their jurisdictions to
North Korea. This means pressuring
financial institutions and, perhaps
more important, unofficial money
transfer networks, to halt any
movement of funds to the North.
The leaders of Asia’s major
cities must also use every contact
with Chinese officials to urge them
to agitate for stronger efforts by
President Xi Jinping’s administration
to rein in the Kim regime. Xi has so
far been reluctant to tighten the
screws on North Korea, owing largely
to concerns about the potential
consequences for China if the Kim
regime collapses.
But the reality is that China’s great
urban centers now face the same
threat from the Kim regime as their
counterparts elsewhere in Asia. In fact,
now that China has voiced support for
UN sanctions – a step that probably left
Kim feeling betrayed – China’s cities
may be among the most vulnerable.
Words are not enough; even the
most heated rhetoric directed at the
North has proved entirely useless,
because it is not backed by action. For
C
embrace of the goal of North Korean
de-nuclearization. To that end, the
key policy initiative that Japan, South
Korea, and the United States must
embrace is to negotiate, and conclude,
an agreement with China about the
security situation that will prevail on
the Korean Peninsula should the Kim
regime collapse.
The contours of such an
agreement are not hard to
discern. The US, Japan, and
South Korea all hope for the eventual
K.
China, fearing that outcome, needs
assurances that America’s military
presence in South Korea, which has
been shrinking for over two decades
and no longer includes nuclear
weapons, will not be extended
northward, toward China’s own
border. South Korea’s government
blessing of its Japanese and American
allies, agreeing today in a formal treaty
lodged at the UN that no foreign
power’s troops will be permitted to
be stationed anywhere north of what
is now the demilitarized zone that
divides the two Koreas. Once the
GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
Words are
not enough;
even the most
heated rhetoric
directed at
the North
has proved
entirely useless,
because it is
not backed by
action.
missile threat from the North was truly
eliminated, South Korea could also
remove the US-supplied Terminal High
Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) missile
system from its territory. As China has
(wrongly) viewed the THAAD system
as a threat to the viability of its own
nuclear deterrent, such a move would
eliminate what has become an open
wound between the two countries.
To provide China with further
assurances, and at no added risk to
South Korea, Japan, or the US, the
UN could also place peacekeeping
forces and inspectors on the ground.
A small number of Chinese soldiers
and inspectors could even be included
in these groups, so long as they take
orders from UN appointed leaders.
This is the agenda for peace
and security that Asia’s cities, which
have been leading the region into
the future for decades now, should
pursue in 2018. We must all now use
future free from the threat of nuclear
war.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
141

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
The Trumping of Asia
By Kevin Rudd
In the last year, the single most pointless
A
mention itself, was its abandonment of the
T.I
the once great free-trading nation that was
the United States of America died, leaving
the global trading system utterly rudderless.
With America’s spurning of the TPP, not
only was progress toward further trade
liberalization reversed; the global free-trade
system itself, including its common rules
and arbitration mechanisms for resolving
disputes, came into question.
You don’t have to be a Marxist to
understand that economics has a profound
and probably even decisive impact on
politics, both national and international.
And, indeed, the geopolitical and geoeconomic
implications of US President
Donald Trump’s move are just beginning
.
With China’s economic footprint across
the Asia-Pacific region already large,
countries in the region are now increasingly
concluding that the US is consigning itself to
growing economic irrelevance in Asia. US
important, as will Silicon Valley, as a source
of extraordinary innovation. But the pattern
of trade, the direction of investment, and,
increasingly, the nature of intra-regional
picture for the future than the one that has
dominated post-war Asia.
The abandonment of the TPP – a key
campaign promise that Trump fulfilled
almost immediately upon taking office –
reflects the collective failure on the part
of the American political class in the 2016
presidential election. Continuing that failure,
America’s leadership has not followed up on
the decision with much of anything.
At home, the Trump administration has
engaged in much chest-thumping about
“America First.” Abroad, it has begun to
Kevin Rudd
Kevin Rudd, former
Prime Minister
of Australia, is
President of the
Asia Society Policy
Institute in New
York and Chair of
the Independent
Commission on
Multilateralism.
open Indo-Pacific,” which displays all the
hallmarks of a slogan in search of substance.
What economic reality will hang beneath
this shingle, we know not. If the idea is a
series of individual bilateral free-trade
agreements, any seasoned observer of US
trade diplomacy can tell you that we are
looking at a decade’s worth of negotiations
that, ultimately, will probably yield very little.
FA
begun to look to two unlikely sources for
leadership on trade liberalization: Japan and
China.
Japan has sought to pull the TPP’s remains
out of the ashes by creating the TPP 11,
which includes all of the original negotiating
states, except the US, which would be
permitted to rejoin later. The core tenets
of this agreement were signed, despite
reservations from Canada, at the November
AECAEC
summit in Da Nang, Vietnam (a meeting that
Trump himself also attended), highlighting
Asia-Pacific countries’ view that they are
no longer chained to US leadership. The
so-called Comprehensive and Progressive
Trans-Pacific Partnership represents a
investment liberalization across the 11
signatory countries. As for the US, we can
only hope that a future administration,
whether Republican or Democrat, will see its
way clear to acceding to an agreement that
Japanese economic leadership has sought
to keep alive. But, given the evidence, that
may be farfetched.
The other surprising source of trade
leadership in the Asia-Pacific region is
China. Some years ago, the country began
championing a Regional Comprehensive
Economic Partnership (RCEP). While this will
not represent a high-ambition arrangement,
it will represent some advancement from
the status quo. It embraces 16 states,
including China, India, Japan, and South
Korea, but excludes the US.
India, the third-largest economy in Asia,
could also have a critical role to play in
furthering pan-regional trade liberalization.
But Prime Minister Narendra Modi’s
142 2018 | OUR WORLD

government has yet to direct its
political capital toward becoming a
member of APEC, let alone advance
a trade-liberalization agenda of its
own. This needs to change, but the
forces of mercantilism are alive and
well in Delhi. The net result of these
developments, with the US having
eschewed both the TPP and RCEP,
has been a further diminution of
AA
region. In fact, the US is increasingly
emerging as an incomplete
superpower. It remains a formidable
military actor, with unique power
projection capabilities that extend
far beyond its aircraft carrier
battle groups to include an array
of other capabilities that are as yet
unmatched by other countries in the
A.
to the region’s future – in terms of
employment, trade, and investment
growth, as well as sustainable
development – is declining fast.
Some in Washington, DC, seem
to think that the US can sustain this
pattern for decades to come. But
many of us are skeptical. Unless and
until the US chooses comprehensive
economic re-engagement with the
future of Asia, the world’s most
economically dynamic region, will
continue to fade.
Precisely how other regional
powers – China, Japan, India, and
South Korea (Asia’s four leading
economies) – will respond to this
decline remains to be seen. But
the truth confronting those who
observe the region closely is that
Southeast Asia has already begun
to move meaningfully toward China’s
strategic orbit.
Ultimately, the policies of an
administration committed to putting
America first are likely, in Asia at
least, to result in America being put
last.
GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
You don’t have to be a
Marxist to understand
that economics has a
profound and probably
even decisive impact on
politics, both national
and international.
And, indeed, the
geopolitical and geoeconomic
implications
of US President Donald
Trump’s move are just
beginning to be felt
across the Pacific.
Activists prepare to
hurl paint bombs
on an image of US
President Donald
J. Trump during a
protest near the US
embassy in Manila,
Philippines, 11
November 2017.
EPA-EFE/MARK R. CRISTINO
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
143

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
Xi
Unbound?
By Minxin Pei
China has defied expectations yet
again. President Xi Jinping, the chief
of the Chinese Communist Party, was
widely expected to face his toughest test so
far in October, when the CCP convened its
19th National Congress to choose its next
leadership. Though Xi was guaranteed a
would run into serious opposition if he refused
to appoint a successor. But he did just that –
and the opposition never materialized.
The reason is simple: Xi was prepared.
Since taking office in 2012, he has carried
out a sustained crackdown on civil society,
unleashing a wave of repression few thought
would be possible in post-Mao China. He
also pursued a large-scale anti-corruption
campaign, which constrained and even
eliminated potential political rivals, thereby
enabling him to consolidate his power swiftly.
Early this year, when Chinese security
agents abducted Xiao Jianhua, a China-born
Hong Kong-based billionaire, to serve as a
potential witness against senior leaders, any
remaining resistance to Xi’s push for greater
authority was decimated. Nonetheless, to
strengthen his position further in the run-up
to the Congress, a sitting Politburo member
who was viewed as a possible successor was
abruptly arrested on corruption charges in
July.
When the Congress finally arrived, Xi
capitalized on this momentum to install two of
his allies in the Politburo Standing Committee,
the party’s top decision-making body. And,
by preventing the CCP from designating a
successor, he has opened the door to a third
term in 2022.
Judging by any conventional measure, Xi
has thus emerged from 2017 more powerful
than ever. The question now is whether he can
Minxin Pei
Minxin Pei is
Professor of
Government at
Claremont McKenna
College and the
author of China’s
Crony Capitalism.
use that power to translate his vision for China
– particularly for its economy – into reality.
On this front, Xi made important progress
in his first term, single-handedly corralling
the Chinese bureaucracy to implement his
ambitious but risky “Belt and Road Initiative”
(BRI). That plan entails the use of Chinese
infrastructure linking countries throughout
Asia, Africa, and Europe to the global economic
juggernaut that China has become.
power, Xi’s continued success in implementing
his economic vision is uncertain, at best, owing
precisely to the ideological indoctrination
and repression that underpin his authority.
Despite the propaganda blitz lauding his vision
for China, it is doubtful that many Chinese,
including CCP members, really believe that
their country’s future lies in a centralized, fearbased
authoritarian regime.
In fact, while overt resistance to Xi’s vision
dangerous nowadays – passive resistance is
pervasive. And Xi’s toughest opponents are not
members of China’s tiny dissident community,
but rather the party bureaucrats who have
borne the brunt of his anti-corruption drive,
not just losing considerable illicit income
and advantages, but also being subjected to
unrelenting dread of politicized investigations.
Unless Xi can regain the support of the
to remake China could fizzle out. After all,
however powerful he might be, he cannot
escape the reality captured by the ancient
Chinese adage, “Mountains are high and
the emperor is far away.” And, without the
C
apparatchiks may subscribe to the logic that
prevailed among citizens of the former Soviet
bloc countries: “We pretend to work, and they
pretend to pay us.”
Beyond a recalcitrant bureaucracy, Xi
might confront a serious challenge from the
so-called Youth League faction of the CCP,
.
With two seats on the new seven-member
Politburo Standing Committee being held by
protégés of Hu, a power struggle between
the Youth League and Xi’s faction cannot
144 2018 | OUR WORLD

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
(L-R) Philip May, husband of British Prime Minister, Theresa May, British Prime Minister, Xi Jinping, China’s President, and
Peng Liyuan, wife of China’s President, pose for a photograph at the Diaoyutai State Guest House in Beijing, China, 01
February 2018.
EPA-EFE/STEFAN ROUSSEAU / POOL
be ruled out. Of course, it is possible
that Xi can overcome resistance from
the Youth League. After all, he has
already largely vanquished the faction
connected to former President Jiang
Zemin, which previously constituted
the most powerful rival group within
the CCP. But even if Xi subdues the
Youth League, he will be left with a
regime that is more fractured and
dispirited.
behavior in the South China Sea. The
new conventional wisdom is that Xi will
be able to steamroll his colleagues in
2022, regardless of his performance in
.T
true.
But political authority is ephemeral,
especially for leaders who lack a solid
economic track record. For now, Xi
and his supporters have reason to
celebrate. But they should not count
.
Xi also faces significant policy
challenges. On the economic
front, he will have to contend
with soaring debts and overcapacity,
which, together with a shift toward
protectionism in President Donald
Trump’s America, could depress growth
further. In foreign policy, too, Xi will
confront a deteriorating relationship
with the United States, fueled by the
intensifying North Korean nuclear
threat and China’s own aggressive
Judging by any conventional measure,
Xi has thus emerged from 2017 more
powerful than ever. The question now
is whether he can use that power
to translate his vision for China –
particularly for its economy – into reality.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
145

How to Break
Korea’s
Barriers to
Social Mobility
By Ha-Joon Chang
When the South Korean military
killed hundreds of pro-democracy
protesters and laid siege to the
southwestern city of Gwangju in May 1980,
few people outside the city knew what was
happening. Martial law had been declared,
the already censored press was completely
gagged, and all communications with Gwangju
were cut off. The end of the 10-day siege
marked the beginning of a seven-year period
of military repression and terror under Gen.
Chun Doo-hwan, who outdid his predecessor,
Gen. Park Chung-hee, in terms of brutality and
corruption.
One generation later, millions of Korean
citizens took to the streets in dozens of cities
across the country for 20 continuous weekends
of “candlelight rallies,” from the autumn of
2016 to the spring of 2017. They called for the
impeachment of then-President Park Geunhye,
General Park’s daughter, for her part in
a scandal involving corruption, bribery and
abuse of power. This time around, the entire
world knew what was going on in South Korea.
The country’s advanced information
.
Smartphones turned front-line protesters
into videographers. Millions commented on
the political situation on Kakao Talk (a Korean
messaging service), Facebook and other social
media channels.
Technology alone is not enough to establish
true democracy. Not all technologically
NEW YORK TIMES
Ha-Joon
Chang
Ha-Joon Chang is
an economist at
the University of
Cambridge. He is the
author of “23 Things
They Don’t Tell You
About Capitalism.”
advanced nations have vibrant grass-roots
political engagement, and in many countries,
devices and software are being abused — used
for surveillance or to manipulate information,
while anti-democratic extremists spread
their views on the same platforms. Advanced
technology can enable democracy by giving
citizens more time and energy for political
engagement and by making corrupt political
practices like vote-buying more difficult.
However, what’s most important is constant
civic engagement — without that, democracy
withers away.
The popular “Asian values” thesis suggests
that Asians are culturally disinclined to
democracy because they favor the good of
the community over individual rights. That
is untrue: South Koreans have fought for
democracy throughout modern history.
In 1945, when the Japanese left after 35
years of colonial rule, no South Korean called
for the restoration of the monarchy. In 1960,
a mass protest against misrule and electoral
fraud ousted the republic’s first president,
Rhee Syngman. Throughout General Park’s
18 years of iron-fisted rule, students and
workers agitated and risked their lives for
democracy. In 1987, 19 days of violent street
demonstrations led by students, workers
146 2018 | OUR WORLD

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
and even young managers ended his
successor’s military rule.
With the candlelight revolution,
Koreans have elevated their democracy
to another level. But the challenge they
face is formidable. The protesters were
calling for more than just the ousting
of an errant president and her cronies:
They want to create a cleaner and fairer
society.
The most immediate challenge
Koreans face is that of ridding the
political system of corruption.
Illicit dealings among politicians,
family-controlled business empires
— are common. This August, Lee Jaeyong,
the de facto head of Samsung,
one of the most prominent chaebols,
for bribing Park and her notorious
C.
Some believe that corruption can
be eliminated by further deregulation,
with the idea that this would reduce
the number of opportunities for
strengthening minority shareholder
rights, on the theory that shareholders
will expose corrupt dealings by those
who run the chaebols. However, a
much more fundamental shift in the
distribution of power is required if
there is to be a reduction in corruption.
Decision-making abilities need to
be transferred from the political
and business elites to citizens, civic
organizations, trade unions, and other
“countervailing powers,” to borrow an
expression from the economist John
Kenneth Galbraith.
Then there is the issue of fairness.
Increasing deregulation has reduced
protections for small factories and
shops, which used to supply jobs that
kept income inequality relatively low.
The spread of American-style salary
norms in the past decade or so has
led to a tremendous increase in wage
inequality — South Korea has one
of the fastest-growing levels among
the countries in the Organization
for Economic Cooperation and
Development.
But what angers South Koreans
most is the marked drop in social
mobility and the sense of hopelessness
that haunts young people from less
privileged backgrounds — that is, most
young people.
This lack of social mobility is
sometimes the result of blatantly
corrupt practices. Of all the corruption
scandals the former president faces,
particularly upsetting for many was
.C
Ewha Womans University in Seoul, one
of the nation’s leading universities,
to accept Ms. Choi’s daughter at the
expense of candidates who were better
.
The barriers to university applicants
are usually subtle. It’s the extras that
make a candidate for admission stand
out, such as extracurricular activities or
expensive private tutoring for university
entrance exams. At the beginning
of their careers, expectations that
candidates have completed internships
may stand in the way. Poor parents
cannot even dream of helping their
children with such things.
Many young Koreas believe,
rightly, that equality of
opportunity is impossible in
the face of ostensibly fair rules that
favor the daughters and sons of the
rich and the powerful.
Removing these barriers to social
reducing corruption. Big changes in
the education system are needed, and
especially in the university application
process.
This will also require the expansion
of the welfare state so that children
from less privileged backgrounds
can have a chance at moving up the
social ladder through early learning
programs, publicly-funded enrichment
schemes, and the increased parental
attention and family stability that extra
income can provide.
Koreans have shown the world
that an engaged citizenry, armed with
the latest technologies, can work a
democratic miracle. That miracle will
fade away and people will become
disillusioned with democracy if our
government does not deliver a cleaner
and fairer society soon.
Many young South Koreans say they worry about their prospects in a
country hobbled by increasing household debt, high youth unemployment
and stagnant wages. Students at Pungmoon Girls High School in Seoul.
Ed Jones/Agence France-Presse — Getty Images.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Ha-Joon Chang. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
147

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
Latin
America’s
Annus
Mediocris
By Jorge Castañeda
The highlight of the year was, without
question, the historic peace forged in
Colombia. After a half-century-long
insurgency fueled by drug cartels, Cubans,
and money launderers, the Revolutionary
Armed Forces of Colombia (FARC) laid down
their weapons and entered the political
mainstream. Although some Colombians
felt that President Juan Manuel Santos gave
away too much to reach the accord, the
end of the Western Hemisphere’s longestrunning
armed conflict should be lauded.
Santos may not enjoy the domestic popularity
his achievements merit, but the peace he
championed – which earned him the Nobel
Peace Prize in 2016 – is likely to survive.
Another highlight of the last 12 months
was Latin America’s continued success in
tackling corruption, led by Brazil’s Lava Jato
(Car Wash) investigation.
That probe, which began in 2014, netted
a number of high-profile politicians and
business leaders in 2017, including former
RLIL
da Silva in Brazil; three former presidents of
Peru; and a former head of Mexico’s state oil
company, Pemex. Santos also had to testify –
and deny that he was aware of contributions to
his campaigns from the Brazilian construction
conglomerate Odebrecht.
Corruption charges were also lodged
during the year against Venezuelan President
Nicolás Maduro, Guatemalan President
Jimmy Morales, several former Mexican state
Jorge G.
Castañeda
Jorge G. Castañeda,
Mexico’s Secretary
FA
from 2000-2003, is
Global Distinguished
Professor of Politics
and Latin American
and Caribbean
Studies at New York
University.
governors, and former Argentine President
Cristina Fernández de Kirchner, along with a
handful of those who served in her cabinet.
The sheer volume of corruption cases is
staggering, and some worry that the region’s
.I
Brazil, for example, many fear the judiciary’s
tenacity could lead to a military dictatorship or
the equivalent, especially if an extreme rightwing
former soldier is elected president next
year.
These are not groundless concerns, given
the region’s history of authoritarianism.
But with endemic corruption eroding Latin
America’s economic growth and undermining
the rule of law, the investigations underway
are a welcome change from the status quo.
Latin America’s low point in 2017 was, like
its highs, easy to discern: Venezuela’s political
crisis. Protests that erupted in the middle
of the year and lasted through September
resulted in the deaths of more than 120 antigovernment
demonstrators. Many were
killed at the hands of barely disguised progovernment
Chavistas, known as colectivos.
In July, Maduro replaced the elected
National Assembly with a handpicked
constituent assembly to rewrite the
constitution and entrench his regime. The
crisis, fueled by the government’s massive
government services, and basic necessities
like food, medicines, and toilet paper remain
scarce. Some two million Venezuelans have
.
Most Latin American governments have
refused to recognize Maduro’s de facto coup
d’état – an encouraging example of democratic
solidarity in the region. But Maduro has yet
to engage in good-faith negotiations, and
Latin America’s worst crisis seems no closer
to resolution.
Finally, there was US President Donald
TLA.
the impact of Trump’s presidency has been
as profoundly as those on the United States’
southern doorstep.
Consider the crisis in Venezuela, which
was moving toward resolution before
Trump suggested that a military response
148 2018 | OUR WORLD

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
might be needed. As Venezuela’s
defense minister put it, Trump’s
reckless comments were “an act of
craziness” – one that forced several
Latin American leaders to distance
themselves from the US. By refusing
to rule out a military option, Trump
a speedy resolution, allowing Maduro
to portray the incident as proof that
“el imperio” wanted to overthrow him.
Trump’s policies and statements
on immigration were equally
chilling, especially for Mexico,
Cuba, and the countries of Central
America, which account for a majority
of immigrants in the US. From vowing
to end a program shielding young
undocumented immigrants from
deportation, to his absurd pledge
to build a “wall” on the border with
Mexico, Trump’s behavior has been
deeply unsettling.
Beyond immigration, Cuba and
Mexico were in Trump’s crosshairs,
.
On Cuba, Trump rolled back much
to normalize bilateral relations. The
new US policies, implemented midyear,
were not draconian, but they
probably will suffice to dissuade
new American investment. Trump’s
decision to reduce the number of
staff at the US Embassy in Havana,
investor concerns. And, as the State
Department continues to discourage
Americans from visiting Cuba by
issuing ominous travel advisories,
the number of US tourists is likely to
decline in 2018.
As for Mexico, Trump’s insistence
on renegotiating the North American
Free Trade Agreement battered the
peso, discouraged foreign investment,
and put the country’s highly unpopular
president, Enrique Peña Nieto, in a
predicament. Following negotiations
TCR
to commemorate the centenary of the anniversary of the coronation of King Karl
IV, the last king of Hungary, in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil, 30 December 2016.
in Mexico, Canada, and the US in 2017,
it became increasingly evident that
Trump’s strident campaign rhetoric
was being translated into policy, most
of which is unacceptable to America’s
trading partners.
The year that just ended was an
eventful one for Latin America. A
war ended, dense webs of high-level
corruption began to unravel, and
the risk of authoritarian backsliding
in some countries has underscored
the region’s broader commitment to
democracy.
But, on balance, Trump’s arrival on
the world stage made 2017 a year to
forget for Latin America. Millions of
Latinos in the US have been targeted
for deportation, and countless
others will suffer in Mexico, Cuba,
and elsewhere if the US proceeds
with the administration’s proposed
trade and immigration policies. And
that, unfortunately, is the most likely
scenario for 2018 and beyond.
EPA/ANTONIO LACERDA
The good,
the bad,
and “the
Donald.”
For Latin
America,
that was
2017 in a
nutshell.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
149

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
Venezuela’s Struggle for Freedom
By María Corina Machado
The wave of violent protests that swept
Venezuela this year focused global
attention on my country’s plight.
Millions of Venezuelans left the country,
and many more are trying to flee from
hunger, disease, and oppression. President
Nicolás Maduro, rather than seeking to end
his dictatorial rule, drawing worldwide
condemnation.
on the international community’s radar, few
have fully grasped why it is happening, or
what a slide into autocracy might mean
beyond the country’s borders. A regime
that has transformed a once-prosperous
country into a basket case of poverty and
crime is a threat not only to Venezuelans,
but also to decades of democratic progress
in the region.
Maduro’s despotism has been compared
to Raúl Castro’s hold on Cuba. But, rather
than a full-blown totalitarian regime, what
we have in Venezuela is, to borrow a term
from the German legal theorist Carl Schmitt,
a permanent “state of exception.” Using the
illusion of free elections as a smokescreen,
Maduro has sought to strip Venezuela’s
democracy of its substance by subordinating
all key institutions, especially the National
Electoral Council, to the government.
Amid this democratic ruse, the regime
kills, tortures, persecutes, and exiles
opponents, threatens and intimidates critics,
and censors or closes down media outlets,
slowly asphyxiating freedom. In relying on
piecemeal subjugation, the regime seems
intent on not crossing some invisible “red
line” that might force the international
community to take a tougher stand.
Sadly, at the moment, Maduro need
not worry. With the Cold War a distant
memory, the West’s threat-perception
mechanisms have weakened. Many Western
leaders struggle to grasp the dangers that
María Corina
Machado
María Corina
Machado is a former
member of the
National Assembly
of Venezuela,
and the founder
of Súmante, a
Caracas-based
election-monitoring
organization.
Maduro’s regime poses to the stability of
Latin American democracies, to the West’s
security in general, and to the national
interests of the United States in particular.
Aside from US President Donald Trump’s
refusal to rule out a military option, most
global commitments to Venezuela’s pro-
.
There are numerous reasons why
stronger international pressure is needed.
For starters, Maduro’s regime continues
to supply Cuba with Venezuelan oil and
money to shore up Castro’s dictatorship. No
prudent observer could welcome the longterm
implications of this partnership.
The Maduro regime also supports, and
forces, from radical parties and secessionist
groups in Spain, the United Kingdom, and
across Europe, to well-known terrorist
organizations in the Middle East, where it
cultivates strong connections with Iran and
radical Islamists (continuing the policies
of its predecessor). Moreover, Venezuela’s
government often supports anti-Western
diplomatic initiatives at the United Nations,
and stirs up division and strife within
regional bodies, like the Organization of
American States.
And lest we forget, the regime’s ties to
Colombian and Mexican drug cartels, money
documented.
During the confrontations with the
regime that took place throughout
Venezuela this year, unarmed, courageous,
and determined people directly challenged
Maduro’s security forces, demonstrating
that Venezuelans will resist attacks on their
.T
the young – have already made bear witness
to this commitment.
So, what happens next? Regime
change, a top priority for many, can still
be accomplished, but only with the right
tools. To topple the forces of illiberalism
150 2018 | OUR WORLD

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
A woman waves a
an opposition protest
against the Government
in Caracas, Venezuela,
12 August 2017.
Dozens of Venezuelans
municipalities of the
capital to protest against
the recent Supreme Court
of Justice’s prison rulings
against two opposition
mayors of the city.
EPA/NATHALIE SAYAGO
and challenge the ruling clique,
Venezuelans will need a solid strategy
of civil disobedience. This will require
continued external pressure on
the government’s financial and
institutional sources of support, and
sustained mobilization of domestic
protest.
This is not a strategy that the entire
opposition movement advocates.
Some believe that pro-democracy
forces have been defeated by
dictatorship, and that the only way
to challenge this new normal is by
seeking to ameliorate it from within.
But such an approach will lead only
to appeasement, cohabitation, and
eventual submission.
History suggests that when a
country is pushed to the edge, its
.F
I believe that, in the coming months,
a reinvigorated opposition will once
again shake the country. As people
come to recognize that Maduro’s
regime has no interest in mitigating
the social and economic catastrophe
that has befallen Venezuela, protests
will reignite. Today, Venezuela lies
in wait. Pro-democracy political
parties and civil-society groups are
reorganizing, sowing the seeds of
a new and more powerful push for
freedom. Together with international
partners, Venezuelan democrats will
continue to work to fracture the
regime and reclaim our freedom.
Venezuelans owe a debt of
gratitude to those in the
international community
who have already answered our
pleas. Now, as 2017 comes to an
end, we once more ask our friends
abroad to cease all ambiguity and
stop calling for a dialogue with a
regime that has shown no interest
in negotiating. Instead, we ask world
leaders to support the legitimate
National Assembly, and to recognize
the Supreme Court, which was forced
into exile. And all free countries
should continue exposing the “narcodictatorship”
that currently governs.
Venezuela stands at a crossroads.
In one direction lies appeasement of
the consolidation of criminal rule – a
path that implies incalculable costs
for the region and the world. In the
other direction lies regime change,
restoration of democratic institutions,
the end of the humanitarian crisis,
and the renewed promise of
economic and political prosperity.
We Venezuelans must decide
which path we will take. But we need
the support of the global community
if we are to make the right choice.
History
suggests that
when a country
is pushed to
the edge, its
patriots fight
back.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
151

RONALDO SCHEMIDT/
AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE
— GETTY IMAGES
We Dream
of Living
in a Free
Venezuela
By Lilian Tintori
When my husband, the Venezuelan
opposition leader and prisoner
of conscience Leopoldo López,
proposed to me in 2006, he told me that
marrying him meant marrying Venezuela. I
was wary of politics, but I was so moved by
Leopoldo’s idealism and love for our country
that I said yes.
Lilian Tintori
Lilian Tintori is
a human-rights
activist and wife
of Venezuelan
opposition leader
Leopoldo Lopez.
At that time, Leopoldo was the mayor
of the Chacao district of Caracas. In 2009,
a year after the government barred him
community organizer and founded the party
Voluntad Popular (Popular Will). I was the
mother of our two children and ran a local
foundation.
We witnessed the rapid erosion of
of President Nicolás Maduro. Food became
scarce and violence grew. But we believed that
by keeping up our faith and staying strong in
our protest we could overcome the crisis and
live happily in a free Venezuela.
We understood the unbreakable bond
between human rights and democracy.
Autocracy doesn’t happen overnight; it’s a slow
transition. A regime that violates the rights of
its people to fuel its own power and greed
can’t be considered legitimate. And without
an honest commitment to human rights,
democracy in Venezuela will die.
Our life as we knew it came to an end on
Feb. 18, 2014, when Leopoldo went to jail and
I learned what it meant to marry Venezuela.
He was working with students and fellow
opposition leaders to organize nonviolent
152 2018 | OUR WORLD

protests. In response, the regime called
him a terrorist and charged him with
.R
country, Leopoldo turned himself in.
He knew that he had nothing to hide
and he wanted to unmask the regime
as a dictatorship.
Leopoldo has spent the majority
at the Ramo Verde military prison. He
was denied private meetings with his
lawyers, and all our communications
.
in Leopoldo’s jail cell.
With Leopoldo imprisoned, it fell to
.A
in the region would meet with me. The
regime had seemingly convinced the
world that Leopoldo was a radical. A
to meet with me — but covertly, in
.
I didn’t give up, even after an
opposition leader was shot dead just
feet from me on stage at a public
meeting in November 2015. Slowly
the world has awakened to our
plight. This summer, 12 members of
the Organization of American States
convened in Lima, Peru, to address the
deepening crisis. In a joint declaration,
the bloc condemned “the breakdown
of democratic order” in Venezuela. It is
a testament to how far we have come.
Our neighbors finally seem to
understand that they must take action.
Signatories of the Inter-American
Democratic Charter of the O.A.S. are
sworn to preserve human rights and
to protect democracy in the region.
Failing to do so will have global
repercussions — and will embolden
other authoritarian states to tighten
their grip.
Much has changed over the
past three and a half years.
Leopoldo is under house
I
from around the world have welcomed
us. But Venezuela is still racing toward
catastrophe. The government is
targeting me more than ever before.
On September 1, I received a notice
to appear in court with no specified
charges. The next day I learned that I
was barred from leaving the country.
The regime thinks that by taking away
my passport they will stop my human
rights advocacy.
The Maduro regime makes a
mockery of the United Nations’
Universal Declaration of Human Rights.
We have no freedom of speech; more
than 600 people have been imprisoned
for protesting the government.
Unabated crime in the streets,
paired with the regime’s repression,
means that we now have no guarantee
even of our right to life.
Venezuela is in the midst of a
humanitarian crisis, too. We’re
experiencing such severe
shortages of food and medicine that we
are being denied the right to a healthy
standard of living. In a survey last year
led by three Venezuelan universities,
three-fourths of respondents said
they had lost weight because of food
scarcity — an average of 19 pounds
each. Maternal and infant mortality
rates have soared. The Maduro regime
also represses our political rights.
Protests have been mostly peaceful,
but government-armed forces have
— at short range. The death toll from
protests since April has surpassed 120.
Even the right to vote is in
peril. The latest outrage is that the
president has effectively eliminated
the democratically elected, oppositionled
National Assembly by setting up
an illegitimate alternative whose goal
is to rewrite our Constitution, and
which formally took over the legislative
branch of our government in August.
The Venezuela crisis won’t
stay within our borders. Internal
displacement is at an all-time high
GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
as the regime refuses to allow
humanitarian aid into the country. Last
year tens of thousands of Venezuelans
.A
year, more Venezuelans applied for
political asylum in the United States
than any other nationality. To stem
this forced migration, the international
community should demand that that
Mr. Maduro allow a United Nationsled
humanitarian program into our
country.
A regime that
violates the rights
of its people to
fuel its own power
and greed can’t
be considered
legitimate.
The long-term solution to our woes
is clear: We need the full restoration
of our democracy. This includes the
release of all political prisoners, respect
for the democratically elected National
Assembly, and general elections
managed by a newly appointed,
independent electoral commission.
The international community can help
by refusing any dialogue that gives
leeway to the Maduro regime.
the emotion I most associate with our
people is hope. We believe that we will
rescue our democracy, with the help
of the international community. We
know that our future is in our hands.
Beyond just denouncing the current
regime’s crimes, we are preparing for
a democratic transition. And we won’t
be stopped.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Lilian Tintori. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
153

The Only True
Strategy for Russia
By Mikhail Khodorkovsky
More than 25 years after the collapse
of the Soviet Union and the
attempt to build a democracy in
its place, Russia has once again become an
authoritarian state. The same inability to build
democratic institutions plagued the leaders of
the February Revolution of 1917, which led to
the Bolsheviks gaining power later that year.
Russian authoritarianism has profound
consequences not just for Russian citizens,
but also for neighboring countries and the
rest of the world. Still burdened by a “besieged
fortress” mentality, the Kremlin pursues a
foreign policy aimed at achieving a “balance
of forces” between Moscow and the West.
This outdated strategy creates a hysteria
for military adventurism that threatens the
entire planet. Pro-Kremlin propagandists
such as Dmitry Kiselyov, a well-known state
TV host, have even suggested that “aggressive
behavior” from the United States could
prompt a “nuclear” response from Russia.
It is not surprising that the Kremlin is
using disinformation and other dirty tricks
NEW YORK TIMES
Mikhail
Khodorkovsky
Mikhail
Khodorkovsky is the
founder of Open
Russia, a movement
committed
to promoting
democratic rule in
Russia.
to sow confusion in Western countries and
undermine faith in democratic systems.
Russia’s leaders are convinced that Western
democracy is a threat to the authoritarian
order in a country they have cowed into
submission.
For Moscow, this is a zero-sum game:
Any weakening or discrediting of democracy
can benefit only the Kremlin’s system of
rule. But this is shortsighted. The rupture
of the Western alliance could create serious
instability throughout the world, exposing
Russia to dangers it would likely be unable
to manage.
To find an alternative system of
government, Russian democrats like myself
need to make sense of our country’s
unfortunate history. Doing so raises the
inevitable question: Do Russia’s size, political
culture and distrust of the Western world
make it unsuitable for democracy?
Absolutely not. I reject the fallacy that
Russians are somehow incapable of building
democratic institutions. People said the same
thing about the Germans. How wrong they
were. Countries and their citizens do change,
usually in response to their own failures.
The majority of Russians have never
experienced democratic institutions and don’t
understand how they function. But Russians
who have moved to the West have adapted
quickly and easily to democratic conditions.
They see how democracy protects individual
rights and property, and allows societies to
.
democratic practices, Russia today has tens
of thousands of civic organizations defending
civil rights. A 2012 survey from the Pew
Research Center showed that a majority of
Russians support honest elections and a fair
judiciary. The Russian people want their voices
heard and their leaders held accountable:
T.
To avoid the mistakes of the past, we need
to determine why Russia’s two attempts to
establish democracy in the 20th century led
to new authoritarian regimes. In both cases,
having overthrown one tyrant — the czar
in 1917 and communism in 1991 — Russia
154 2018 | OUR WORLD

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
ended up handing over power to
another. How did this happen?
At the beginning of the 20th century,
conservatives and liberals were unable
a democratic foundation for Russia. As
a result, the most reactionary faction
within the governing elite came to
dominate after the revolution of
1905, stymieing the development of
democratic reforms.
After the overthrow of the czar
in 1917, democracy once again lost
out. The Bolsheviks were in essence
just as autocratic as the reactionaries
who came before them, only with the
opposite “ideological polarity.” They
may have managed to swap the minus
and plus signs in a few places, but the
Bolsheviks were never able to break
R
authoritarianism.
History repeated itself with the
rise of Boris Yeltsin, even though he
was Russia’s first popularly elected
leader. In the early 1990s, the new
president was granted extraordinary
constitutional powers, with victorious
liberals referring to Mr. Yeltsin as
.
elected president in 2000, the former
K.G.B. lieutenant colonel inherited a
system perfectly designed to sustain
Russia’s authoritarian traditions.
A significant part of the Russian
opposition today, unlike opposition
movements in the West, sees
democratic rights as emanating not
from balanced political representation,
but from the appointment of a
“good czar.” This tendency to pursue
a magnanimous ruler instead of
democratic institutions forces
ambitious political leaders to seek
public support by relying on the force
of their own personality rather than
on a clear political program. To win,
politicians need to create an image of
a “strong leader.”
The challenge facing democratically
minded Russians therefore isn’t simply
to remove Mr. Putin from power; it’s
to replace the authoritarian system he
.T
1991 teach us that the Kremlin cannot
establish democracy by decree, and
that democratic institutions will not
spring up across the whole of Russia’s
territory at once.
The process must begin with the
political transformation of Europeanoriented
Russia and its cities: Moscow,
St. Petersburg, Yekaterinburg and
Novosibirsk, among others. These
DAMON WINTER/THE NEW YORK TIMES
Do Russia’s size,
political culture
and distrust
of the Western
world make it
unsuitable for
democracy?
Absolutely not.
urban centers can demonstrate to the
rest of the country how a majority of
the voters can respect the minority, and
vice versa, by bringing decision-making
closer to the people and by holding
.
When Russian society becomes
aware of its own power, its people
local democratic culture and the
institutions required to support it.
The most important task is to create a
justice system based on the rule of law
rather than on arbitrary power.
To the Kremlin, these ideas are
heresy: They undermine the centuries-
R
governed only from Moscow and that
the delegation of power will lead to
chaos. We must embrace a new and
if we want Russia to be a successful,
respected country able to make a
positive contribution to international
relations.
The 1990s teach us another lesson:
that it is the Russian people, and the
R
their own way forward. The West
cannot do it for us.
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Mikhail Khodorkovsky. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
155

In Turkey,
Democracy
Is in Peril
By Elif Shafak
Anyone who has visited the city center
in Ankara, Turkey’s capital, would
have noticed the “lady statue” — a
bronze sculpture of a young woman reading
a book. Designed by the Turkish artist Metin
Yurdanur, the sculpture is known as the
Human Rights Monument, and the woman is
reading the Universal Declaration of Human
Rights.
I was a college student when the statue
was erected in 1990. We would sit around it
for hours, drinking beer, smoking cigarettes
and listening to the sound of rock music
mingling with the clack of backgammon
pieces from the bars and teahouses nearby.
The scene was a mixture of opposite worlds:
East and West, traditions and modernity,
religion and secularism. It might have
seemed confusing to outsiders, but we
Turks generally didn’t mind. To be Turkish
meant to be confused about identity issues
anyhow.
Over the years the monument earned
a political reputation. Every time the
government stepped up its repression of
Turkey’s Kurdish-majority areas and denied
the Kurds equal rights, including the right to
education in their mother tongue, Kurdish
activists would rally at the lady statue to
issue press statements. Others followed
suit: secularists, Turkish religious sects,
women’s rights groups, sexual minorities —
any people who believed that their voices
were being silenced by the regime.
During the past year, the lady statue has
been busier than ever. Following the coup
attempt in July 2016, which left more than
200 people dead and traumatized the entire
Elif Shafak
Elif Shafak is an
award-winning
novelist whose
works include “The
Bastard of Istanbul”
and “The Forty
Rules of Love.” She
is also a political
commentator and
public speaker.
nation, President Recep Tayyip Erdogan
declared a state of emergency in Turkey.
For a few days, a national consensus
condemned the coup. The left and right
united. But the harmony didn’t last long.
The president’s Justice and Development
party, known as the A.K.P., initiated a vast
purge. Since last summer, some 200,000
people have been expelled from their jobs,
and 50,000 have been arrested.
The crackdown has been especially harsh
for journalists, writers and intellectuals.
More than 150 media outlets were shut
down, Wikipedia was banned, and over 150
journalists were imprisoned, with an even
larger number blacklisted.
Academics whose only "crime" was
to sign a peace petition have been fired,
detained, stigmatized. Once demonized
publicly, these people can’t find another
job in a Turkish university. Two of them,
Mehmet Fatih Tras and Mustafa Sadik
Akdag, have committed suicide.
Under the rule of law everyone is
considered innocent until proven guilty.
In Turkey, it’s now the opposite. People
from all across the ideological spectrum
have been baselessly charged with crimes
and expected to prove their innocence.
Such is the case of the iconic opposition
newspaper Cumhuriyet, whose editors have
been accused of being conspirators in the
coup — a charge that no one took seriously.
from prison, but four others, including the
distinguished journalists Ahmet Sik and
Kadri Gursel, are still being held.
Among the hundreds of people who
have organized protests and sit-ins around
the lady statue, one case has attracted
nationwide attention. When Nuriye Gulmen,
a literature professor, and Semih Ozakca,
who taught primary school, were unlawfully
expelled from their jobs, they went on a
hunger strike, surviving only on a liquid diet
of saltwater and sugar solutions. Support for
them grew nationally and internationally. In
May, the police dispersed the sit-in, detained
supporters and barricaded the area. Ms.
Gulmen and Mr. Ozakca were put in jail.
156 2018 | OUR WORLD

Under the rule
of law everyone
is considered
innocent until
proven guilty. In
Turkey, it’s now
the opposite.
ADEM ALTAN/AGENCE FRANCE-PRESSE — GETTY IMAGES
When a new campaign sprang
up to urge citizens to support the
hunger strikers by singing songs
A
streets after dark.
T
the world the fragility of democracy. It
is a delicate ecosystem of checks and
balances that needs a free media and
a conscious civil society to survive.
The A.K.P. elite under President
Erdogan wrongfully assume that
having the majority in the ballot box
gives them the legitimacy and the
power to do whatever they please.
It doesn’t. The vote is just one of
the components for a democracy to
function properly. Democracy also
requires separation of powers, rule
of law, a free press and academic
GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
freedom, among other things. All of
these components have been broken
in Turkey.
As nationalism, Islamism and
authoritarianism have increased in
Turkey, so has sexism. Turkey ranks
130th out of 144 countries in the
Global Gender Gap Report issued
by the World Economic Forum. And
sexual harassment is rife. Recently
the A.K.P. tried to pass a law that
would make it possible for rapists
to avoid punishment if they married
their victims. After women protested,
the bill was withdrawn.
The feeling among Turkey’s
progressives is that our lifestyle is
under siege and secularism is being
systematically chipped away. More
than one million students have been
enrolled in imam-hatip schools —
vocational schools designed to train
imams and provide a thoroughly
religious education — up from
71,000 in 2002.
Turkey is becoming more
religious, more paranoid and more
inward-looking. We have become
a nation where teachers can be
detained for no reason, singing songs
can be banned and intellectuals and
writers can be accused of sending
subliminal messages to society.
Nobody feels secure or knows how
things can get better, or if they ever
.TT
democracy shows us that history
doesn’t necessarily move forward.
Sometimes it goes backward.
NEW YORK TIMES
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Elif Shafak. Distributed by The New York Times Syndicate
157

GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
Africa,
the
Business
Deal of
the Century
A woman looks at some of the works on display during a preview of the ‘Making
Africa: A Continent of Contemporary Design’ exhibition at the High Museum of Art in
Atlanta, Georgia, USA, 12 October 2017.
EPA-EFE/ERIK S. LESSER
By Célestin Monga
As experts speculate about global
growth in 2018 and beyond, few pay
much attention to Africa. Those who
do often stress that the continent remains
home to the highest proportion of poor
people in the world, or that large numbers
search of security and opportunity. Even the
more optimistic economic forecasters tend to
refer to Africa in negative terms, advocating a
latter-day Marshall Plan, not as a catalyst for
business partnerships and growth, but as a
new form of humanitarianism.
To be sure, Africa’s GDP per capita stands
at only $2,000 per year, and the region has the
lowest proportion of wage earners (around
20%) in the world. Persistent poverty, together
with climate change, are aggravating high rates
of unemployment and underemployment.
Most of the labor force is still trapped in lowproductivity,
subsistence activities, with the
heavily on declining commodity prices.
While structural transformation is taking
place, it is happening very slowly. Africa
accounts for just 1.9% of global value-added
Célestin
Monga
Célestin Monga is
Vice President and
Chief Economist
of the African
Development Bank
Group.
in manufacturing – a share that hasn’t risen in
decades. Moreover, Africa’s population of 1.2
billion is growing fast, at 2.6% per year, with
the youth bulge – 70% of Africa’s population
is under the age of 30 – putting pressure on
and managerial capacity.
Nonetheless, such talk about “Africa” is
misplaced. There are many “Africas.” The
continent comprises 54 countries, with widely
varying economic performance. In 2016, per
capita gross national income (GNI) ranged
from $280 in Burundi to nearly $15,500 in
Seychelles.
War-torn and conflict-affected African
countries such as South Sudan rank high on the
list of Africa’s worst economic performers. But
the continent also boasts some of the world’s
fastest-growing economies: Côte d’Ivoire,
Ethiopia, Rwanda, Tanzania, and Senegal. And
Africa has about 30 middle-income countries,
whose combined middle class – estimated at
some 300 million people – is growing fast.
Yet the world’s advanced economies are
emerging Africa, which means that they are
158 2018 | OUR WORLD

missing out on the opportunities
.A
same time, rich countries have excess
savings, which encourage excessive
risk-taking by yield-hungry bankers
– behavior that eventually creates
financial bubbles. By contrast, poor
countries have investment deficits,
which are constraining growth and
perpetuating economic and social
misery in Africa – problems that
eventually lead to poverty, conflicts,
political instability, and mass migration
of skilled and unskilled labor.
It doesn’t have to be this way. The
discrepancy between global excess
opportunities in the developing world
– especially in Africa – reflects the
fact that intermediation is not taking
place. The substantial sums of private
financing dwarf the total volume of
amounted to $135 billion in 2015 ($45
billion of which went to Africa). The
estimated $7 trillion held by sovereign
wealth funds is another potential global
.
Developed-country investors
should be channeling some of this
in Africa, which now face investment
deficits, despite offering profitable
opportunities. A study by McKinsey
& Company. shows that the rate of
return on foreign investment is higher
in Africa than anywhere else in the
developing world. Yet only a fraction of
global foreign direct investment (FDI)
flows – projected to resume growth
in 2017, and to surpass $1.8 trillion in
2018 – are likely to go to Africa.
One key reason for this is the
perception that Africa’s business
environment is poor. But despite its
generally weak tax-collection record,
A
revenues of $500 billion annually –
more than ten times the foreign aid the
continent receives per year. And $60
recorded remittances that went to
developing countries in 2015 went to
Africa.
Yet the continent spends more
than $300 billion annually to import
goods that it could produce cheaply
and competitively within its borders,
if its industrialization strategies
focused on promoting industries with
.C
is rampant in some countries. And
ineffective management of foreign
exchange and government revenue
leads to substantial opportunity costs.
Creating a financing framework
for channeling excess savings from
the global North into profitable
investment opportunities in the global
A
investors searching for opportunities,
and advanced economies seeking
new sources of export demand.
The key would be to target Africa’s
most competitive, labor-intensive
industries, supporting them not
just with money, but also through
institutions such as development
banks, industrial parks, and agencies
infrastructure.
With appropriate policies,
industrialization in Africa would
help to raise productivity, including
by spurring technological progress
and innovation, while creating
higher-skill jobs in the formal sector,
thereby boosting average incomes
and domestic consumption. It would
also promote linkages between the
services and agricultural sectors;
between rural and urban economies;
and among consumers, intermediates,
and capital goods industries. And, by
making the prices of manufactured
exports less volatile and susceptible to
long-term deterioration than those of
primary goods, industrialization would
help countries escape dependence on
commodity exports.
GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
It sounds like
a bonanza-inwaiting
– and
so it is. Smart
investors will
not ignore it.
The United Nations Industrial
Development Organization (UNIDO)
has estimated that increasing
manufacturing’s share of GDP in
Africa and Least-Developed Countries
could lead to an aggregate positive
investment shock of about $485
billion, and to an increase in household
consumption of about $1.4 trillion.
According to UNIDO research, per
capita investment would rise by $66
for every additional percentage point
in manufacturing’s share of GDP in
Africa, while per capita consumption
would increase by $190.
This rise in investment and
consumption would boost demand
for imported capital and consumer
goods from other regions of the world,
most notably the G20 economies.
Increased production of capital and
consumer goods would activate several
demand for intermediate inputs,
higher employment, and faster income
growth. It sounds like a bonanza-inwaiting
– and so it is. Smart investors
will not ignore it.
OUR WORLD | 2018
Copyright: Project Syndicate, 2018. www.project-syndicate.org
159

In Syria, the World’s
Democracies Failed Us
By Fadi Azzam
Umar ibn al-Khattab, a chief adviser
and successor to the Prophet
Muhammad, was the last truly just
ruler in the Arab world, and he died 1,400
years ago. Khattab was called “al-Farooq”
— the one who distinguishes between right
and wrong.
He also uttered one of the most beautiful
phrases in Arab history: “How can you turn
people into slaves when their mothers gave
birth to them as free human beings?”
Khattab extended the Islamic empire
as far as Persia and was renowned for
establishing evenhanded governance
throughout the conquered lands, including
in what is now Syria. Damascus is a pivot
point for understanding history and its
movements. Conquered countless times,
the city has always managed to remain
steadfastly itself when its occupiers change.
During the last century, Damascus
established many of the essentials of
democracy: elections, a parliament, political
parties, anti-government protests, freedom
of the press.
Then came the Baath Party coup in 1963.
Hafez al-Assad snatched freedom and
instituted a paranoid regime. In 2000 his
son Bashar succeeded him, and promised
.
movement stalled.
In March 2011, in the midst of the Arab
Spring, protesters took to the streets of
Damascus, demanding democratic reforms
and the release of political prisoners.
Security forces opened fire — and a
revolution began, gradually convulsing all
of Syria.
In a video from that time, President
Bashar al-Assad’s soldiers trampled a group
Fadi Azzam
Fadi Azzam is a
Syrian writer and the
author of the novel,
“Sharmada”.
of young protesters shackled in chains
on the ground: You want freedom, you
animals? Tell me: What is freedom? That
was the question. And the Assad regime
responded decisively.
Meanwhile, in an area of Syria seized by
Al Qaeda, a video camera documented how
foreign fighters from Chechnya, France,
Saudi Arabia and Tunisia were terrorizing
the young people of the Syrian revolution,
tearing down their flag. Then Al Qaeda
posted signs on the roads under its control:
“Democracy Is Blasphemy.”
The Syrian tragedy came to dominate
screens worldwide. And the question for
Arab nations was clear: Do you understand
the fate of those who demand freedom
and democracy? This question, which was
answered with Syrian blood, confirmed
that this dreadful Arab Spring must end in
Damascus.
A
intervention mainly to words, as if
statements alone would counter the
Assad regime’s brutality and the hatefulness
of the imported terrorists. In our time,
terrorism has emerged as an effective
prescription for treating all diseases —
a postmodern sorcery that has opened
Syria’s doors to thousands of jihadis from
around the world.
Once in Syria, these bearded men drove
tanks and fired machine guns, applying
what they had learned from playing video
games. Fantasy blended with fact so that
the two were hard to separate.
As terrorists streamed in and Syria
erupted, the free world kept a safe
distance. In 2014, President Barack Obama,
defending the West’s lack of significant
military intervention, questioned whether
the “moderate opposition” in Syria — which
included “farmers or dentists or maybe
some radio reporters” — could ever prevail
against “a battle-hardened regime, with
support from external actors who have a
lot at stake.”
But if a Syrian dentist says to the world,
in effect, “You have bad breath,” what’s
wrong with that?
160 2018 | OUR WORLD

We know how the United States
has helped sustain brutal regimes
in the Middle East and around
the world, how it has overthrown
democratically elected governments
in Latin America and elsewhere.
We know that Syria’s oil reserves
don’t compare with Iraq’s and that
we’re not vital enough to American
interests for the United States to
intervene on our behalf.
We know what happened in
Abu Ghraib prison. And we know
what happens to people who find
themselves at the wrong place when
a drone strike hits. This is the power
that America and the West can wield.
But such power is immoral if it
doesn’t assert the values of freedom
and democracy for the world’s poor
and dispossessed.
We Syrians asked for help to
end the massacres, to provide safe
havens for civilians and to prosecute
war criminals. Those pleas were
futile. Syrian deaths became a moral
scandal for the entire world.
The nation’s most courageous
men and women were killed while
they danced and sang for freedom,
dignity and democracy. There is
no nobler death than this. Take a
moment to view the faces of those
who died in the streets and inside
.
the thousands of photos of the dead
in government custody leaked by the
Syrian defector code-named Caesar.
The democratic world failed
Syria. I don’t mean the West’s
politicians, foreign ministers
and generals. I mean its cultural
elites, civil societies and human
rights organizations. Those are the
people who failed us.
For us in the Middle East,
democracy has brought misery —
at relatively little cost to the West,
which always protects its own
interests first. Policy is tailored to
business concerns. The focus of
Western decision makers today is
“jobs, jobs, jobs …”
The Sept. 11 attacks shattered a
barrier. The West immediately took
revenge on the poor of Afghanistan,
and applied democracy there like a
handkerchief on a hemorrhage.
The supposed existence of
weapons of mass destruction
provided a pretext for Iraq’s
annihilation, which allowed Iran
to vandalize an enormous Arab
NEW YORK TIMES
GLOBAL VS. LOCAL WORLDS
NEW YORK TIMES
nation. A democracy was created in
Baghdad’s Green Zone, an area of
just a few kilometers.
Mr. Assad ridiculed Mr. Obama’s
porous red lines. The former
president claims that he owes a
patch of his gray hair to the debates
about what the United States should
do in Syria. He won the Nobel Peace
Prize — which he can’t talk about
without being haunted by a photo
of a child asphyxiated by sarin gas
in Syria.
Can democracy be achieved
through the use of military force?
The answer is yes. If the West had
intervened in support of the Syrian
revolution, democracy would
have had a chance. Instead, the
Syrian people have been left with
democracy’s slogans and lies — and
more destruction and extremism.
The world’s free men and women
have been tied up and forced to the
ground by the leaders of the new
era: Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin,
Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Ayatollah
Ali Khamenei, Benjamin Netanyahu
and Mr. Assad himself. Each of them
applauding while he tramples our
backs and yells: You want freedom,
you animals? Tell me: What is
freedom?
OUR WORLD | 2018
© 2018 Fadi Azzam. Distributed by The
New York Times Syndicate
161