Young, gifted Arabs hold the key to peace

Helle, Hajer and Hussein are young, articulate and ambitious. They dream big and aim high. They want the best for themselves and for the countries – Tunisia, Libya and Syria – they live in.You won’t read about them in traditional newspapers. They aren’t making headlines just yet.But more, much more, than their governments, these young people and millions of others like them hold the key to our future.Almost 65 per cent of the population in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is under the age of 30.  The choices that Helle and her friends make will determine the fate of their own countries. But they will also have a strong impact on Europe and the world.I met these “Young Mediterranean Voices” – teachers, journalists, environmentalists, social entrepreneurs, peace and democracy activists – at the MedForum 2016, organised last week in Malta by the Anna Lindh Foundation.The energy and enthusiasm of more than 500 savvy, young Europeans and Arabs whom the Anna Lindh Foundation had identified as “change-makers” rang through the Valetta conference centre. The talk was of crafting a narrative of hope, dialogue and cooperation that runs counter to the extremist discourse of hate and violence.‘No-one is born a terrorist’, says one young man. Instead of trying to counter the extremists’ poisonous voices, many underline the need to articulate an inspiring vision of societies where people can live in peace.Religion is the last thing on their minds. These young people want to fight for better education, jobs, clean government, stability and hope. And forget the stereotypes: the girls – including the small number who wears headscarves – are even more confident than the boys.The focus on civil society and young people as agents of social change is not new. But there is a consensus on the need to act urgently.The good news is that the Anna Lindh Foundation is getting the attention and support it deserves. The message of the EU High Representative, Federica Mogherini, to the Forum highlighted Europe’s commitment to engagement with young people.And there are growing opportunities for young people to make a difference.United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250, agreed last December, emphasises the crucial role they can play in managing conflicts and establishing peace. And building stronger Euro-Mediterranean bonds is going to be a key priority for Malta, which takes over the EU Council presidency in January 2017.The conversations in Valetta provided many lessons for policymakers.First, stop obsessing about religion and start putting money where it really matters: into schools, job creation and investment schemes.Second, engage with civil society – don’t fear it. MENA governments too often reject the ideas and passion of young people instead of seeking to channel their enthusiasm for change and reform into positive contributions to national policymaking. And while many EU cooperation agreements include an important people-to-people component, these programmes need to be made more crucial and more exciting.Third, even as it seeks to engage with MENA governments, the EU should invest in the region’s young people. This is essential if the region is to have long-term peace and stability.Certainly many parts of the Arab world are jolted by conflicts and wars. Violence and economic deprivation are driving many young people to come to Europe.But the gathering in Malta is proof that Europe’s southern neighbourhood need not be a place of death and destruction. With the right policies, the right people in charge, and sustained support, it can be a region of hope and peace.

We should all be rooting for Georgieva

The United Nations is tantalisingly close to having its first woman - and Eastern European - secretary general. European Commission Vice President Kristalina Georgieva, who is Bulgarian,  now has the long-awaited backing of the Bulgarian government to get the top UN job. She is finally officially in the race to replace Ban Ki-moon and will be fielding questions from the UN General Assembly on October 3.We should all be rooting for Georgieva. Here are 3 reasons - among many- why I think she rocks:

• Georgieva will be transformational. At a time when the UN, like all international organisations, is struggling to reestablish its credentials in a complicated and turbulent world, Georgieva has the personality, skills and experience to break away from the repetitive "same old, same old" way of doing things.
• From the day she took over as the EU Commissioner for Humanitarian Affairs in 2010, Georgieva has travelled the world, standing out as a strong, no-nonsense but compassionate leader who goes the extra mile to engage and connect with people and countries.
• Having tried all different types of men (from different continents, different races,  different backgrounds) it's time the UN was led by a gutsy, hard-working woman who commands respect and knows her way around byzantine multilateral institutions, including the EU Commission and the World Bank.

Of course it's not done yet. Antonio Guterres, the much respected former Portuguese prime minister and head of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, is still in the lead in the numerous "straw polls" held so far at the UN.  But that was before Georgieva entered the fray.Also, Irina Bokova, head of UNESCO and the former favourite of the Bulgarian government, is still in the race and reportedly has Russian backing.Not everyone - including Moscow and some Europeans such as the French and Portuguese governments - is pleased that Georgieva is believed to be the favourite candidate of German Chancellor Angela Merkel.But really should we care? Isn't it time to stop the petty political and geopolitical quarrels and focus on what's best for reviving the only multilateral body which has a mandate to tackle the many challenges of global governance?

The EU’s Georgieva should get the top UN job

I’ve long hoped European Commission Vice-President Kristalina Georgieva would be the next Secretary-General of the United Nations.  Fingers crossed, she may just get the job.True, Georgieva is going to be entering the race at (almost) the last minute. And it’s also true that the current frontrunner in the competition to replace Ban Ki-moon is the very capable and much-respected former UN Human Rights Commissioner Antonio Guterres.But it’s really about time the UN was led by a woman. The problem is that the leading female contender, Bulgaria’s Irina Bokova, lags firmly behind Guterres in the last straw poll. Bokova, who is current head of UNESCO, has also run into strong opposition from the United States and Britain.So it’s time to change tack.Georgieva, who is also Bulgarian and is now in her second term at the European Commission, has the qualifications, experience and personality to take charge of the global body.She should have been in the race from the start. But politics and the Bulgarian government’s decision last year to opt for Bokova as its candidate, got in the way. However, it now looks like the Bulgarians have finally seen sense and are ready to back Georgieva.Sofia’s change of heart is to be welcomed. Georgieva, formerly at the World Bank, has been an impressive European Commissioner. She shone as the EU Commissioner in charge of Humanitarian aid. And this year she also lead efforts to reform the international humanitarian system.Nothing is settled yet. The UN race is proving to be much more exciting and unpredictable than anticipated. As Richard Gowan points out “a Guterres versus Georgieva contest would be a dream matchup for many UN officials and analysts…Both have held top-level humanitarian portfolios and were widely praised for their performances.”But for all the reasons I’ve mentioned, I’m putting my money on Georgieva.

In a crazy world, we need to daydream

So here I am surrounded by evil, wickedness and hate, the world going mad all at once and all I can think of is this: if only Freddie Mercury and Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan had lived long enough to sing together.

Call it escapism. Call it cracking under pressure, the demands of an exhausted mind demanding some respite, a moment of rest in an angry vicious world. There’s just so much a person can take.

The rest of the world is going crazy over Pokemon Go! But as I read, hear and watch the loonies take over the asylum, the mad men raging and ranting, I’ve started daydreaming. And often as the mind wanders, I wish Freddie and Nusrat could have come together to sing and ease our pain.

What a concert that would have been, the meeting of two musical titans, sublime singers whose voices would have touched our souls in so many different unexplained ways, reaching places no one else could reach. Not John Lennon, not Elvis, not even Prince. Any yes, not even Amjad Sabri.

I can imagine their voices merging and mingling, Freddie’s haunting vocals soaring higher and higher and then dipping low — and then, slowly but steadily, Nusrat Fateh Ali adding his magical, spiritual sweetness to the duet. I can hear them now, singing a mixture of ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ and ‘Dam Mast Qalandar’.

If only. My fantasy doesn’t last long. Both men are dead, their message of love and tolerance buried with them. So are Sabri, Lennon and others.

Instead of sweet music, we are doomed to listen to Donald Trump’s nasty rants. The man many once shrugged off as a freak show is now likely to be the next president of the United States. Interestingly, he is best friends with Vladimir Putin, the other tough guy on the block.

I’m sure it won’t be too long before both are bonding with that other angry middle-aged strongman, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who, having escaped a military coup is now busy rounding up and punishing all and sundry. Oh yes, and there is talk of reinstating the death penalty.

Here in Europe, there are mad men aplenty too. Hungary’s right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban has described the arrival of asylum seekers in Europe as “a poison”, saying his country did not want or need “a single migrant”.

Geert Wilders, the leader of the Dutch far right Freedom Party told the Republican Party Convention in Cleveland that he is set to become the next prime minister of the Netherlands. “I don’t want more Muslims in the Netherlands…and I am proud to say that,” he told a cheering crowd of Americans.

To much applause, Britain’s new Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson lied and misled his way during the Brexit campaign that he headed. Nigel Farage, the xenophobic leader of the UK Independence Party has promised to help anti-EU protesters in France and other countries. Marine Le Pen, the leader of the French far right has become even more popular in the wake of recent terrorist attacks.

But there is hope yet. The world is not completely dark and dirty — at least not yet.

At their convention in Philadelphia, the Democrats called on Americans to reject what they called Trump’s politics of fear and division. It’s still not clear, however, if the message of hope and optimism offered by US President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton can successfully counter Trump’s toxic rhetoric.

The divisions in society run deep — and not only in the US. Europe too is deeply divided between those who live in a permanent state of apoplexy over their inability to cope with a rapidly changing world and those who are ready to go with the flow.

For the last few years, like many others, I have been silently thanking the universe for Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor whose ability to show grace under pressure makes her the only true leader in a very messy and chaotic Europe.

Just recently, Merkel delivered a staunch defence of her open-door policy towards refugees, insisting she feels no guilt over a series of violent attacks in Germany and was right to allow hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees to arrive last summer.

“A rejection of the humanitarian stance we took could have led to even worse consequences,” the German chancellor said. She repeated her wir schaffen das (we can manage it) mantra delivered last summer at the peak of the refugee crisis, adding: “We can manage our historic task — and this is a historic test in times of globalisation — just as we’ve managed so much already, we can manage it…Germany is a strong country.”

Interestingly, Merkel’s popularity remains high. In contrast, despite his hard-line response to terrorism and the extension of the national state of emergency, French President Francois Hollande remains intensely unpopular.

Go figure. Just when you think 2016 can’t get any worse, there is another terrorist attack and more innocent and gentle souls are killed.

As Freddie sang all those years ago: ‘this world could be heaven’. Sadly, tragically, it is not.

Brexit’s EU shake-up and the global fall-out

Brexit has certainly shaken the European Union. But apart from the mess over the timing, pace and substance of Britain’s EU divorce, no one should expect any other major changes in way the now-27 member bloc conducts itself. And, oh yes, don’t expect any rapid EU unravelling either.

True, there has been a spate of statements on the need for “political reflection to give an impulse to further reform”. The foreign ministers of France and Germany have talked in a heady fashion of their vision for further steps in the direction of a political union. And there’s even a brand new EU “global strategy” articulating the bloc’s vision for dealing with the world outside.

The far right, meanwhile, is predictably gloating over the “Leave EU” message delivered by British voters and demanding similar national referenda on EU membership in their countries. Europe’s populists will certainly continue to make gains in elections in the coming years. But the likelihood of other EU referenda is slim.

Similarly, those vowing to show that the Union is strong and unchanged by Britain’s withdrawal and that the EU will push on without the presence of Britain as the perennial naysayer, the sceptic and the doubter are on the wrong track. The truth is different.

Britain’s objections focused on the EU’s overly ambitious plans a further pooling of sovereignty and the bloc’s failure to hammer out a rational and fair immigration policy. These are also opposed by many other EU states, not just Britain.

On questions related to the further development of the EU single market, Britain was usually in the vanguard of states wanting the removal of internal barriers. On trade, it took a strong anti-protectionist line. And for all the anti-immigration talk, Britain’s multi-cultural landscape stands out in an EU where minorities are not as visible as they should and could be.

Europe’s internal divisions are not about to disappear. The squabbling and wrangling over the EU’s future will continue — perhaps even become shriller. There is no guarantee that the advice to act responsibly given to the EU by US Secretary of State John Kerry will be heard.

What Brexit has done, however, is create uncertainty on global financial markets triggered by the fall in the value of the pound. Some of Asia’s biggest economies have warned that Brexit could cast a shadow over the world economy for years to come.

Global business leaders are already rethinking their export and investment strategies to take account of Britain’s imminent departure from the EU.

More is at stake, however. The EU has long inspired nations across the globe with its message of reconciliation among former adversaries and as a project for peace and stability. In varying ways and to varying degrees, many have also looked to Europe in their own quest for regional integration and cooperation.

That reputation has now taken a body blow. Both Britain and the EU appear diminished to a closely watching world. Those opposed to regional cooperation are likely to take heart from the EU’s difficulties. But it would be unfortunate if the EU crisis puts the brakes on other regions’ plans for integration.

Significantly, none of the EU’s foreign partners — except Donald Trump, the presumptive Republican nominee for US president and possibly Russian President Vladimir Putin — is applauding.

Much will depend on how British and EU leaders conduct themselves over the coming weeks and months. Britain’s pro-Leave campaigners have already sullied the country’s reputation by misinforming and misleading their citizens and by fanning the fires of hatred and racism. It will be tough to correct their mistakes — if that is indeed what the next British Brexit government intends to do.

EU leaders, meanwhile, face a stark choice: they can either listen to and respond to the real concerns of their citizens, including on immigration, and seek a dignified response to the latest crisis. Or — as many fear — they can engage in yet more squabbling over Europe’s future direction.

The route they take will determine whether or not other eurosceptic movements will become even stronger in the days ahead and present their own blueprints for an EU exit.

Europe’s response will be watched carefully not just by the US where fears are growing of a Trump victory in the November presidential elections but also by China, India, Japan and Europe’s other important partners which have invested heavily in Britain as a “gateway” to Europe.

No responsible global power wanted Britain to leave the EU and today no major country wants the EU to unravel. True, some countries may want to negotiate new trade pacts with Britain — but as the US and India have warned, such discussions will not be their top priority. The EU is a much larger trading bloc than Britain — and will continue to count for more on world stage.

For Europe’s trading partners Britain’s absence will be especially felt in EU discussions on trade agreements, whether bilateral free trade accords such as the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) or the wider multilateral trading system. London has taken a strong stance in favour of granting market economy status to China. It has also been among the lead players in the EU’s trade relations with many South Asian countries, including India, Pakistan and Afghanistan.

The departure of Britain as the EU’s prime military power, is going to hit hard at a time when Europe is trying to push its security credentials, especially in Asia. A new EU “global strategy”, which cannot rely on and use Britain’s wide network of global partners, will appear less impressive.

In the end, however, once the market turmoil is over and the reality of Brexit sinks in, it is the blow to the EU’s reputation as an agent for change and transformation which will resonate most strongly across the world.

Time to walk the talk on Agenda 2030

Last year’s adoption of the Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) was an important milestone in the struggle to create a better world. The rhetoric was uplifting. Many promises of quick action were made. It’s time now to start walking the heroic talk.

As the great and the good of the global development community prepare to meet in Brussels in mid-June for the “European Development Days”, a massive brainstorm on new ways to deal with the world’s most pressing development challenges, the focus must turn from words to action.

Implementing the transformative Agenda 2030 for social, economic and environmental development agreed at the United Nations last November requires loads of money. And the funds must start flowing fast.

Financing of the earlier Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) agreed in 2000 was mostly a traditional affair. Yes, there were some efforts made to be creative, but the focus was largely on Official Development Aid (ODA), disbursed by traditional Western donors. The flows were from the north to the south.

The world in 2016 is a different place. Aid budgets in industrialised countries are under pressure. And in any case, financing for the 17 SDGs and 169 targets will require much more than ODA.

That’s because the SDGs are not only about ending poverty and hunger, and improving health, education and gender equality, but also about reducing inequality, making cities safe, addressing climate change and promoting peaceful societies.

Traditional ODA will remain crucial but governments and other donors need to start demonstrating creativity and innovation to find more money and get more bang for their buck.

So where is the additional money going to come from? Public, private, domestic and international funding sources need to be tapped. More than they do today, governments will have to work with business in so-called public-private partnerships to get things moving.

The private sector plays an important part by focusing on infrastructure, energy, agriculture, urban development, water systems and technology. But these private incentives must be aligned with public goals to create a policy framework that encourages for-profit investments in these areas.

Initiatives such as the UN Global Compact can be utilised by governments to partner with private sector and mobilise finance to achieve the SDGs.

Fortunately, as traditional donors struggle to maintain aid flows, countries like China, India, Turkey and Korea are emerging as an important source of funds for poorer countries. The China-led Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) is working hand in hand with the World Bank and the Asian Development Bank (ADB) to finance desperately-needed infrastructure in developing countries.

South-south cooperation plays a pivotal role in helping countries to share experiences and promote common development. The new actors must therefore be made part of the global conversation on development, not excluded as outsiders.

In addition to traditional aid flows, foreign direct investments (FDI) in emerging countries are on the rise as are impact investments, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities and philanthropy.

Remittances from workers abroad are a huge boon to their countries of origin. However, the cost of remitting funds remains extremely high. These barriers must be reduced.

Meanwhile, at home governments must be put under additional pressure to increase domestic resource mobilisation through more effective tax collection and anti-corruption measures.

The focus is also on changes in international tax rules and practices to ensure fair treatment for developing countries and strengthening the ability of developing countries to prosecute tax evaders and renegotiate contracts.

Innovative financing includes taxes on carbon, air travel and financial transactions. Pension funds, insurance companies and sovereign wealth funds are also a potential funding pool.

Official development assistance remains a critical funding source, particularly for low-income countries, providing 70 per cent of all external funding, as well as a third of public expenditure available to governments

The SDGs are wide-ranging and important. They will have a critical impact on what the world will look like in 2030. Their implementation will require more money than is currently available from official aid budgets, the mobilisation of domestic revenues in developing countries and more public-private partnerships.

The outlook is fairly positive. After all, while not all of the previous Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) were successfully translated into reality, the MDGs have contributed, among other things, to reducing extreme poverty and halving the number of annual deaths of children under five.

Implementing Agenda 2030 will not be easy. It will require money, certainly but more than that it will need political will and determination.

FRANKLY SPEAKING – Europe matters to an anxious world

As Europe tears itself apart, the world is watching anxiously. Entangled in their multiple crises, self-absorbed EU leaders appear oblivious to the impact of their conduct and policies on Europe’s global standing. But in this interdependent and inter-connected world, what happens in Europe doesn’t stay in Europe. It sends shockwaves across the world.Europe matters. It’s partly economics. The world needs European markets and investments. In a world desperate for higher growth and more jobs, Europe’s stagnant or slow-growing economies are a source of deep concern.Worries over Europe’s lacklustre economic performance have grown as the Chinese growth engine slows down to a “new normal”. Latest World Trade Organisation (WTO) data shows global trade tumbling 13% last year to $16.5 trillion, from $19 trillion in 2014. In volume terms, world trade remained flat in 2015.European technology, standards, expertise and know-how also matter. It’s no surprise that emerging nations embarked on ambitious economic transformation agendas want access to Europe’s intellectual expertise.For proof, look no further than the EU’s recent meetings with China and India and their emphasis on cooperation in areas like urbanisation, digital development, clean energy and water management.But for many outsiders, Europe is about more than trade and business. It is a major source of development assistance and humanitarian aid. In Asia, Africa and Latin America, the EU’s regional integration efforts are a source of inspiration.Europe is also an agent for economic, social and political change outside its borders. It promotes human rights, democracy and the rule of law. Hardline governments may not like it, but their citizens certainly do.Slowly but surely, Europe is also developing its security credentials. Not as a hard military power, but in its capacity to promote confidence-building measures, reconciliation between adversaries and to tackle non-traditional security threats.These achievements were built slowly, over time. They are now at risk. Europe’s international standing is taking a battering. As they stumble in their efforts to deal with refugees, terrorists and Brexit as well as with the structural challenge of slow growth and jobs, European leaders are sending a message of discord and weakness to the world.Given Europe’s complex relationship with its foreign friends, there could have been some gloating abroad. After all, for years, European policymakers seemed to think their main task was to lecture, harangue and finger-wag their way through world capitals. Appalled critics called Europeans arrogant and complacent.No longer. In an intertwined world, no one is safe. Far from showing any signs ofschadenfreude, most world leaders are genuinely concerned at Europe’s predicament.“Europe is not tranquil at the moment, we are following developments very closely,” China’s Assistant Foreign Minister Liu Haixing told a meeting of European and Chinese academics and think tank representatives in Beijing last week. “We are optimistic about the EU’s future and its ability and determination to overcome difficulties,” he added.Queries about Europe’s future also come from family, friends, colleagues, students and business representatives who want to know if this time, again, Europe will bounce back, come to its senses, regain its reputation as a land of tolerance and humanity.Their collective appeal to European leaders is simple: enough already, stop bickering, get your act together. The world wants and needs a strong and resilient Europe. The message is clear – but is anyone in Europe really listening?

View from abroad: In this dark world, who can still make us dream?

Back in 1963, Martin Luther King had a dream. His vision of empowered African Americans resonated across the world where millions believed in his message of equality and brotherhood, and his calls for an end to racism.

The struggle for the emancipation of black Americans was not easy. Many people died. King himself was assassinated. But eight years ago, Americans elected their first African American president.

Barack Obama spoke of hope and change. He also had a vision of an America at peace with itself and with the rest of the world.

How times and presidential election campaigns change. As Obama’s second term as president draws to an end, talk of dreams and hope have been replaced by poisonous messages of hate and fear.

These days, America’s would-be presidents don’t dream. They have nightmares. They spout ugly words and dark, morbid visions of an America overrun by immigrants, terrorists, Muslims and Mexicans.

Billionaire Donald Trump is of course “hate-monger in-chief”, his anger and loathing for those outside his circle appears to know no bounds. But he is not alone. Others in the US are propagating an equally toxic message.

And here in Europe the political landscape is just as grim. The one woman, German Chancellor Angela Merkel, who did harbour a dream of a Europe willing to receive and accept people fleeing war and persecution, is in a minority of one in a European Union which counts 28 states.

Instead of being acclaimed as a courageous leader who lives by the values that so many in Europe profess to believe in — but clearly don’t want to practice — Merkel is derided as naive and irresponsible.

The German leader’s male colleagues have a different agenda. They are clamping down hard on refugees, building fences, reinforcing border controls. And they are joining Trump in disseminating a message of fear, intolerance and hate.

Even as hapless EU officials have warned governments not to take “unilateral actions”, last week Austria and the Balkan states made clear that they will go their own way.

Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic have been among the staunchest opponents of EU plans to transfer asylum-seekers arriving in southern Europe to other EU states.

Austria last week announced a daily cap on the numbers of people allowed to apply for asylum or travel through to apply elsewhere, prompting some Balkan countries to introduce restrictions. As a result, migrants have been stranded in Greece, the main entry point into Europe.

There is angry talk by Greece and Italy of stopping funding for the countries who refuse to play the “solidarity” game by taking in refugees, but nobody is really listening.

Meanwhile, in France, a court has given the green light to plans to evacuate hundreds of migrants from the notorious “Jungle” camp in Calais. Worried that the migrants will cross the border, Belgium has decided to impose frontier checks, thereby giving another blow to the EU’s so-called Schengen agreement on the free movement of people.

Europe’s reaction to the refugee crisis is chaotic, inhumane and shocking. United Nations High Commissioner for Refugees Filippo Grandi has warned, for instance, that border restrictions along the Balkan route go against international and European rules.

Europe’s tough-talking leaders have escaped media scrutiny for the moment. Most journalists have neither the time nor the inclination to investigate the reality of Europe’s migrant crisis.

But history will certainly pass harsh judgement on the policies and actions of the European, especially Eastern European, leaders.

And what about Britain? As continental Europe frets over refugees, British politicians are in the grip of a strange self-inflicted wound known as the “Brexit” debate over membership of the EU.

Having secured a “deal” earlier this week with his EU colleagues on renegotiating the terms of Britain’s EU membership, British Prime Minister David Cameron’s hopes of winning the June 23 referendum for his “stay in Europe” campaign were shattered when the quirky but very popular Mayor of London, Boris Johnson, threw his ample weight behind the “exiters”.

With any expectations of a sane conversation in Britain now also buried, people can put aside any hopes of a change in Europe’s politics of fear.

So is there anyone else out there who can make us dream again? Russia’s Vladimir Putin has his cabal of admirers but does not inspire hope among anyone else.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan may have caught the world’s imagination a decade ago but is now discredited as just another authoritarian leader who has lost touch with reality.

China’s President Xi Jinping is too busy grappling with his country’s “new normal” economic slowdown to pay attention to global challenges.

For all the talk of India’s rise, Prime Minister Narendra Modi is no global leader. Neither is Indonesia’s President Jokowi or Japan’s Prime Minister Shinzo Abe. Iran and Saudi leaders are busy adding to the world’s problems by fighting each other through proxies in Syria, Iraq and Yemen.

Which brings us nicely to Canada. Justin Trudeau certainly stands tall as a man of principle, compassion and humanity. While his counterparts in other countries deafen us with their rabid rants, and European and US politicians paint the world in black, the young Canadian leader is proof of the power of dreams.

Indonesia Matters 2015: Video

[embed]https://vimeo.com/72975038[/embed]

[embed]https://vimeo.com/72979465[/embed]

As a major Asian economic powerhouse, the world’s largest Muslim majority nation and third largest democracy, Indonesia’s future direction matters to a closely watching world. Since taking over last autumn, President Joko “Jokowi” Widodo has outlined a new foreign policy focused on three priorities: maintaining Indonesia’s sovereignty, enhancing the protection of Indonesian citizens, and intensifying economic diplomacy. On the economic front, the President has scrapped petrol subsidies, giving the government more fiscal room to tackle other priorities including increased spending on health, education and infrastructure. Six months on, what are the new President’s key achievements and challenges? As he goes about strengthening his credentials at home, is President “Jokowi” putting at risk Indonesia’s global reputation? Will Indonesia’s new “people-oriented” foreign policy priorities change Indonesia’s interaction with the world? Is Indonesia still committed to ASEAN as a cornerstone of its foreign policy? What are the most important economic tasks facing Indonesia today? And is Indonesia doing enough to act as a model for other Muslim countries and transfer its successful experience on democratic transition to other nations. What role do SMEs play in the economic development of Indonesia? What are Indonesia’s expectation of  the ASEAN Economic Community (AEC)? What is the state of EU-Indonesia trade and economic relations?

Moderated by Shada Islam, Director of Policy at Friends of Europe, the panel includes Marc Deschamps, Director of Muslim Economic Department, L'Agence wallonne à l'Exportation et aux Investissements étrangers (AWEX); Rahimah Abdulrahim, Executive Director, The Habibie Center, Jakarta, Indonesia; Felia Salim, Former Vice President Director, Bank Negara Indonesia (BNI) and Ugo Astuto, Acting Managing Director  for Asia and the Pacific, European External Action Service (EEAS). 

Europe - China forum 2015: Video

Trade and business have long been the backbone of EU-China relations.  But as both Europe and China expand their regional and global presence, there are an increasing number of areas where EU-China cooperation and consultation have become a compelling necessity.  Building on successful efforts to work together in anti-piracy operations in the Gulf of Aden, Beijing and Brussels are interested in further developing their security and defence cooperation.

China’s economic transformation continues to intrigue and mesmerise – and create immense business opportunities – for a closely-watching world.  The coming decade promises to be even more transformative as China shifts the focus to sustainable, green, high-quality growth, the development of the service sector and speeds up efforts to build a digital economy. China's start-up scene is abuzz with new products, new ideas and new investments. With access to some 640 million Chinese netizens, including 530 million mobile internet users, China now boasts a new class of internet companies which are creating their own business models, becoming increasingly innovative and extending their outreach in rural as well as in urban areas.

[embed]https://vimeo.com/112476744[/embed]

In part 1, Friends of Europe Secretary General, Giles Merritt, moderates the discussion. The panel includes Shada Islam, Director of Policy at Friends of Europe; Chi Fulin, President of the China Institute for Reform and Development (CIRD); Linda Corugedo Steneberg, Principal Adviser at the European Commission Directorate General for Communications Networks, Content and Technology (DG CONNECT); Luigi Gambardella, President of China-EU; Jeongmin Seong, Senior Fellow at the McKinsey Global Institute (MGI) and co-author of the MGI report: “China’s digital transformation: The Internet’s impact on productivity and growth”;and Guo Wei, Chairman and Executive Director of  Digital China

The disussion focusing on what are the key challenges facing “Digital China”? How do China’s ambitions fit in with Europe’s own efforts to create a more competitive “Digital Europe”? What is the significance of China’s “Internet Plus” plan and 5G cooperation between the EU and China? Does China’s service-led economic transformation create new opportunities for EU-China innovation cooperation? What new investment opportunities will be opening up in China’s services sector in areas such as transport, communications, finance and health care?

[embed]https://vimeo.com/112487949[/embed]

In part 2, the panel discuss strengthening connections: “One Belt, One Road”, trade and investments. President Xi Jinping’s plans for the Silk Road Economic Belt and a 21st Century Maritime Silk Road (termed together “One Belt, One Road”) aimed at building two economic corridors with important development implications for many nations. China has set aside 40 billion dollars for the Silk Road Fund and another 100 billion dollars are being invested in the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB).

How will Europe benefit from the construction of the Silk Road Economic Belt? What is the potential for synergies between the Chinese and European infrastructure and connectivity policies? Which sectors are likely to benefit most from such cooperation? What will be the role of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank in financing the “One Belt, One Road” initiative? Can the EU and China work together to build and improve the decision-making and governance mechanisms of the AIIB? How are negotiations proceeding on an EU-China Bilateral Investment Treaty? How will the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) impact on China? Could the successful negotiation of the investment accord pave the way for talks on an EU-China free trade agreement?

Introductory remarks are made by Lv Fengding, Vice President of the China Public Diplomacy Association (CPDA) and Former Chinese Ambassador to Sweden. Speakers in part to include Jo Leinen, Chair of the European Parliament Delegation for Relations with the People’s Republic of China; Mario Esteban, Senior Analyst at the Real Instituto Elcano; Yonghui Li, President of the International Relations Institute, Beijing Foreign Studies University; Haiyan Zhang, Director of NEOMA Confucius Institute for Business at the NEOMA Business School and Professor of Asia/China Business Strategy and Management at Antwerp Management School; André Loesekrug-Pietri, Founder & Managing Partner, A CAPITAL, Finance committee board member, Friends of Europe and Liqin He / General Manager of Bank of China (Luxembourg), S.A. Brussels Branch.

VIEW FROM ABROAD: Let’s focus on the 'mother of all' SDGs (Originally published 19/09/2015 at Dawn.com)

In just one week, world leaders will gather at the United Nations General Assembly in New York to adopt the much-anticipated Sustainable Development Goals (SDGs) designed to steer global economic, social and environmental policies over the next 15 years.The SDGs are important and their implementation will have a critical impact on what the world will look like in 2030. After all, the previous Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) certainly contributed, among other things, to reducing extreme poverty and halving the number of annual deaths of children under five.And yet. Promises about the future are fine but I can’t help wondering: shouldn’t the focus in New York be on the need for urgent global action to tackle a raging refugee crisis which is affecting not just Europe but number of countries, including many in the developing world?The UN should use next week’s meeting to craft one over-arching “mother of all SDGs” which would tackle the deep, structural problems — poverty, inequality, conflicts, climate change — which lie behind the world’s growing refugee problem.Instead of making speeches on the SDGs, world leaders would be more credible if they hammered out a global strategy to ensure a decent, dignified life for the millions of refugees on the move today — while also taking action to deal with the wars, conflict and persecution which cause people to flee their homes.Such a blueprint should be about the current plight of the refugees — mostly from Syria, Iraq, Eritrea and Afghanistan — who are desperately seeking shelter in Europe but also in Lebanon, Jordan, Turkey and many African countries.But it should be about much more as well. It should focus on the deficiencies in current global development policies which have helped to provoke the current disastrous situation.In fact, the world body doesn’t have to add on another — eighteenth — SDG which focuses specifically on refugees. It could quite simply and forcefully put its full weight behind the urgent need to link the implementation of the SDGs to the resolution of the refugee crisis.Certainly, there will need to be a sharper focus on fragile states. As Gideon Rabinowitz from the Overseas Development Institute (ODI) points out in a recent blog, “although certainly not its primary cause, the international community’s inadequate support for countries facing humanitarian and conflict-related challenges has contributed to this [refugee] crisis”.Rabinowitz underlines that funding for food vouchers for Syrian refugees has been slashed. Aid to fragile states is down.At a recent conference on the SDGs held in Brussels, there was agreement that the refugee crisis should lead to greater emphasis on peace and conflict resolution in the SDGs.“The crisis is actually a test for many of the SDGs — some of the social ones and education, health, things like that,” said James Mackie, Senior Adviser on EU Development Policy at the European Centre for Development Policy Management (ECDPM). “But the one I would really focus on would be SDG 16 on conflict, peace, justice and inclusive institutions. I think that’s where the real solution to this crisis is, and we should learn that lesson looking forward.”Certainly, attention at the moment is on European governments’ messy and discordant responses. Hungary’s odious mistreatment of the refugees is one cruel facet of the story, Germany’s still-humane reaction is another.Most “ordinary” people are going out of their way to welcome the refugees even as the Far Right screams blue murder.The sad truth is that Europe is overwhelmed by the number of people seeking entry, the collapse of its cherished Schengen border-free system and the need to rapidly craft a new and more intelligent asylum and immigration policy.All this will take time. Speedy decision-making is not something the EU is good at.But what about others? Where is the compassionate global response that could be expected, especially from Muslim Middle Eastern nations which have taken only a few escapees from the brutal conflict they are helping to finance in Syria. Saudi Arabia has offered Germany funds to build 200 mosques. Hopefully, Berlin will say no.Japan took in eleven asylum seekers last year although Tokyo faces labour shortages and the huge problem of an ageing population. The US has been slow and lumbering in its grudging decision to take in about 10,000 Syrians.Little can be expected meanwhile from Southeast Asian countries which were at loggerheads only a few months ago over their reluctance to house the Rohingya fleeing ethnic strife in Myanmar.The problem won’t go away, however. The UNHCR has warned that that worldwide displacement is at the highest level ever recorded, with the number of people forcibly displaced at the end of 2014 rising to a staggering 59.5 million compared to 51.2 million a year earlier and 37.5 million a decade ago.The increase represents the biggest leap ever seen in a single year. Moreover, the report said the situation was likely to worsen still further.Since early 2011, the main reason for the acceleration has been the war in Syria, now the world’s single-largest driver of displacement.If they are to mean anything to anyone in the coming years, the SDGs must focus on preventing, managing and resolving the many conflicts and the many inter-connected challenges of poverty, inequality and climate change which are devastating the world.So here’s my advice to the great and the good as they head for New York: tone down the rhetoric, tear up your speeches. Remember your speeches and the SDGs will be meaningless unless the new set of global development priorities also help tackle the reasons behind the global refugee crisis.

View from abroad: Free trade and the new world order (Originally published 01/08/2015 at Dawn.com)

The signal for exporting nations is clear: if you count — or want to count — in the new world order, make sure you join a regional free trade agreement.That’s the message that many global trading nations will be taking home if — as expected — the US-led Trans-Pacific Partnership (TPP) free trade deal is finalised this weekend in Hawaii.Certainly, most nations still pay lip service to the multilateral trading system symbolised by the World Trade Organisation (WTO). And yes, there is also a focus on bilateral free trade agreements as well as plurilateral deals.But once, again, loudly and clearly: the trend towards mega-regionals is unstoppable and that’s where savvy nations are headed.As described by one newspaper, FTAs are “the new Great Game at the dawn of the 21st century”.The TPP is about trade and commercial interests, certainly. It’s about creating growth and jobs. But it is about more than that: it’s also about overarching strategy and geopolitics and just which nation will emerge as the primary power in the Asia-Pacific region.So let’s be clear: the TPP is US-led and China — along with India and Indonesia — is excluded. Still, the TPP would create a 12-nation grouping including five countries in the Americas (Canada, the US, Chile, Mexico and Peru); five in Asia (Brunei, Japan, Malaysia, Singapore and Vietnam); and New Zealand. South Korea, the Philippines and Taiwan have voiced interest in joining.Once signed, the TPP will form a free trade area with a population of 800 million, which accounts for 30 per cent of global trade turnover and nearly 40 per cent of global output.That is impressive. And clearly those outside the TPP are worried. And are not sitting still.First, China. Convinced that TPP is meant to “contain” China’s regional and global outreach, Beijing is working on several fronts to counter the US led initiative.Beijing is actively promoting the Regional Comprehensive Economic Partnership (RCEP) which would include members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) as well as India.China is also taking up the Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP) which would bring together members of the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (APEC) forum.Most significantly, China’s President Xi Jinping has come up with the ambitious ‘One Belt, One Road’ initiative to connect an array of Asian and European nations through transport, infrastructure and ICT links — and ultimately through unfettered trade.India’s actions may not be that visible but Delhi is creating stronger trade links with Southeast Asian nations while also seeking to negotiate a free trade agreement with the European Union. The EU-India negotiations are in an impasse at the moment — but both sides are trying to inject much-needed momentum into the talks.Which brings us to the EU. European trade officials did not, at first, take the TPP very seriously. As the deal looks set to be signed, attitudes appear to be changing.The EU is negotiating FTAs with a number of Asian nations — Japan, Vietnam and Malaysia — which are also members of TPP. A free trade deal with New Zealand and Australia has not been ruled out. And Singapore has already signed a free trade pact with the EU.And, significantly, for the EU, China is demanding exploratory talks on the pros and cons of an EU-China FTA. Brussels has so far filibustered by insisting that it first wants to conclude ongoing negotiations on an EU-China Bilateral Investment Treaty (BIT) before considering a free trade deal. But sooner rather than later, the EU will have to acquiesce.The EU has of course responded by trying to hammer out its own Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) with Washington. But those negotiations have run afoul of civil society groups which fear that TTIP will lower EU health, food and other standards.In Asia, however, if it is to compete with the US and China, the EU needs to start FTA negotiations with the 10-member Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN). Europe could be even more ambitious and seek a trade deal which covers ASEAN as well as New Zealand and Australia.More ambitious still would be a trade agreement which would cover all 51 countries which have signed up for ASEM, the Asia Europe partnership.Clearly, therefore, trade agreements these days are about commercial and economic interests but also geopolitical outcomes.US President Barack Obama has no doubts that “if we don’t write the rules for free trade around the world, guess what, China will … and they’ll write those rules in a way that gives Chinese workers and Chinese businesses the upper hand.”Make no mistake: the TPP and other FTAs of its kind are not easy to negotiate. The scope of such deals is enormous — covering questions ranging from copyright law to labour and immigration issues, as well as more standard trade talk of import tariffs and exceptions for sensitive commodities.It is crucial that TPP — and the transatlantic TTIP if it is ever completed — keep the doors open, with no discriminatory terms set for newcomers.Finally, while it is understandable that countries, frustrated by the long-stalled Doha round of global trade talks, have turned their attention to various initiatives to set up regional FTAs, they should try to maintain the WTO’s central role in global trade liberalisation.The TPP process itself is an admission that the consensus-driven WTO is too cumbersome a venue for so-called “high-standard” trade deals. But it would be counterproductive and harmful to give up on the WTO and its ability to create a “level playing field” for all trading nations, big or small, rich or poor.

View from Abroad: Europe and the new world order (Originally published 11/07/2015 at dawn.com)

Entangled in the Greek debt crisis, few European policymakers had the time or interest this week to pay attention to the summit talks in the Russian city of Ufa between the leaders of Brazil, Russia, India, China and South Africa (BRICS).True, Europe has its hands full with Greece and the looming possibility of a Greek exit from the Eurozone. But the world doesn’t stop for Europe. And pretending that the BRICS and their self-confident leaders don’t matter — or matter little — is not an option.Discussions about the rapidly-transforming world, the role and influence of the BRICS and Europe’s relations with the emerging powers appear to be off the European Union agenda. For now, the focus is rightly on the existential threat posed by Grexit, the acrimony the Greek crisis has triggered across the EU and the worsening relationship among Eurozone leaders.Solving the Greek problem should of course take priority. But Europeans know that more is at stake. Italy’s Prime Minister Matteo Renzi has so far been most vocal in signalling his fears that the fury unleashed by the difficulties in Greece is damaging the very existence of the EU. But this thought is also in many other minds. If Europe can’t get its house in order, it really does run the risk of becoming irrelevant on an increasingly crowded global stage.For the moment, most Europeans seem to fall into two categories: those who fear the rapidly-changing world order and the increasingly long list of nations clamouring for a stronger role on the world stage and those who hope that if they look the other way, firm up their bonds with the United States, the world won’t change too much and the BRICS will gradually fade away.There are some, wiser, people in the middle: they may not be enthusiastic about the changes being made to the global status quo; but they also know that times are changing fast and that Europe needs to adapt, adjust and accommodate.It was on the advice of such people that despite strong pressure from the US not to do so, several EU countries decided to join the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank (AIIB) set up by China.While many Europeans voice fear that China is “buying up” European assets, cooler heads are urging the EU to join forces with China’s ambitious ‘One Belt, One Road’ transport networks to boost domestic growth and jobs.Similar arguments for and against cooperating with emerging nations are likely to come to the fore as Europeans discuss membership of the New Development Bank (NDB) being set up by the BRICS to fund projects in member countries.Headquartered in Shanghai, the bank is expected to be operational by end of 2015. Once fully operational, it will become an alternative financing source for the BRICS nations and other emerging markets.Like the head of the AIIB, the first chief of the BRICS bank, India’s K. V. Kamath has been quoted as saying that the NDB sees other multilateral lending institutions such as the International Monetary Fund (IMF), World Bank and Asian Development Bank (ADB) as partners rather than rivals.And yet many continue to be suspicious. The US and Japan have not yet joined the AIIB and many EU policymakers continue to voice fears that the new banks will fall short of high Western standards of transparency and accountability.The BRICS have made clear that they don’t really care. The Old Guard is welcome to come on board, but the world is moving on and they won’t stop for the laggards.Russia, given its tense relations with the West following the crisis in Ukraine and the annexation of Crimea, has taken the toughest line in its dealing with Europe and America. As Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov underlined in Ufa, emerging nations represent a “new polycentric system of international relations” and demonstrate new global centres of power.As he shook hands with his Chinese, Indian, South African and Brazilian counterparts, a beaming Russian President Vladimir Putin made clear that he was far from the sad and isolated man that the West wants him to be.And it’s not just about the BRICS. An array of newly-empowered nations and groupings are challenging Europe and America’s dominance of the post World War II order. Mexico, Indonesia, Korea, Turkey and Australia are part of MIKTA which claims to act as a bridge between old and new powers.New Zealand says it is the champion of “small nations” without whose support nothing can be achieved on the global stage. The Group of 20 remains relevant as a forum which brings together industrialised and emerging countries.And then there is also the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) which EU and Nato policymakers also tend to shrug off as an impotent “paper tiger”.They shouldn’t. As India and Pakistan set out on the road to membership of the SCO, it is clear that while the security organisation does not see itself as a rival to Nato, it does intend to make its voice heard on global security challenges.Underlining just how significantly the world has changed, the five BRICS countries and the six SCO members which include China, Russia, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan and Uzbekistan — joined by India, Pakistan, Afghanistan, Iran and Mongolia which have observer status — held a joint summit in Ufa.The Greek crisis was on the BRICS agenda of course. While Europe may not like the new world out there, emerging nations know that in an interconnected and interdependent world, what happens in Europe affects them. And that a failed Europe is in nobody’s interest.

View From Abroad: Europe, India and Modi — could be starting over (Originally published 20/06/2015 at dawn.com)

It has taken one year, but Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi has finally signalled an interest in reviving ties with the European Union. And the EU is ready to reciprocate, albeit cautiously.India has in fact long been the big gap in the EU’s outreach to Asia. While India and the EU declared that they were strategic partners some years ago, the relationship has never really taken off.Indians complained the EU was distracted by problems at home and its focus on China. Europeans said India was too mesmerised by the US to pay attention to Europe. Contacts between the two sides were desultory, slow-moving and lacklustre.Finally, after a year-long wait, it looks like this could change. Whether it is his “Make in India” campaign or plans for “Digital India” and “smart cities”, Modi knows he needs European know-how and money. Europe, for its part, is eager to be involved in the massive overhaul of the Indian economic system that the prime minister is promising.Modi’s warm embrace of foreign partners could soon therefore also extend to the EU and not just national European governments. To make the Delhi-Brussels rapprochement sustainable, action is required in some important areas.First, after a year of little or no high-level contact, Delhi and Brussels must resume negotiations on the much delayed Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA), a comprehensive deal covering all areas in goods, services and public procurement in both markets. Once signed, the agreement could act as an important launching pad for increased European investments in India.Second, India’s new economic programme opens up fresh avenues for increased EU-India alliance which go beyond the two sides’ traditional interaction. This could include cooperation in areas where both sides have a strong economic interest such as infrastructure investments, sustainable urbanisation, innovation and synergies between “Digital India” and the EU’s agenda for a Digital Single Market.Third and most importantly, there are hopes that EU and Indian leaders could meet for summit talks, possibly in November this year to coincide with the G20 summit in Antalya, Turkey. With no bilateral summit held over the last three years — the last such gathering was in February 2012 in Delhi — the EU-India relationship is in desperate need of renewed political direction to give it a new lease of life.Both sides agree that EU-India relations need to be broadened to include a “beyond-trade” agenda — and that Modi’s wide-ranging modernisation programme offers ample opportunities for such new synergies. Realistically, however, a quick relaunch of the stalled BTIA negotiations is required to get the relationship back on a constructive track and for discussions to begin in new areas.This may now happen. EU Trade Commissioner Cecilia Malmström and Indian Commerce Minister Nirmala Sitharaman, who met on the margins of an OECD meeting in Paris on June 4, have agreed to restart the BTIA talks as soon as possible. Contacts are expected to resume soon, leading to cautious hopes that the deal — eight years in the making — will finally be clinched early next year.The EU has made clear that it is targeting the emerging well-off Indian middle class for enhanced market access in automobiles, wines and spirits, and cheese. Brussels is also calling for reform in Indian laws on intellectual property rights, trade and environment, trade and labour, and wants liberal access in insurance, banking and retail trade. India, for its part, is insisting on more labour mobility, professional work visas and recognition as a data-secure country to attract more European investments in its high-tech sector.With two-way trade estimated at around €72.5 billion in 2014 while the EU’s investment stock in India was €34.7 billion in 2013, there is certainly ample room for improvement. But agreement on BTIA will require that both sides summon up the political will to look beyond the array of technical issues to the deeper strategic importance of their relations.In order to get India and the EU talking to each other on these and other equally interesting topics, Modi’s can-do spirit needs to filter down to different, less adventurous echelons of the Indian bureaucracy. The European External Action Service, meanwhile, must work in tandem with the European Commission’s trade and other departments to hammer out a fresh EU-India agenda for action which looks at new areas and interests. Such an action plan should be short, snappy and action-oriented, rather than the long wish list which the EU traditionally draws up with and for its partners. Hopefully, Such a pithy document could then be approved at the EU-India summit later this year.Above all, both sides must take a fresh look at each other. European member states have already recognised the importance of India, both as a regional actor and an influential global player. It is time the EU institutions shed their reservations and engaged with India as an increasingly powerful 21st century partner.Equally, India should recognise that while relations with national European governments are important, the EU also has much to offer. It would be a pity if the full potential of EU-India ties were to remain untapped and unexplored for another long period.

View From Abroad: Pivotal moments on the global agenda (Originally published 06/06/2015 at dawn.com)

Read the headlines and there’s no doubt: the world is a nasty, violent, unequal place where man kills man and women are either victims of violence, discrimination or quite simply invisible.Take a closer look and it’s equally clear that despite the killing, exploitation and bloodshed, there are worthy people struggling to build a better world.Every so often, the global community has once-in-a-lifetime chance to aim high and set ambitions for a new way of living and working together. To create hope, sketch out new horizons, set new goals.In Brussels this week, the focus has been on a number of milestones, make-or-break global events which merit stronger attention and scrutiny.Two stand out because of their global significance. First, in September this year, the United Nations General Assembly will decide on a new, post-2015 agenda for sustainable development.The so-called sustainable development goals (SDGs) will take the place of the Millennium Development Goals agreed by the UN at the turn of the century. Implementation of the MDGs has been patchy, uneven and not-too impressive.But for the last fifteen years, emerging nations have been engaged in an uphill battle to make progress on reducing poverty, improving health care and access to education. And more.The SDGs under discussion are more in number, higher in ambition and target not just developing countries, but also developed ones.Second, in December at an international meeting in Paris, the focus will be on fighting climate change by committing to new targets for reducing CO2 emissions, both in industrialised and emerging countries.It’s not going to be easy, given the different levels of development, different energy mixes and economic priorities — but if agreement is reached, it will be a strong sign that when push comes to shove, rich and poor nations can work together on tackling an issue of immense global importance.Issues related to the financing of the SDGs will be discussed at a conference in Addis Ababa in Ethiopia in early July. Clearly, if the new SDGs — there are 17 in all, with 167 targets — are going to be implemented, more money will be needed.Official Development Aid will still be important — but won’t be enough. Funding will have to come from the private sector, from non-governmental organisations, from private individuals. Creative financing will have to be the buzzword.There is more. Women’s rights are climbing higher and higher up the global agenda. In Brussels this week, the focus will be on the UN Security Council Resolution 1325 which addresses the inordinate impact of war on women but also spotlights the pivotal role of women in conflict management, conflict resolution and sustainable peace.At a Nato conference, discussions focused on how the UNSCR 1325 could help to boost the participation of women in the Alliance’s armed forces.Only a day later, at an EU debate, the emphasis was on using the same resolution to ensure the participation of women in peace negotiations and the protection of women at times of conflict.It’s been fifteen years since the UNSCR 1325 was adopted. And when the review takes place in September this year, countries will be asked to show just what they have done to shelter women from the horrible effects of war and conflict.The 20th anniversary of the adoption of the wider Beijing Platform of Action on women’s rights later this year will also provide much food for thought.Although some progress has been made, the struggle for women’s development and empowerment continues to face many obstacles due to government neglect, discrimination, family traditions and actions by religious authorities.The situation is particularly serious in fragile or conflict-affected states where because of conflict, weak governance, political instability, oppressive practices and traditions, sections of society and in particular women are marginalised and under-represented.The good news is that achieving gender equality and empowering all women and girls are recognised important priorities in the post-2015 development agenda.But how committed are governments to giving priority attention to women and girls in their national development plans?Finally, inequality. There is consensus that we live in an unequal world. The world economy may be growing fairly rapidly but there are increasingly vast differences in income, equal opportunities, education, skills and access to health within countries and between countries.Inequality has been identified as one of the biggest threats to the world economy and global stability and is a salient issue in the post-2015 development debates.The focus is often mainly on inequality in emerging nations but widening inequalities and social imbalances are also evident in Europe and have worsened because of the Eurozone’s economic woes.A study by Oxfam released earlier this year warns that global wealth is increasingly being concentrated in the hands of a small wealthy elite.“These wealthy individuals have generated and sustained their vast riches through their interests and activities in a few important economic sectors, including finance and pharmaceuticals/healthcare,” the report warns.So while the rich get richer — the poor struggle to make ends meet and the middle classes live in a fragile environment where any small negative movement can bring them crashing down to the bottom of the ladder.The important international conferences coming up over the next six months will set the world on a course for conflict and discord — or, hopefully, lead to joint efforts to tackle some of the key challenges facing the world in the 21st century. The choice is ours.

View From Abroad: Getting connected — the secret to reviving Asia-Europe ties (Originally published 16/05/2015 at dawn.com)

To count in an increasingly complex and interdependent world, you have to be connected. This is true for individuals, institutions, companies, continents, regions and countries. The growth of social media sites is testimony to the increased connectivity of individuals and groups.No connections translate into lack of influence. It means no voice, no role and no chance to make an impact. What’s true for individuals is also true for countries. The nations which have clout in this rapidly-changing 21st century are those that are connected to the rest of the world.That’s why the European Union is busy breaking down internal barriers to trade, services and the movement of goods among its 28-member states. It is also the reason that the EU and the United States are negotiating an ambitious and trade-boosting Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) and it is also why the US is also hoping to conclude the Trans-Pacific Partnership (TTP) negotiations by the end of the year.Asians are embarked on a headline-grabbing connectivity agenda of their own. The Connectivity Masterplan drawn up by Asean (Association of South-East Asian Nations) is impressive in its scope and content. And of course China’s “One Belt, One Road” initiative is making waves worldwide.As these different initiatives illustrate, connectivity can and does take many forms. The first focus is clearly on transport — building roads, bridges, railways as well as maritime and air routes. There are also digital networks.Connectivity is also about building networks that connect people, schools and colleges, media, civil society organisations, businesses, policymakers and institutions.Being connected is good for the economy by helping to boost trade and investments and creating jobs. It is good for creativity and innovation. It is good for fostering mutual understanding. And, of course, it is very good for peace and stability.And that’s why is encouraging to see the attention now being paid to Asia-Europe connectivity. The topic is high on the agenda of Asem (Asia Europe Meetings) and is being widely recognised as a vital element in the efforts to revive Asem for its third decade.Certainly, compared to 1996 when Asem was first launched in Bangkok in 1996 or even 10 years ago, there is now a stronger EU-Asian conversation on trade, business, security and culture. As Asem celebrates its 20th anniversary in Mongolia next year, connectivity is expected to be an important driver for further Asia-Europe cooperation.Asia-Europe economic connectivity has grown. With total Asia-Europe trade in 2012 estimated at 1.37 trillion euros, Asia has become the EU’s main trading partner, accounting for a third of total trade and surpassing the North American Free Trade Agreement (Nafta). More than a quarter of European outward investments head for Asia while Asia’s emerging global players are seeking out business deals in Europe.The increased connectivity is reflected in the mutual Asia-Europe quest to negotiate Free Trade Agreements and investment accords. The EU and China are currently negotiating a bilateral investment agreement. The FTAs concluded by the EU with South Korea and Singapore and similar deals under negotiation with Japan, India and individual Asean countries are important in consolidating EU-Asia relations.Beyond trade and economics, Asia and Europe are linked through an array of cooperation accords. Discussions on climate change, pandemics, illegal immigration, maritime security, urbanisation and green growth, among others, are frequent between multiple government ministries and agencies in both regions, reflecting a growing recognition that 21st century challenges can only be tackled through improved global governance and, failing that, through “patchwork governance” involving cross-border and cross-regional alliances.Importantly, connectivity is the new Asem buzzword. The significance of Asia-Europe connectivity — including digital connectivity — was underscored by the Asem summit in Milan last year, with leaders underlining the contribution increased ties could make to economic prosperity and sustainable development and to promoting free and seamless movement of people, trade, investment, energy, information, knowledge and ideas and greater institutional linkages.The summit urged the establishment of an integrated, sustainable, secure, efficient and convenient air, maritime and land transportation system, including intermodal solutions, in and between Asia and Europe. It also noted the usefulness of an exchange of best practices and experiences on areas of common interest, relating for example to the governance of the EU Single Market and the implementation of the Master Plan on Asean Connectivity.A meeting of Asem summit in Milan transport ministers held in Riga discussed a common vision for the development of transport networks between Asia and Europe and emphasised the significance of connectivity between the two regions for achieving economic prosperity and sustainable development. The importance of railway links was especially underlined.Certainly, much of the talk on Asia-Europe connectivity is centred on Chinese President Xi Jinping’s plans for the Silk Road Economic Belt and a 21st century maritime Silk Road (termed together “One Belt, One Road”) aimed at building two economic corridors with important development implications for many nations, creates new opportunities for further China-EU cooperation in areas such as infrastructure, trade and investment as well as energy and resources.The initiative raises many questions: how will Europe benefit from the construction of the Silk Road Economic Belt? What is the potential for synergies between the Chinese and European infrastructure and connectivity policies? Which sectors are likely to benefit most from such cooperation? What will be the role of the Asian Infrastructure Investment Bank in financing the “One Belt, One Road” initiative? What is the role of youth and women in the drive to connect Asia and Europe?Is it only about infrastructure or can Asem also encourage institutional and people-to-people connectivity? The answer was given at a meeting of Asem education ministers — also in Riga — which highlighted the importance Asia-Europe cooperation in areas like mobility of students, teachers, researchers, ideas and knowledge. Finally, while increased connectivity would offer opportunities for business and trade, the darker security implications linked to the cross-border movement of arms, drugs and terrorists also need to be addressed.

View From Abroad: Getting excited about Asean (Originally published 28/02/2015 at dawn.com)

As China’s economy slows and Indian growth remains uncertain, global attention has switched to the end-year creation of a tariff-free 10-nation Southeast Asian “single market” as the newest and most exciting facet of rising Asia.The excitement is justified. Taken together, members of the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (Asean) have a population of 620 million, a growth rate of five per cent and a combined gross domestic product of almost $2.5 trillion. A growing middle class across the region has emerged as an avid consumer of foreign and domestic goods and services. Not surprisingly, global business is enthusiastic. Trade is booming and foreign investments into the region are rising.Significantly, even as they strive to get elements of the Asean Economic Community (AEC) in place by year-end, countries in the region are already crafting an even more ambitious “post-2015 vision” for further integration. The ambition is to move beyond trade and economics to focus on still largely incomplete plans for building a political and security community and preparing the groundwork for stronger social and cultural integration. One visionary goal is to create a common Asean time zone — as opposed to the current three spanning the Asean region — to facilitate cross-border business and finance.The AEC roadmap includes four pillars: a single market and production base (including the free flow of goods, services, skilled labour, capital and investment), a competitive economic region, equitable economic development and integration into the global economy.But challenges remain. First, don’t expect the AEC to enter into force with a “big bang” on Jan 1, 2016. Not all elements of the single market will or can be in place on schedule and while progress is being made to reduce trade barriers and ease investment, as well as ensure the free flow of goods, services, investment and skilled labour, the devil is in the detail — and in enforcement and implementation. An Asean Scorecard which keeps countries up to date on progress on the AEC says about 80pc of the work on completing the AEC has been done. But Asean experts acknowledge that the remaining 20pc covers “the most difficult” tasks.Malaysian Trade Minister Mustapa Mohamed, whose country holds the rotating presidency of the Southeast Asian bloc this year, has said the full impact of integration may not be felt until perhaps 2020, recognising that there are border issues, customs, immigration and different regulations, which still need to be tackled. Businesses must still navigate a complex landscape of different product standards and regulations that make it hard to sell across the region and hamper the ability of new companies to enter the market.Surprisingly, many Asean businesses appear to know little of the AEC’s pros and cons. Vietnamese officials said recently that 60pc of their country’s business community “had no idea what the AEC is”. A survey by the Singapore Business Federation in January found two out of five firms were completely unaware of it. Yet establishing the AEC will impact positively on many industries, including electronics, car parts and components, as well as chemicals, textiles, and clothing. Once completed, the hope is that the AEC will boost intra-Asean trade which currently stands at a modest 24pc of the region’s overall trade flows.Second, Asean still has much to do to connect with citizens. Increasingly vocal civil society representatives are adamant that Asean must live up to its goal of becoming “people-centred” and less elitist. In contrast to earlier years and outdated conventional wisdom, Asean civil society is proactive and striving to become deeply involved in efforts to ensure stronger human rights protection and promotion across the region. In a recent statement, the Asean People’s Forum (APF) — Asean’s largest civil society group — listed a number of problems in the region, among them grave human rights violations, corruption and poor governance. Intimidation of human rights defenders was also raised.There are signs that governments are paying heed. As current Asean chair Malaysia has indicated that one of its main priorities will be to engage Asean citizens and to promote greater understanding of Asean initiatives and projects. “We also hope to steer Asean closer to the people of Southeast Asia: to make this institution part of people’s daily lives, by creating a truly people-centred Asean,” says Malaysian Prime Minister Najib Razak. The rhetoric has to be turned into action, however.Third, for all the hype, Asean still has to deal with obstacles created by economic nationalism, protectionism and resistance to foreign-owned industries which persists in many member countries. Malaysia’s trade minister Mohamed has said he will not avoid the politically sensitive task of tackling protectionism in Asean such as local content requirements, mandatory product standards and import restrictions.More generally, maritime disputes in the South China Sea as well as incidents of religious sectarianism, rising intolerance, human trafficking and corruption are further challenges to surmount as are differences in levels of development and political and economic models among Asean states. Additionally, there is concern that Indonesia under President Jokowi may be too focused on the country’s domestic questions to play its traditional leadership role in Asean. Meanwhile Indonesian business continues to be wary of opening up the country’s markets to Asean competitors.Looking aheadThe Nay Pi Taw declaration on Asean’s post-2015 vision adopted last November sets out an impressive agenda for the region’s future. While deepening economic integration and connectivity remains on the agenda, Asean leaders have identified external relations and the building of political/security and socio-cultural communities as a priority.There is no shortage of interesting ideas: leaders of Indonesia and Malaysia in recent weeks have been pushing for a common time zone arguing that this would help businesses and allow for coordinated opening times for banks and stock markets. An Asean Open Skies Agreement is designed to create a single aviation market and allow for more flights, which will increase trade, investment and tourism. There are suggestions to set up an Asean regional infrastructure fund. Plans for strengthening the Asean Secretariat and improving coordination among member governments are being studied by a high-level task force. East Timor’s Asean membership is under internal discussion.Asean is a business opportunity for the West but also for other Asian countries — a fact that India, China and Japan are more than aware of.

View From Abroad: European lessons for Asian security (Originally published 14/02/2015 at dawn.com)

The just-negotiated ceasefire to stem the conflict in eastern Ukraine may or may not last. But the hard work put in by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French leader Francois Hollande as they negotiated for over 18 hours with Ukrainian President Petro Poroshenko and Russia’s Vladimir Putin points to the still-potent and constructive security role that European states can play in their neighbourhood.It also underlines that — when it comes to the crunch — it’s Germany, France, and sometimes Britain, rather than the European Union which can do the hard labour involved in defusing tensions and securing a semblance of peace.True, the crisis has spotlighted divisions in the European Union over relations with Russia. The current sanctions regime against Moscow is not popular with all EU states.And certainly, the collapse of previous ceasefires has stoked doubts as to whether this one will hold. But before they throw up their hands in despair and accept confrontation with Russia — or follow America in seeking to send military aid to the Ukrainian army — European leaders will certainly try — and try again — to secure peace in the neighbourhood.And the lesson that peace is worth patiently, painstakingly and repeatedly striving for is an important one for Asia’s many star-crossed nations.This is also why the new European Security Strategy that the EU intends to hammer out by the end of the year should not ignore the different ways in which Europe can help Asia to deal with its many security challenges.Much has changed in the world since the last European Security Strategy was released in 2003, in the aftermath of the Iraq war. As EU foreign and security policy chief Federica Mogherini pointed out at the Munich Security Conference last weekend, the world today is a disorderly place. “The world is far from being a unipolar one, nor is it truly multipolar ... maybe we are living in times of an absence of poles,” Mogherini underlined, adding: “The big question for all of us is ... how do we manage complexity?”Asians are also struggling with the same challenge. For the first time in history, Asia is home to four — even five — important powers: a rising and increasingly assertive China, Japan that wants more influence, Korea searching for an expanded regional role, India which is being wooed by many as a counterweight to China and Asean, the regional grouping which has made peace and cooperation its leitmotif for many years.Trade and investment are the backbone of EU-Asia relations so far. But an EU-Asia conversation on security is set to be the new frontier. The EU cannot afford to be outside the loop of the dramatic geopolitical power games, rivalry and tension being played out in Asia between China, Japan and India — and the 10 south-east Asian members of Asean. Increased spending on arms across Asia is one indication that the region feels insecure, fragile and uneasy.The so-called Asian “paradox” — the fact that the region’s economies are closely knit together but governments are still grappling with historical tensions, is pushing some in Asia to take another, closer look at how Europe has been able to deal with its own tensions.Asian perceptions of security are also changing. The focus on territorial security is shifting to the importance of non-traditional security threats, such as climate change, pandemics, extremism and human trafficking, with some Asians putting the emphasis on “human security”. Across Asia, there is a recognition of the need for a collective or cooperative security architecture. But cooperative security in Asia remains underdeveloped, lacking collective security, regional peacekeeping and conflict resolution functions.Differing threat perceptions, mutual distrust, territorial disputes, concerns over sovereignty make things very difficult.But as their views of security evolve, for many in Asia, the EU is the prime partner for dealing with non-traditional security dilemmas, including food, water and energy security as well as climate change.Asian views of Europe’s security role are changing. Unease about the dangerous political and security fault lines that run across the region and the lack of a strong security architecture has prompted many in Asia to take a closer look at Europe’s experience in ensuring peace, easing tensions and handling conflicts.As Asia grapples with historical animosities and unresolved conflicts, earlier scepticism about Europe’s security credentials are giving way to recognition of Europe’s “soft power” in peace-making and reconciliation, crisis management, conflict resolution and preventive diplomacy, human rights, the promotion of democracy and the rule of law. Europeans, too, are becoming more aware of the global implications of instability in Asia. Clearly, the EU as the world’s largest trading bloc needs safe trading routes and sea lanes.Also, Europeans are now recognising that fragile peace in Asia will have an enormous impact on global security. That is one reason that the EU has signed Asean’s Treaty of Amity and Cooperation and is seeking entry to the East Asia Summit in order to sit beside the United States and Russia.An important challenge for the EU in its relations with Asia is to retain its identity vis-à-vis the much more dominant role played by the US. As it fashions its distinctive security role in Asia, the EU must make an effort to its own distinct profile in promoting multilateral approaches, the rule of law, good governance and regional integration.And that’s what makes the progress made with Russia over Ukraine so important.

This time it can be different: SDGs need more funds, changes in mindset (Originally published 26/01/2015 at friendsofeurope.org)

Prepare for a pivotal year for development cooperation. For most of 2015, the focus will be on seeking to define a transformative agenda for poverty eradication and shaping social, economic and environmental development over the next 15 years.Priority attention will be on knitting together a “post-2015” blueprint for poverty eradication and sustainable development which follows on from the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) of 2000 and the 2012 United Nations Conference on Sustainable Development (Rio+20). Agreement on the “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) is expected at the UN General Assembly in September this year.Consensus on a new set of goals – however long – is important in order to focus minds and ensure more coherence in global development. Even more crucially, however, implementation of the SDGs will demand a broader, more inclusive mindset, more international consultation and certainly more active civil society engagement. Additional resources, renewed attention on updating existing financial tools and instruments and creating new ones will also be needed.As such, the conference on Financing for Development Conference to be held in Addis Ababa in July must be well-prepared, with participants ready to look at traditional and innovative ways to fund growth and development.Also in 2015, a climate change agreement is hoped for at the December COP21 ministerial meeting in Paris. Last but not least, the EU has designated 2015 as its first-ever European Year of Development.Significantly, the 2015 summits are linked. An agreement at the Addis Ababa financing conference will provide momentum for the dialogue on the SDGs which will, in turn, create an impetus ahead of the critical climate talks.A radically changed environmentThe rhetoric in 2000 was impressive. But fifteen years after the adoption of the MDGs, the jury is still out on nations’ record in meeting the eight targets. The headline goal for extreme poverty reduction appears to have been met five years ahead of its target. Significant successes in school enrolment and mortality rates for under-fives have been achieved (albeit at slightly less than target rates). However, progress in meeting other important indicators remains patchy.This time, it’s different. The MDGs were brief, focused, easily understood and communicated – and represented a rare international consensus for development. The SDGs reflect the concerns and priorities of a radically changed world. As EU Development Commissioner Neven Mimica pointed out, “the world is a very different place in 2015 to what it was in 2000. We can no longer focus only on eradicating poverty; today’s challenges are much more inter-related and we have to make sure that we achieve sustainable development in all of its three dimensions: environmental, social and economic.”The SDG consultative process has been long and painstaking. The 17 SDGs and 169 targets agreed by the United Nations Open Working Group and endorsed by the General Assembly last year, represent a global wish list and cover the broad themes of the MDGs – ending poverty and hunger, and improving health, education and gender equality – but also include specific goals to reduce inequality, make cities safe, address climate change and promote peaceful societies. As such, they bring together two frontiers – development and climate – and tackle global public goods problems as well as national obstacles. There’s something for everyone – almost.For purists, the list is too long, the goals too disparate. “What the world needs is a plan of action to replace the Millennium Development Goals. What’s on offer is a shopping list,” according to Kevin Watkins, Director at the Overseas Development Institute. “The 17 SDGs and 169 targets cover everything from the urgent and measurable – eliminating poverty, cutting child deaths, universal provision of education, water and sanitation, and climate stability – to the vaguely aspirational.”Certainly, the goals are going to be much more complex to describe, implement and monitor.On the plus side, however, the SDGs could encourage a more holistic approach to development and offer a chance for more partnerships and collaboration. Crucially, the SDGs will be universal, which means all countries – rich and poor – will be required to consider them when crafting their national policies. This is different from the MDGs, which were applicable to all and marketed as anti-poverty goals for poor countries.Significantly, the adoption of the SDGs goes beyond the pure development agenda. They signal a determination by nations to jointly tackle complex global challenges. The importance of sustainable development will be accepted and highlighted as fundamental. Not least, they will reinforce an unprecedented process of international consultation and commitment at a time when many are sceptical about multilateral cooperation.Global partnership for development.MDG 8 urged development actors to forge a global partnership for development. Turning that ambition into reality means focusing on finding the resources to implement the post-2015 agenda. “Funding is crucial for credibility on climate and post-2015 efforts,” according to UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon who believes that all public, private, domestic and international funding sources need to be tapped.Public financing and Official Development Aid (ODA) will be central to supporting the implementation of the SDGs. But money generated from the private sector, through tax reforms, and through a crackdown on illicit financial flows and corruption will be vital.Certainly, there will be less ODA to spur implementation. Aid flows look set to stagnate at best, and continue declining in importance to emerging economies. Public-private partnerships will be crucial. New development actors are emerging as an important source of funds for developing countries, especially for the financing of infrastructure. Foreign direct investments (FDI) in emerging countries are on the rise as are impact investments, Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities and philanthropy.Remittances from workers abroad are a huge boon to their countries of origin. Governments are also under pressure to increase domestic resource mobilisation through more effective tax collection and anti-corruption measures.According to Amina J Mohammed, special advisor to the UN Secretary General on post-2015 development planning, “the private sector also has responsibilities and all must work in partnership, within and across sectors,” adding: “Indeed, partnership is critical but means so much more than just collaboration. Partnership is about the integration of visions, values, plans, accountability, resources and knowledge sharing.The world in 2015 will continue to be a difficult and hazardous place. The SDGs are one way of ensuring that the goal of a fairer, more equal and more stable world is kept alive.

Forget the headlines: Life is getting better (Originally published 24/01/2015 at dawn.com)

Cast a glance at the headlines and it’s clear: the world is a violent, cruel and unforgiving place. Inequality is rampant. Terrorists stalk our streets. Poor, homeless people crowd our shelters. It’s bleak and grim — and not getting better.

Only, it is getting better. Take a second look and its equally obvious, as Max Roser of the Oxford Martin School explains, that we are becoming less violent and increasingly more tolerant, that we are leading healthier lives, are better fed, and that poverty around the world is declining rapidly. Taking these facts into account paints a very positive picture of how the world is changing.In fact, it could improve further. For most of this year, the United Nations, aid donors and world development agencies will be focusing on defining — and crucially also, on ways of implementing — a transformative global agenda that will shape our social, economic and environmental development for at least the next 15 years.Agreement on the “Sustainable Development Goals” (SDGs) which are expected to follow on from the 8 Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) agreed in 2000, is expected at the UN General Assembly in September this year.Taken together, the 17 SDGs and 169 targets represent a global wish list for a fairer, more just and more prosperous world. The proposed goals cover the broad themes of the MDGs — ending poverty and hunger, and improving health, education and gender equality — but also include specific goals to reduce inequality, make cities safe, address climate change and promote peaceful societies. There’s something for everyone.It is hoped that the SDGs will encourage a more holistic approach to development at national and international level, and offer a chance for more partnerships and collaboration.Crucially, the next set of goals will be universal, which means all countries will be required to consider them when crafting their national policies. Officially, the eight MDGs were applicable to all but they have been marketed as anti-poverty goals for poor countries that are funded by wealthy nations.There have been grumbles that 17 goals are too many, but it is understood that the number is unlikely to be reduced. Instead, the number of targets may be trimmed. Implementation is expected in 2016.Paying for the ambitious post-2015 agenda is a key task ahead. “Funding is crucial for credibility on climate and post-2015 efforts,” according to UN Secretary General Ban Ki Moon. He has said all public, private, domestic and international funding sources needed to be tapped.According to experts, public financing and donor aid will be central to support the implementation of the SDGs. But money generated from the private sector, through tax reforms, and a crackdown on illicit financial flows and corruption will be vital.A major conference on financing for development will be held in Addis Ababa in July 2015.Adoption of the SDGs goes beyond the pure development agenda. Their adoption will in fact reassure the world that, in spite of everything, 193 members of the United Nations are able to jointly respond to complex global challenges.Second, they will reaffirm the validity of universal human rights and the principles of sustainable development as fundamental to human civilisation. Not least, they will reinforce an unprecedented process of international consultation and commitment that defies the swan songs to multilateral cooperation and international law.Still, there is hard work ahead. One of the great successes of the MDGs was that they were brief and to the point. They could be communicated easily and provided a focus for advocacy.The next time around, with 17 SDGs, it will not be the same. They bring together two frontiers — development and climate — and tackle global public goods problems as well as national obstacles.They also apply universally — to all countries rich and poor — which has major implications. So it’s obvious that they are going to be much more complex to describe, implement, and monitor.In short, they’re going to have to function quite differently from the MDGs.Certainly, there will be less official development assistance to spur implementation. Aid flows look set to stagnate, at best and continue declining in importance to emerging economies.If not aid, then what? Well, public-private partnerships will be crucial. New development actors are emerging as an important source of funds for developing countries, especially for the financing of infrastructure. Foreign direct investments in emerging countries are on the rise as are impact investments, Corporate Social Responsibility activities and philanthropy.Remittances from workers abroad are a huge boon to their countries of origin. Governments are also under pressure to increase domestic resource mobilisation through more effective tax collection and anti-corruption measures.The world in 2015 will continue to be a difficult, hazardous place. But behind the scenes, there will be people making sure that the vision of a fairer, more equal and more peaceful world is kept alive