View from Abroad: Peshawar, Paris, Pegida and me (Originally published 10/01/2015 at dawn.com)

Just when you think it can’t get any worse, it does.On the second day of my long-awaited trip to Pakistan in December last year, I woke up to the news of the horrible massacre of school children in Peshawar.Like most people, I wept for the innocent lost lives, the bereaved families and a once honourable country which has lost its path, becoming mired in ever-more indecent violence and barbarism.As I made my way home to Brussels a few days into 2015, I was preparing to write about Pegida, Germany’s nascent and very toxic ‘anti-Islamisation’ movement which is making headlines across the globe.But then tragedy struck again as terrorists, unfortunately and wrongly, described as Islamists gunned down 12 people at the offices of Charlie Hebdo, the Paris-based satirical magazine.As France and the world mourned the dead and worried about the freedom of expression, diversity and tolerance, I asked myself: how many tears can you shed? How long and often can you weep? Will the hatred, violence and extremism ever end?I don’t know the answers but I know that whether we recognise the link or not, Peshawar, Paris and Pegida are, tragically, connected.I know that money, encouragement and support for the extremists whether in the Middle East, Pakistan, Asia or Europe can be traced to extremist Wahabi state and non-state actors in Saudi Arabia and other Gulf states.I know that Far Right groups in Europe and the United States are spreading a hysterical and toxic anti-Islam message, gaining traction and popularity as the economic slowdown persists and unemployment continues to rise.I know that politicians in Europe, the US and the Muslim world are unwilling and unable to rise to the challenge of building a strong counter-narrative of tolerance and discrimination.I know that 2015 is going to be a defining, testing year for humanity’s ability to live together in peace while accepting differences in religion, colour and culture.I know that the violence-loving, gun-toting men and (some) women who kill, maim and torture are outside the boundaries of any religion. There is no “Islamic State”, only murderers and criminals. There is no “good” Taliban, just blood-thirsty barbarians.I know that just as is the case for freedom-loving people in Pakistan, life for Muslims in Europe is going to get tougher in the aftermath of the recent terrorist attacks.But I also know that sanity and good sense will probably and hopefully prevail in both Pakistan and Europe.In the end, it’s not the politicians who will stop the rot. It is the people, the ordinary men, women and young people who say “enough is enough” to violence and intolerance.I know it is possible. As we visited Lahore only hours before the massacre in Peshawar, girls and boys came up to us to talk and take pictures, giggling and chuckling, proud of Pakistan and their heritage.The Badshahi Mosque and the Lahore Fort sparkled in the sun but it was the laughter and the cheeky jokes of the young men and women that warmed our souls.This was Pakistan the way it really is, the way it should always be. Hours later as we tried to come to grips with the tragedy in Peshawar, I took solace in the hope I had seen in the eyes of the young people of Lahore.In Europe too, it is the people who will stop the continent from descending into a dangerous downward spiral of anti-Muslim sentiment.True, the Far Right is gaining momentum. Talk of a “clash of civilisations” is rife. But equally those who want a multicultural and tolerant Europe are speaking out.Pegida gatherings have been dwarfed by massive counter-demonstrations in Dresden, Berlin and Cologne where people have spoken in support of immigrants and condemned intolerance.The famous Cologne cathedral and Berlin’s Brandenburg gate have switched off lighting as a sign of protest against xenophobic rallies. German Chancellor Angela Merkel has warned against hate and discrimination.In the aftermath of the Paris killings, European governments will certainly clamp down hard on radicals and would-be terrorists. They are right to do so. But in the medium and long-term, European politicians must also focus on the compelling need to integrate and accept their Muslim citizens.Retribution and revenge must not be allowed to take centre stage. If it does, it will play into the hands of the extremists.This is a dangerous moment. Yes, it is war. But it not a conflict between Islam and the West. The battle being fought so cruelly is between people who believe in humanity and criminals and terrorists who, quite simply, want to kill.

Shada Islam quoted in 'Europe Muted on CIA Torture Report Amid Islamic State Conflict' (The Washington Post with Bloomberg 10/12/2014)

European governments gave a muted response to a U.S. report on Central Intelligence Agency torture, declining the opportunity to criticize the Obama administration amid concerns over current security threats.

While China accused the U.S. of hypocrisy, the European Union and the U.K. moderated their response to the findings of the report by Democrats on the Senate Intelligence Committee.

“There’s a deep reluctance to open old wounds just as we face the challenge of Islamic State and parts of the Middle East go up in flames,” Shada Islam, Director of Policy at the Friends of Europe advisory group in Brussels, said in a phone interview. “Many European governments were complicit or at least turned a blind eye to what the CIA was doing.”

The report, which focused on the agency’s “enhanced interrogation techniques” in the aftermath of the Sept. 11 attacks, revealed that U.S.-held terrorism suspects received more brutal treatment than previously known.

For the full article, visit http://washpost.bloomberg.com/Story?docId=1376-NGBYTJ6K50YD01-0BB8G4EV8H8HOEQDREHOMQHNBP

View from Abroad: Europe waits for trade talks but Modi ‘looks East’ (Originally published 22/11/2014 at dawn.com)

These are busy times for Asian leaders — and Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi is among the busiest.Last week as he criss-crossed Asia, clinching business deals, attracting much-needed investments and building strategic alliances, Modi found time for a quick meeting with the European Union’s outgoing European Council President Herman Van Rompuy to underline that the “EU should take advantage of the new economic environment in India”.The two men apparently agreed that the United Nations should hold an annual international “Yoga Day”.But not much was apparently said on the EU-India free trade agreement that the two sides have been trying to negotiate for the last seven years and which now seems to have run into the ground.EU officials are still hoping that the negotiations will be back on track soon. But the Indian leader is too busy looking elsewhere.As of this autumn, Modi has his nation and the rest of Asia abuzz with his determination to inject new life into India’s “Look East” policy which, following his incessant Asian travels, including recent talks with Asean (Association of South-East Asian Nations) and other Asian leaders in Myanmar, has morphed into what Modi proudly describes as a “Look East — and Act East” policy.India’s decision to step up its game in Asia is no surprise. As an emerging power with “great power” ambitions, India has no option but to seek a stronger role in a volatile neighbourhood and a region marked by often-changing geopolitical rivalries and alliances. Also, tapping into the region’s dynamic economies is critical for India’s own growth and reform agenda.Certainly, China has the funds needed to help finance India’s infrastructure requirements while Japan and South Korea have the technical experience and expertise. South-east Asian markets are important for Indian investors and exporters. Sustainable peace with Pakistan may still be a long way off but is essential for India’s development and peace and stability in the region.While in Myanmar, Modi made the headlines by pushing his “Make in India” campaign, which aims to turn the country into a global manufacturing hub, by cutting red tape, upgrading infrastructure and making it easier for companies to do business. Modi promised to implement long-delayed plans to boost trade and deepen ties with Asean so that current trade flows could rise from $75 billion today to $100 billion by 2015.In fact, the policy is not new. India has long spoken of developing a “Look East” policy, but has lagged behind China in forging ties with emerging economies in South-East Asia. Tackling China’s influence on Asean and South Asia is still a challenge but India benefits from the fact that Japan, Asean and others in the region are certainly looking to reduce their economic dependence on Beijing by reaching out to Delhi.Indian commentators also underline that Modi used the Asean meeting to articulate for the first time India’s intent to enhance “balance” in the Asia Pacific region, arguing that the word was carefully chosen to reflect India’s shared concerns with other Asian countries about China’s growing assertiveness in the region.Interestingly, Indian defence cooperation is being stepped up with several Indian Ocean states including Sri Lanka and Maldives. India will supply four naval patrol vessels to Hanoi as part of $100 million Line of Credit signed last month. The two countries have also decided to ramp up cooperation in the field of hydrocarbon, civil nuclear energy and space.Given Modi’s focus on the Asia-Pacific, the EU’s new leaders may have to wait a long time before he signals a real interest in upgrading bilateral ties.It is no secret that the EU-India strategic partnership needs a shot in the arm and that trade and investment flows are much too modest. But negotiations for an India-EU Bilateral Trade and Investment Agreement (BTIA) — the most important issue on the bilateral agenda — have lasted for seven years, with no end in sight. And hopes that New Delhi would put energy and effort into the successful conclusion of the elusive deal have not materialised, with differences over tariffs and market access as well as questions related to the protection of intellectual property rights continuing to impede progress.The pact could be signed in 2015 — but only if both sides can summon up the political will to look beyond the array of technical issues to the deeper strategic importance of their relations.Modi and the EU’s new leaders face the uphill task of taking the relationship to a higher and more genuinely strategic level, a move that would benefit both sides.In addition to the geopolitical value of such a decision, European investors are willing and eager to enter the Indian market. European know-how could be valuable to India’s reform and modernisation agenda. Europe, meanwhile, needs new markets to keep its modest economy on track.To inject momentum into the relationship, both sides will need to make an effort. EU and Indian leaders have not met for summit talks since February 2012. An early meeting between Modi and the EU’s new presidents of the European Commission and the EU Council this autumn will therefore be crucial in signalling a fresh start in relations.

View from Abroad: EU must engage urgently with China (Originally published 15/11/2014 at dawn.com)

China's President, Xi Jinping, is a busy man. And if the European Union’s new leaders waste time in engaging with him, the EU could find itself gently, but firmly, shut out as Beijing steps up its game, both in the region and on global stage.The Chinese president has had quite a week. Having hosted the Asia Pacific Economic Cooperation (Apec) summit, signed an unexpected agreement with President Barack Obama on cutting greenhouse gas emissions and eased tensions with Japanese Premier Shinzo Abe, Xi attended the East Asia Summit in Myanmar and will then be at the G20 gathering in Brisbane, Australia.Chinese Premier Li Keqiang did attend the Asia Europe Meeting in Milan last month — but the EU was represented at the meeting by the outgoing EU leaders, European Council President Herman Van Rompuy and his colleague at the European Commission Jose Manuel Barroso. Beijing is waiting for the new Commission chief Jean Claude Juncker, Donald Tusk who will head the European Council as of Dec 1, and the new EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini to get in touch and answer whether the new men and women in Brussels will want a continuation or a change in in EU-China relationsCertainly, urgent matters at home and in Europe’s troubled neighbourhood command immediate attention. Juncker has also had to field embarrassing questions about allegations that Luxembourg was helping companies to dodge taxes while he was prime minister.But still, reinforcing ties with the world’s second largest — and still fastest growing — economy must be also be an EU priority.The good news is that after a few troubled years, Europe-China ties are encouragingly sound. Although trade frictions are unlikely to completely disappear, major trade quarrels have been settled. Differences over human rights notwithstanding, the EU and China have developed a good working relationship. As such, the new EU team inherits a relatively solid EU-China agenda. It must use this to further shape relations to fit a complex environment, both at home and in China.But as the array of recent events, overtures and agreements illustrate it is busy with consolidating relations with the US and is focused on its immediate neighbourhood. Unless Europe acts quickly, it could lose China’s attention at a time when the two sides need each other.It is worth repeating: Europe and China need each other, not least for economic reasons. Its growth rates may be slowing down, but China’s appetite for European goods and investments continues to be crucial in determining the pace and success of Europe’s economic recovery. China’s economic transformation demands that it has access to European know-how, experience and technology. China’s reform agenda also gives European companies myriad opportunities for enhanced trade and investments.Second, a deeper EU-China relationship is important in order to polish Europe’s foreign policy credentials — in Washington, Moscow and in many Asian capitals. Asian countries, which are locked in territorial quarrels with Beijing in the East and South China Seas, believe Europeans can temper Beijing’s assertiveness on the issue and use its experience in managing cross-border challenges to ensure stability in the region.Third, while Europe’s one-time dream of ensuring that China would one day become a “responsible” international stakeholder now appears hopelessly out-of-date and patronising in view of Beijing’s increasing global outreach and self-confidence in world affairs, there is no doubt that the EU needs to engage with China on a range of urgent foreign and security policy issues, including relations with Russia, Iran’s nuclear plans, policy towards the IS, fighting Ebola and combating climate change.Significant headway has been made in recent years, especially in EU-China economic ties. Trade relations remain buoyant, with bilateral trade in goods valued at about 420 billion euros in 2013. Trade in services, currently estimated at about 50 billion euros annually, is expected to grow as China opens up its services sector and as new reform efforts begin to bear fruit. More is being done to increase bilateral investment flows.There is still much more to discuss and discover. China is in the midst of massive change as the focus shifts to boosting consumer demand and away from an excessive reliance on investments and exports. The emphasis is also on fighting pollution, ensuring sustainable urbanisation and implementing other aspects of last year’s massive national reform agenda agreed at the Third Plenum. More recently, China’s Fourth Plenum shifted the focus to the rule of law, governance and legal reform. President Xi, widely regarded as China’s most powerful leader in recent decades, is stepping up his anti-corruption campaign.Beijing has been true to its word in making 2014 “the year for Europe”, with both President Xi and Premier Li travelling to key European capitals. The EU’s new leaders must reciprocate through visits, convening of an EU-China summit early next year and rapid organisation of the high-level political, economic and people-to-people dialogues.As China and the EU prepare to celebrate the 40th anniversary of their partnership next year, the relationship must be made more resilient, robust — and mutually respectful.

View from Abroad: Asia’s affair with US leaves Europe out in the cold (Originally published 8/11/2014 at dawn.com)

America continues to loom large over the Asia-Pacific region. Whether it’s about trade, politics or security, Asian eyes tend to focus almost solely on Washington. Japan, South Korea, Taiwan and the Philippines feel safer under the US security umbrella. India wants to forge a stronger relationship with Washington. Even China, the region’s most economically vibrant and powerful nation, seeks a special “great power” relationship with America.Hence the focus on the US-led Asia-Pacific Economic Cooperation summit opening in two-day Beijing on Nov 10 and the East Asia Summit from Nov 13-14 in Naypyidaw, Myanmar. A few days later, the spotlight will move to Brisbane, Australia, for the G20 summit.Certainly, the APEC agenda is impressive, with leaders expected to agree to a study on negotiating a Free Trade Area of the Asia-Pacific (FTAAP). But Asia’s enduring affair with America leaves only a small space for an Asia-Europe relationship.Significantly, Europeans will be absent from the jamboree in Beijing. The EU has been pressing for entry into the EAS which now also includes the US and Russia but Asians are in no hurry to open the door.Some European countries and the European Commission will, however, participate in the G20 meeting.And yet, there is more to the Asia-Europe relationship than meets the eye. America’s so-called “pivot” to Asia may have grabbed the headlines, but the EU has spent the last three and a half years upping its own game in Asia.The Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) held in Milan last month is a case in point. The summit may not have made headlines worldwide but over 50 European and Asian leaders made an array of pledges on boosting growth, continuing economic and financial reform and building stronger Europe-Asia connectivity.Significantly, the theme of the Milan summit — “Responsible Partnership for Sustainable Growth and Security” — allowed for a discussion not only of ongoing political strains and tensions in Asia and in Europe’s eastern neighbourhood, but also of crucial non-traditional security threats linked to food, water, and energy security.In addition, the meeting brought back much of the informality that marked the first few ASEM summits by including a “retreat” session during which leaders — with only one aide in attendance — were able to have a free-flowing discussion on regional and international issues, including Ebola and the threat posed by the so-called Islamic State.Attendance was exceptionally high, with all key Asian and European leaders — apart from the new Indonesian president and the Indian and Pakistani prime ministers — taking part in the sessions.Even before they meet in Beijing, there was a quick handshake in Milan between estranged neighbours Chinese Prime Minister Li Keqiang and Japan’s Shinzo Abe. Russian President Vladimir Putin was in attendance. Also, the EU finally held a long-awaited first-ever summit with Asean leaders. Kazakhstan and Croatia joined ASEM, bringing the total number of ASEM participants to 53.Leaders agreed on an ambitious programme until 2016, the year when ASEM, under Mongolian chairmanship, will celebrate its 20th anniversary. Countries agreed to work in smaller groups or clusters on 16 “tangible cooperation areas” including disaster management, renewable energy, higher education, connectivity and information technology.The challenge is to keep up the momentum generated in Milan. The good news is that ASEM’s resilience has allowed it to survive many upheavals since its launch in Bangkok in 1996. Initial euphoria over the initiative was followed by a period of inertia and a degree of disinterest. Asians criticised European leaders and ministers for not turning up at important ASEM meetings.Europeans complained that the gatherings were turning into little more than photo ops. The current mood is positive as ASEM seeks a stronger focus on content. However, ASEM’s future hinges on whether governments are ready to pay as much attention to ASEM and devote as much time and energy to their partnership as they did in the early years. Closer engagement between Asian and European business leaders, civil society representatives and enhanced people-to-people contacts is also essential.In the future ASEM needs an even sharper focus on growth and jobs, combating extremism and tackling hard and soft security issues. Women in both Asia and Europe face many societal and economic challenges. Freedom of expression is under attack in both regions. Populist parties and nationalism are becoming a threat to diversity and societal peace in both regions.Finally, ASEM faces the uphill task of securing stronger public understanding, awareness and support for the Asia-Europe partnership. ASEM’s 20th anniversary in 2016 should set the Asia-Europe partnership on a new and more dynamic track — that could perhaps generate the kind of excitement that APEC does.

View from Abroad: Keep watching Jokowi (Originally published 1/11/2014 at dawn.com)

You heard it here first. Two years ago, I predicted in this column (Hope amidst the madness Sept 29, 2012) that Joko Widodo, the then newly-elected governor of Jakarta, was poised to become the next president of Indonesia.On Oct 20, that prediction came true as Widodo — better known as Jokowi — became the leader of the world’s most populous Muslim majority country, fourth largest democracy and an impressive Asian economic power house.In 2012, I remember coming back from a long study tour in Indonesia where practically everyone I met had waxed lyrical about the governor of Jakarta. I was intrigued — and then I was convinced. Jokowi is special.Jokowi and Indonesia matter. They matter to Indonesia’s 250 million citizens, to the wider south-east Asian region — and also to an increasingly chaotic and depressingly violent Muslim world.Much has been written about Indonesia’s new head of state: by all accounts, he is low-key, soft-spoken, dedicated, hard-working and, in a country once ruled by the army and an unsavoury elite, he is “a man truly of the people”.He is therefore an unusual and outstanding political phenomenon. His origins are modest. He was drawn to politics late in life. In a country where family and background counts, he breaks the rules by having no army or political family connections.Comparisons have been made to US President Barack Obama. Both men emerged “out of nowhere” to lead their nations, caught the popular imagination by breaking with the past, reached out to young people and brought a message of change and hope to a tired nation.Look carefully, and the two men even share a striking physical resemblance.As Jokowi takes power, there are concerns that he may also run afoul of an old guard which is reluctant to cede power and privilege to a less skilful and less experienced political newcomer.But there is a difference. Obama heads an economy which is just beginning to sputter to life after years of stagnation. America is desperate to look inwards even as it is pulled screaming and kicking into new military adventures. Public support for Obama is eroding fast.Jokowi, in contrast, has become the leader of one of Asia’s most exciting countries and dynamic economies. Indonesia still faces an array of political, economic and societal challenges — and none of these will disappear under the new president’s watch.Significantly, what happens in Indonesia will not just stay in Indonesia — it will have strong repercussions across the country itself, the 10-member Association of South-east Asian Nations (Asean) and a curious Muslim world.Jokowi’s election is hopefully a fatal blow to the old-style politicians like Prabowo Subianto — a former general once married to the daughter of Indonesian dictator Suharto — who was also a candidate for president and refused at first to acknowledge defeat.In a region not noted for its espousal of democratic values and human rights, Indonesia stands out for having successfully ensured the transfer of power from one elected president to another.For many years, Indonesia has engaged in a massive soft power exercise of trying to export democracy to neighbouring nations, including Myanmar. Jakarta has taken the lead in trying to inject some real “people power” into Asean.Finally, Jokowi offers welcome relief in a Muslim world dominated by dictators, monarchs and unsavoury politicians.Still, it won’t be easy. Jokowi may have claimed the presidency, but he does not have a majority in parliament which last month controversially blocked the direct election of governors, mayors and district chiefs, a move which could prevent the rise of figures outside the political establishment, like Jokowi. The law is expected to be repealed — but it signals the tough political battle ahead for the new president.It’s been a good few years for the Indonesian economy — but growth is slowing down as the commodity boom wanes and exports decline. The government is under pressure to cut its generous fuel subsidies, a move which could spark civil unrest.Indonesia has not suffered a major terrorist strike since 2009 when a pair of luxury Jakarta hotels were targeted by suicide bombers but its brand of moderate and tolerant Islam is under threat from extremist forces. The country is trying hard to fight the spread of Wahabi Islam. Fighting corruption remains a challenge across the country.Most significantly, the new president faces the challenge of distancing himself from Megawati Sukarnoputri, a one-time president of the Indonesia and the daughter of the country’s first post-independence president, Sukarno.As chairwoman of the Indonesian Democratic Party of Struggle (PDI-P), which put up Jokowi as presidential candidate, Megawati still wields enormous influence and has used it to determine the members of the new president’s cabinet.Indonesian newspapers warn that the new government is the result of compromises between Jokowi and Megawati and that contrary to expectations that the new president would appoint a team of technocrats, at least 21 ministers in the 34-member cabinet are either representatives of political parties or have links to political figures.Most damagingly, is the inclusion of Puan Maharani, Megawati’s daughter as a coordinating minister for human resources development and culture.“We can only imagine that the shoe is too big for her,” warned the Jakarta Post.“We are disappointed because we had high expectations,” the newspaper warned. However, there is praise for the appointment of eight female ministers, including the country’s first-ever woman foreign minister, Retno Marsudi.As I said in an earlier column, the world needs an inspirational, forward-looking Indonesia which stands proudly for pluralism, human rights, civil society and reform in a world where these values are in short supply.Friends of Indonesia are hoping they can continue to engage with a country which can fulfil its role as a modern and promising 21st century power. And they are watching Jokowi.

View from Abroad: A 21st century Silk Road (Originally published 25/10/2014 at dawn.com)

I have been in China for five days and my brain is on fire. Perceptions, discussions, confrontations crowd my mind, jostling for space, demanding attention. My Chinese colleagues have so much to tell me about their country’s new priorities and they want to know so much about the future of Europe. We discuss. We argue.

The debates go on and on at the round-table meeting in Changsha in Hunan province that we are attending. As day turns into night, the debates not only dominate my waking hours, they enter my dreams.Europe and China have much to talk about. We are so different and yet we have much in common. There is the shared challenge of encouraging sustainable growth, tackling problems in our respective neighbourhoods, dealing with an ageing population, making sure we eliminate inequalities.But much also separates us. Europe believes in democracy, elections and human rights. China wants western countries to stop pontificating and giving Beijing lessons on democracy. The focus should be on governance, not on elections and other the rituals of democracy, one Chinese academic tells us.“We have to treat each other equally ... the West should stop looking down on us,” another Chinese colleague insists at the round-table discussion between European and Chinese think tanks.Indeed, much has changed — and is changing — in Beijing. President Xi Jinping has embarked on an unprecedented national reform drive, demanding an end to corruption, stronger implementation of the rule of law, a rebalancing of the economy from investments and exports to domestic consumption.And for the last year, President Xi and Prime Minister Li Keqiang have been promoting the ambitious idea of a Silk Road which would connect China to Europe, weaving its way across Central Asia and Central and Eastern Europe on the one hand while also building connections through a maritime route which would include the Maldives and Sri Lanka and many South-East Asian states.Full disclosure: I confess that I am completely fascinated, intrigued by the initiative. As a young girl growing up in Pakistan, I spent hours reading of the adventures of the intrepid men and women who plyed the Silk Road, connecting towns, industries and people.Exotic looking Chinese traders, with their bundles of silk, satins and brocades, made their way to Islamabad, persuading my mother and aunts to buy their goods. I watched from the sidelines, amused by the good-natured bargaining, the chuckles resulting in mutually satisfactory transactions.Years later, I went up the Silk Road — or rather the silk track — to Hunza and Gilgit and felt my heart almost break at the exquisite beauty of the landscape. Many hundreds of Chinese and Pakistani workers died while building the road in such a hostile land. Their sacrifice was enormous, their memories preserved in plaques along the route.That was then. The Road was about romance and adventure. Today it’s about commerce. China’s new concept of the Silk Road has little to do with romance — and a lot to do with business.Still it is a visionary idea which is getting much attention in Asia and Europe. And so it should. As they did when they came out with their ‘China Dream’ concept a year or so ago, the ‘Silk Road’ initiative is a work in progress.Beijing has yet to articulate its ambitions in detail. “We are not yet talking about a strategy,” says a Chinese colleague.Clearly, China wants to use the Road to increase its trade relations with countries along the route. Beijing is interested in Central Asia’s energy resources. It wants to counterbalance Russia’s political influence in the region.Also, the Silk Road provides a strong counter move to America’s much-touted ‘pivot’ to Asia and to the Trans Pacific Partnership (TPP) trade agreement that the US wants to negotiate with countries in the region but without China.As I listen to the discussion, I am convinced that this is an idea whose time has come — again. China has the political clout to make it happen. And it has the money to finance many of the projects.Still, it won’t be easy. The 21st century Silk Road will not only allow goods to be trade freely across borders, it could also facilitate the cross-frontier movement of drugs, arms and terrorists.As such, the proposal needs to be developed with care and caution.As I prepare to leave Changsha, my head is still spinning with new information and ideas. I dream of ancient bazaars and long, winding roads through mountains and plains. The Silk Road as envisioned by Beijing may be based on national self interest and, given the challenges, may never see the light of day.But the vision of an interconnected world it articulates is worth preserving — and developing.

View from Abroad: Western nightmares are just bad dreams (Originally published 19/10/2014 at dawn.com)

It's the stuff of Western nightmares: imagine if, one day, a strong China and a weak but assertive Russia “gang up” against the United States and Europe, winning more friends and allies and imposing their writ on the rest of the world?The recent high profile meetings between Chinese Premier Li Keqiang and Russian President Vladimir Putin have been watched carefully — and fretfully — in all Western capitals with uneasy policymakers seeking to understand if this is just a passing show of affection or if the two countries are planning to build a more solid partnership.Beijing has made clear that it has no intention of being part of any geopolitical power play being hatched by Moscow. China’s interests are global. Indeed before he met Putin, Li was in Germany striking two billion euro worth of business deals. He then headed to Italy for more headline-grabbing commercial overtures.Beijing’s standard line is that it has no allies, only friends. That’s not how Russia views the world. Russia in contrast is under Western sanctions. The EU is struggling to reduce its dependence on Russian oil and gas while the Nato military alliance talks menacingly about Russian actions in Ukraine and its annexation of Crimea.Some warn it is the beginning of a second Cold War. Clearly, it isn’t. The multipolar world today is a very different place from what it was in the Cold War years.Still, some thing is afoot. The Russians are working overtime to woo the Chinese. Beijing is clearly interested in accessing more Russian oil and gas, providing Moscow with new markets as Europe diversifies away from Russian energy. Some 50 agreements and memorandums of understanding are reported to be signed during Li’s visit to Moscow, including in areas related to high-speed transit and finance. China is also eager to supply Russia with fruit and vegetables, products that Moscow is no longer importing from Europe.Western attention is focused on Russian-Chinese cooperation within the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation which some in the West view as a potential competitor for Nato. And the recent decision to launch the BRICS bank is seen as a joint challenge by Russia and China to the post-war liberal order and the supremacy of the Bretton Woods institutions.Both China and Russia are often on the same side on tackling global flashpoints, eschewing military intervention unless sanctioned by the United Nations Security Council.There’s no doubt, however, that while it may want to stay friends and do business with Moscow, China has no interest in being seen as Russia’s best friend. As friendships go, in fact, the focus in many envious Western capitals is on the ‘special relationship’ between China and Germany.While in Berlin, Li and German Chancellor Angela Merkel signed deals worth approximately US$18.1 billion, covering cooperation in areas including agriculture, automotive, telecom, healthcare and education.Li requested that Germany help to relax the EU’s high-tech export restrictions to China and continue expanding bilateral trade and investment. He further stated that the two countries should continue working together on feasibility studies concerning the proposed China-EU Free Trade Agreement. The two sides also signed guidelines covering 110 cooperative agreements over the next five to 10 years.At the Hamburg Summit organised by Germany’s top industrialists that was attended by Premier Li the message was clear: China is not only the the biggest market for German companies, it is also a growing one. China’s huge national reform programme agenda, opens up exciting new export and investment opportunities for German — and other European — companies. Discussions focused on China’s massive urbanisation needs which can be met by European companies.Chinese investments into Germany and the EU are soaring. Significantly, unlike many other countries, China has shown a strong interest in the future course of Asem, the Asia Europe Meeting forum which is often criticised for being a mere talk shop.At the Asem summit in Milan last week, Li waxed lyrical about Asem’s role in improving connectivity between Asia and Europe, underlining his vision of building a Silk Road between Asia.Li knows he is on a winning streak. As the Financial Times newspaper reported recently, Chinese investors are surging into the EU.In 2010, the total stock of Chinese direct investment in the EU was just over 6.1bn euro — less than what was held by India, Iceland or Nigeria. By the end of 2012, Chinese investment stock had quadrupled, to nearly 27bn euro, according to figures compiled by Deutsche Bank.Not surprisingly, the EU and China are in the process of negotiating a bilateral investment treaty aimed at protecting each others’ investments but also ensuring better marker access.China is clearly not about to ditch Russia. But Beijing’s focus is on the growing markets of Europe. Western policymakers can sleep easy. For many nights.

View from abroad : Working on a new brand Rwanda (Originally published 20th September at dawn.com)

Most countries ban the entry of drugs and alcohol on to their territory. As we prepare for landing in Kigali, the captain issues an unusual warning: Rwanda does not allow plastic bags. As I turn in bewilderment and some amusement to my Ugandan neighbour, he grins at my reaction. Jumping up to get rid of the duty-free plastic bag in his hand baggage, he explains that Kigali is arguably Africa’s cleanest city. And the government wants to keep it that way.The message is repeated at the very grand World Export Development Forum (WEDF) that I am attending in Kigali. As I moderate a panel on “Tourism and Development”, Abdou Jobe, Gambia’s Minister for Tourism, tells the audience, he is very impressed by the clean streets of Kigali. “A model for all of us,” he says with a smile as the hall bursts into applause.Cleanliness and environmental protection are only one small part of Rwanda’s new post-genocide narrative. As the country rebuilds after the horrors of the 1994 genocide, the government — and the people — are in a hurry, sharing a common desire to move forward as quickly as possible.The past is not forgotten — Rwanda commemorated 20 years of the genocide this year — but it is a spur to the future. My tourist guide takes me to the genocide memorial. But he is equally keen to show me the shiny shopping malls, banks and new high-rises coming up in central Kigali.It’s difficult not to be impressed. Having visited the country and neighbouring Burundi before the genocide, I remember Kigali as a sleepy town, overrun by aid workers. The “land of the thousand hills”, with its coffee and tea plantations, was strikingly beautiful but also very poor. Landlocked Rwanda needed roads, bridges and airports. But development was slow and plodding. And then there was the genocide. On April 6, 1994, a plane carrying Rwandan president Juvenal Habyarimana was shot down over the airport at Kigali, triggering massive civil unrest between the majority Hutu and minority Tutsi people. It is usually estimated that more than 800,000 Rwandans, mostly Tutsis, were murdered in the following three months.I remember the feeling of despair as reports came in of the killing and maiming, of neighbours turning against each other, of some priests joining in the mass murders — and of the international community’s failure to stop the devastation. The United Nations has now apologised for its failure to act.The mea culpa is welcome, a Rwandan colleague tells me. But what the country needs now is to expand its trading potential, export more, attract investments, welcome more tourists, embrace information technology, improve connectivity.The list is long and ambitious. At the WEDF conference, President Paul Kagame insists that Rwandans are not going to give up until they have it all. It’s about hard work, ambition, jobs and growth, he says. Africa’s story — and the Rwandan story — is about high growth rates, providing jobs for the continent’s huge population of young people, making use of the talent and skills of women. The quicker the world realises the truth about the opportunities offered by a rising Africa, the better.Certainly, the Chinese, Indians and the Turks are listening. Negative perceptions of Africa as a continent mired in poverty and disease may still be difficult to shed in the West, but the WEDF conference is buzzing with Indian business leaders and Chinese entrepreneurs eager to invest in what many in Kigali insist is “the continent of the future”.There are other things that strike me. Rwanda, a former Belgian colony, used to be a French-speaking country but has switched with enthusiasm to English. Rwanda is the only country in the world with more women than men in parliament, a statistic that has attracted a good deal of international attention. The country boasts that 97 per cent of its children attend primary school — the highest rate in Africa. And Rwanda has another asset in the 1,000-strong population of mountain gorillas, some of the last surviving on the planet, which live in its rainforests and attract thousands of avid tourists.Much of the transformation has been engineered by Kagame, a Tutsi who grew up as a refugee in neighbouring Uganda, and led the Rwandan Patriotic Front in its resistance against the Hutu militias rampaging through the country. After the genocide ended in July 1994, he became vice-president. He became president in 2000 after his predecessor resigned and then won elections in 2003 and 2010.There is no doubting Kagame’s domestic popularity and reputation as an economic reformer. But critics complain of the president’s authoritarian style of government, allegedly patchy human rights record, and media controls. There are accusations that the Rwandan army is involved in and responsible for prolonging the conflict across the border in Congo. Recent hints that he may run for a third term as president in 2017 — a move which would require changing the constitution which allow for only two seven-year terms — have raised concerns.But Kagame is having none of it. “I think at some point we need to leave countries and people to decide their own affairs,” he told students and faculty staff after a recent speech in the US. At the WEDF, I hear that Kagame engages in the same “tough love” approach towards his people as Lee Kuan Yew, the hard-driving former prime minister of Singapore.Certainly, modern Rwanda is not yet Singapore but it is a far cry from the sleepy nation I remember from over twenty years ago. The genocide-devastated country is now one of Africa’s most determined and hard-working nations. As I leave the country, the man at the immigration desk asks me to come back soon. “And the next time, don’t just attend a conference, travel around and see this country,” he urges. I tell him that I intend to.

View from abroad: Why Cold War is back — sort of (Originally published 06/09/2014)

IN case you haven’t noticed there’s a new swagger to Nato, the 28-nation Western military alliance that many thought had outlived its usefulness with the end of the Cold War.Well, guess what, the Cold War is back — sort of — and the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation is once again in the international spotlight. No longer viewed as another has-been institution, a relic of the past, Nato is now universally recognised as a crucially important alliance to ward off threats from Russia, which threatens Europe’s security from the east, and the nasty “Islamic State” on Europe’s southern flank.It’s quite a turn-around for an organisation which many had given up as irrelevant and out-of-step with a deeply connected, inter-dependent and post-modern world. Leaders were supposed to be nice to each other, sign treaties of amity and cooperation, invest in each other’s economies and give up on wars and conflict.The talk was of “peace dividends”, turning guns into ploughs, the victory of democracy and the rule of law and a commitment to maintaining a liberal international order.Nato talked of “partnerships for peace”, extended a hand of friendship to Russia and to other former foes, countries which were once part of the Soviet Union.No longer. First, for all its economic networks and interdependence, flourishing of global trade and just generally, of globalisation, the world is proving to be a volatile, disorderly and unpredictable place.Suddenly, the future is not that bright or that secure. Far from witnessing the “end of history” as predicted by Francis Fukuyama in the euphoric period following the crumbling of the Berlin Wall, we are entering an “age of anxiety”.Mostly — but not only — this is due to President Vladimir Putin’s recent upending of the post-World War security order in Europe through his actions in Ukraine, starting with the seizure of Crimea five months ago and the subsequent destabilisation of other parts of the country.Russia’s actions and the outrage they have prompted across Europe and the US have undoubtedly given Nato new lease of life. The alliance’s summit held in Wales last week is proof that far from being relegated to the dustbin of history, Nato is back — possibly even with a bang.Or is it? While Nato’s rhetoric on Russia is strong and impressive, it’s far from certain that actions will match words. Take the decision to deploy a new and potentially significant Rapid Reaction Force to deter any further aggression by Russia against its neighbours.The Force would be ready to be deployed within days should there be any military aggression against one of the 28 N ato member nations. The military unit, numbering 4,000 troops, would be on high alert at all times, with additional logistical support stations set up in Eastern European statesThe decision is being hailed as an example of a new and more determined Nato but it falls short of the call by Polish Prime Minister Donald Tusk for the alliance put 10,000 troops in Poland.And there are fears that Nato member states won’t be able to find the funds to finance the Force.The problem is that not only is the alliance divided on how best to react to an increasingly aggressive Russia but defence spending in almost all member nations remains under two per cent of GDP, the goal set by Nato. Overall, Nato military budgets have shrunk by 20 per cent over the past five years, while Russia’s budget has risen by half.Also, Nato has tried to organise rapid-reaction forces in the past, with disappointing results. It first announced it would create a Nato Response Force in 2002, with as many as 13,000 troops. But it took two years to get the unit up and running. Even today, the force needs about 30 days to mobilise. Until this year, it had deployed only once, in 2005, to provide earthquake relief to Pakistan.Meanwhile, many Nato members in Europe have been deeply reluctant to challenge Russia — both for fear of spurring a wider conflict and because of domestic economic problems which could be exacerbated by a confrontation.But the 65-year-old alliance’s worries aren’t limited to Eastern Europe. IS, the terror group that has declared an independent state in Iraq and Syria in recent months, is threatening to send violent European “foreign fighters” to Nato members’ streets.Insiders say Britain is likely to join the US in airstrikes against Islamic State as public anger grows over the execution of Western hostages.Also as Nato troops prepare to depart at the end of the year, Afghanistan represents another headache. Nato officials say Afghans are now responsible for almost 100 per cent of their country’s security. But Nato has said it will remain committed to Kabul through the Nato-Afghanistan Enduring Partnership signed in 2010 and the Resolute Support mission to “train, advise and assist” Afghan forces.In addition, Nato is being challenged by Moscow to react to a new breed of “hybrid war”, a term used to describe Russia’s use of a broad range of hostile actions — including military force — to spur unrest.The Nato summit in Wales may not have been the “most momentous” in the alliance’s history as some predicted. But it does mean that Norway’s former prime minister Jens Stoltenberg who will be taking over as Nato Secretary General on October 1 will be inheriting a very different alliance than the one led by Anders Fogh Rasmussen over the last five years.

Why Global Europe must change in an “anxious age” (Originally published 04/09/2014)

Federica Mogherini’s appointment as the new European Union foreign policy chief offers an opportunity for an overhaul of EU foreign and security policy. With many EU leaders, ministers and senior officials slow to respond to world events given Europe’s traditionally long summer break, the 2014 summer of death and violence has left the reputation of “Global Europe” in tatters, highlighting the EU’s apparent disconnect from the bleak reality surrounding it. When she takes charge in November along with other members of the new European Commission, led by Jean-Claude Juncker, Mogherini’s first priority must be to restore Europe’s credibility in an increasingly volatile and chaotic global landscape.It cannot be business as usual. A strategic rethink of Europe’s global outreach is urgent. Europe can no longer pretend that it is not – or only mildly – shaken by events on its doorstep. In a world where many countries are wracked by war, terrorism and extremism, EU foreign policy cannot afford to be ad hoc, reactive and haphazard. Given their different national interests and histories, European governments are unlikely to ever speak with “one voice” on foreign policy. But they can and should strive to share a coherent, common, strategic reflection and vision of Europe’s future in an uncertain and anxious world.Changing gears is going to be tough. Many of Europe’s key beliefs in the use of soft power, a reliance on effective multilateralism, the rule of law and a liberal world order are being shredded by governments and non-state actors alike. With emerging nations, especially in Asia, gaining increased economic and political clout, Europe has been losing global power and influence for almost a decade. Despite pleas by NATO and the crisis in Ukraine, most European governments remain reluctant to increase military and defence spending. At the same time, the Eurozone crisis and Europe’s plodding economic recovery with unacceptably high unemployment continue to erode public support for the EU both at home and abroad. Populist far-right and extreme-left groups in Europe – including in the European Parliament – preach a protectionist and inward-looking agenda. Most significantly, EU national governments are becoming ever greedier in seeking to renationalise important chunks of what is still called Europe’s “common foreign and security policy.”To prove her critics wrong - and demonstrate foreign policy expertise and flair despite only a six-month stint as Italy’s foreign minister - Mogherini will have to hit the ground running. Her performance at the European Parliament on September 2, including an adamant rejection of charges of being “pro-Russian”, appears to have been impressive. Admirers point out that she is a hard-working team player, who reads her briefs carefully and speaks fluent English and French in addition to her native Italian. These qualities should stand her in good stead as she manages the unwieldy European External Action Service (EEAS), plays the role of vice president of the European Commission, chairs EU foreign ministerial meetings, chats up foreign counterparts and travels around the world while also – hopefully – spearheading a strategic review of Europe’s global interests and priorities.The tasks ahead are certainly daunting. There is need for reflection and action on several fronts – all at the same time. Eleven years after the then EU High Representative Javier Solana drew up the much-lauded European Security Strategy (partially revised in 2008), Europe needs to reassess the regional and global security environment, reset its aims and ambitions and define a new agenda for action. But this much-needed policy overhaul to tackle new and evolving challenges must go hand-in-hand with quick fire-fighting measures to deal with immediate regional and global flashpoints.The world in 2014 is complex and complicated, multi-polar, disorderly and unpredictable. Russia’s actions in Ukraine have up-ended the post-World War security order in Europe. The so-called “Islamic State” is spreading its hateful ideology through murder and assassination in Syria and Iraq, not too far from Europe’s borders. A fragile Middle East truce is no guarantee of real peace between Israelis and Palestinians. These and other complex problems require multi-faceted responses.The days of one-size-fits-all foreign policy are well and truly over. In an inter-connected and interdependent world, foreign policy means working with friends but also with enemies, with like-minded nations and those which are non-like-minded, with competitors and allies. It’s fine to pay special attention to China, India and other headline-grabbing big countries but it could be self-defeating to ignore the significance and clout of Indonesia, Mexico and other middle or even small powers. Upgrading ties with the US remains crucial. While relations with states and governments are important they must go hand-in-hand with contacts with business leaders, civil society actors and young people. Finally, Europe needs to acquire a less simplistic and more sophisticated understanding of Islam and its Muslim neighbours, including Turkey, which has been left in uncertainty about EU membership for more than fifty years.Europe’s response to the new world must include a smart mix of brain and brawn, soft and hard power, carrots and sticks. Isolation and sanctions can’t work on their own but neither can a foreign policy based only on feel-good incentives. The EU’s existing foreign policy tools need to be sharpened but European policymakers also need to sharpen and update their view of the world. Mogherini’s youth and hopefully fresh stance on some of these issues could be an asset in this exercise. Importantly, Mogherini must work in close cooperation and consultation with other EU institutions, including the European Parliament and especially the European Commission whose many departments, including enlargement issues, trade, humanitarian affairs, environment, energy and development are crucial components of Global Europe. The failure of synergies among Commission departments is believed to be at least partly responsible for the weaknesses of the EU’s “Neighbourhood Policy”. Also, a coherent EU foreign policy demands close coordination with EU capitals. Recent experience shows that, as in the case of negotiations with Iran, the EU is most effective when the foreign policy chief works in tandem with EU member states. Closer contacts with NATO will also be vital if Europe is to forge a credible strategy vis-àvis Russia and Ukraine. Such cooperation is especially important if – as this article suggests – Mogherini embarks on a revamp of EU foreign and security policy.An incomplete list of key issues which require closer scrutiny in the days and weeks ahead includes:

• EU policymakers need to rethink relations with Russia following the Ukraine crisis and Moscow’s success in breaking down Europe’s post-World War security order. This requires a careful evaluation of EU-Russia relations which goes beyond the current focus on sanctions but includes the EU’s reliance on Russian oil and gas and the over-arching need to ensure immediate and long-term stability on Europe’s eastern flank. A key question to reflect over is whether US-EU restrictive measures can be effective in a world where other countries – in Asia, Africa and Latin America – are ready and willing to move in to the much-coveted Russian market. Mogherini has previously raised eyebrows for allegedly being soft on Russia but she has since told Italy's Corriere della Sera that sanctions against Russia are necessary, adding at the European Parliament that Moscow is no longer an EU strategic partner. But even as sanctions are ratcheted up,is it in Europe’s interest to isolate Russia – and should it even try? More immediately, will an EU-Russia summit go ahead as planned later this year or is there an interest in trying to re-establish a constructive conversation with Russia again?

• Events in Ukraine spotlight the failure of the EU’s goal of creating a “ring” of stable and well-governed states around its border and the glaring need to jettison the Neighbourhood Policy in favour of a less-exclusive and fresh strategy for a diverse region where none of the states are ready for EU membership and where the EU wields only limited influence given its modest financial resources and the increasing presence and funding possibilities from not just Russia but also China.

• Europe’s quasi silence over the summer’s violent events in the Middle East has dented EU credibility in a region where it once enjoyed a certain degree of respect. The EU needs to regain its role as an important actor in any peace talks which follow the current Israel-Palestinian truce. While taking part in upcoming Gaza reconstruction talks, Mogherini and her team must also reflect on the long-term validity of a situation where EU-funded projects (the EU spends US$600m on Gaza territories each year) are regularly reduced to rubble by Israeli military intervention.

• Even a more experienced foreign policy expert than Mogherini would find it difficult to hammer out an EU policy to stabilise Iraq and Syria in the face of the ruthless expansion of the “Islamic State”. Much will also depend on whether US President Obama is really as determined as he claims to be in leading a regional and international coalition to beat back the terrorists. European nations certainly have the military capabilities—such as the EU battle groups—to contribute to military actions together with the US. But there is no certainty that they will find the required political will – and public support - to take such steps. In any case, the EU needs to hammer out a medium to long-term strategy for political, humanitarian and financial efforts to stabilise the devastated region.

• In addition – and in any case - the EU needs not only to avert any domestic terrorist threat posed by “foreign fighters” who return to Europe from the Middle-East but also enhance its knowledge of Islam, its different interpretations and variations, distinguishing not only - as hopefully they now do - between Shia and Sunni but also among the various, often quixotic and radical sects promoted by Saudi Arabia and Qatar. Mogherini’s thesis on Islamic politics should help her to spearhead such a reflection.

• More importantly a closer dialogue is needed with Turkey. Ankara may have been accused of allowing foreign fighters easy transit routes to Syria but its knowledge of the region continues to be valuable. Encouraged by the recent erratic and often-authoritarian actions of now Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan, the EU has let its relationship with Turkey fester for much too long. Even if membership negotiations remain erratic and certain European leaders send out contrary political messages, Europe must find a way to revitalise relations with this important country. A closer dialogue with Iran, once the nuclear issue is surmounted, will help. Indonesia, only now being considered an interesting partner for the EU, has arguable even more insights to offer.

• The focus on the eastern and southern borders will not be enough. Europe’s hopes for being recognized as a valid and relevant global actor hinge on its relations with Asian nations, including China, India and Japan but also South Korea and the ten states in ASEAN (Association of Southeast Asian Nations). There is little the EU can do to directly tackle the so called “Asian paradox” whereby countries enmeshed in increasingly close economic networks are also embroiled in acrimonious territorial disputes. Mogherini would be well-advised to maintain strong EU ties with both Beijing and Tokyo while continuing to press for an easing of tensions between the two Asian giants. EU support for South Korean President Parks’s North East Asia peace and cooperation initiative (NEAPCI) to build trust in the region should be considered. Disputes over history as well as maritime claims have meant that no Trilateral summit between the three countries since 2012. Mogherini could try and encourage the opening of a purposeful dialogue among the three nations, allowing stability to return to an economically prosperous but politically fragile area.

• Having injected new dynamism into its once lacklustre relationship with ASEAN over the last three years, the EU must not reduce its diplomatic and economic engagement with the region. This requires participation in all key ASEAN related events and a subtle but determined effort to become a member of the East Asia Summit, the region’s increasingly important dialogue forum. The EU already participates in many of the East Asia Summit’s activities through its cooperation with ASEAN in areas from economic and financial cooperation and environmental issues and disaster relief to education and research and technology.

Mogherini will not be able to do it on her own. Much will depend on the EEAS team she works with and the knowledge, expertise and passion her aides bring to their work. Team work and leadership, not micro-management, will be required.With the crisis in Ukraine and the volatile and dangerous violence spreading through the Middle East, the EU needs to rethink its foreign and security policy, asking itself three key questions: can Europe’s most-modern attachment to soft power, diplomacy and multilateralism, which have stood it well during the last decades, survive in an increasingly unstable and volatile world? How ready is the EU to forge a more muscular and interventionist approach? And can Europe make such a momentous policy U-turn at a time of falling European defence budgets and amid continuing public wariness of getting involved in foreign conflicts?Putting these issues on the backburner is no longer an option. The change of guard in Brussels is the right moment to review and reconsider Europe’s role in the world. Global Europe’s disconnect needs to be tackled before it’s too late.

Fashioning "Global Europe" for the 21st Century (Originally published 01/10/13)

It’s not enough to talk about the European Union's standing and influence in today’s rapidly changing world: the EU needs to thrash out a new foreign policy adapted and responsive to 21st century challenges.This is urgent.  True, EU leaders, foreign ministers and senior official often engage in bouts of hand-wringing over Europe’s “loss of influence” and declining presence on the global stage.  This is often followed by a resounding thumping of chests as everyone agrees that Europe is – after all – still an important and relevant international player.  It’s not that simple, however.Europe certainly has much to offer. The EU single market attracts goods, investments and people from across the globe.  European technology helps the world tackle climate change, urbanisation and other 21st-century challenges, European design excites fashionistas the world over and tourists flock to European cities to enjoy good food, wine and visit exquisite monuments.Europe’s ‘soft power’ resonates when it comes to peace-making and reconciliation, trade, aid and the promotion of democracy and the rule of law.  With Croatia now in and others lining up to join, the EU retains its zone of influence in the neighbourhood.  And as the Eurozone crisis gives way to recovery, however fragile, global concerns about Europe’s economic performance are easing.And yet.  There is no doubt that the EU’s star does not shine as brightly as it should in many skies.  EU-watchers who once – too optimistically – believed that the Lisbon Treaty and the creation of the European External Action Service would lead to a more forceful EU foreign policy are disappointed.Their disappointment is even stronger when it comes to European security and defence policy.  Many believe that because it has no army, navy or air force at its command, the EU will always be a second class international actor, handing out cheques but not pro-actively influencing global events and decisions.No appetite for military actionEurope’s partners know that while governments in France and Britain may still have an appetite for military interventions in response to international crisis, their citizens – and Europeans more generally – certainly don’t. Significantly, Germany, Europe’s most powerful economy and an industrial machine that’s the envy of the planet, has made clear that it is not overly interested in taking on global responsibilities of the military kind.Germany is viewed by many as a reluctant giant which, as one newspaper recently put it, seems content to lurk in the shadows. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is fond of saying that Europe must become more competitive as China and other powers rise. “The world doesn’t sleep,” she said recently. However, she hasn’t coupled that with any grand visions for a continental revival.Within Europe, the doomsayers — of which there are many — insist that the Eurozone crisis and the impact of economic stagnation on European societies have accelerated the loss of EU influence in the international arena.China, India, Russia, Brazil and others are often seen in the EU as fierce rivals who want a ‘full-scale reversal’ of their relationship with the West by demanding better representation in multilateral fora and a stronger voice in global governance. Others argue that Europe should be more assertive and more self-confident when dealing with the cheeky new kids on the bloc.It was partly to respond to such concerns that the EEAS was set up three years ago to act as an EU foreign ministry — and certainly the EU flag is now more often seen flying across the world. But in today’s competitive world of rising powers, new alliances and increased geo-strategic competition, the EEAS is still seen as under-performing.Much of the criticism is levelled at Catherine Ashton, the head of the EEAS and the EU’s de facto foreign minister. It has to be said, however, that Ashton’s role is a difficult one and constrained by the limited space she is allowed by some of the EU’s bigger member states, including Britain and France.Pressure for a more effective foreign policyThe good news is that some EU countries want to go further. The foreign ministers of Italy, Poland, Spain and Sweden argued recently that Europe needs a strategic framework to help it navigate a more complex world. The famous question posed by Henry Kissinger, the former US national security adviser and secretary of state, about the dialling code for Europe has, by now, by and large been answered, the ministers said.“The critical question is no longer how to reach us, but instead what Europe should say when the phone rings,” they complained, adding: “we now have the hardware of institutions in place, we need to focus on the software of policies that makes the entire thing operate in a clear and credible way.”

The ministers are right: Europe needs a new strategic framework to help it navigate a more complex world than the one that existed in 2003, when Javier Solana, the former EU “high representative” for foreign and security policy, drew up the first-ever EU strategy for living in a globalised world.

Such a new blueprint for “global Europe” need not be long and complicated.  It needs to start by recognising that the world has changed dramatically in the last decade - and include recommendations for a few pivotal changes in policies and attitudes.

While the 2003 document centred on traditional security threats, the focus should now shift to  non-traditional challenges – climate change, energy and food security, maritime piracy, cyber security - which must be tackled urgently.

The EU has strong expertise and experience in all these areas.  But concerted international action on these and other issues requires that countries and organisations build new networks and alliances.  It means working with like-minded nations but above all also cooperating with non-like minded countries.  It means talking with others, not haranguing or talking down to them.  And this means a change of EU diplomatic tone and style.

Respect for emerging powers

Global competition for influence has increased as China, Russia, India and Brazil become more assertive and more vocal on the global stage.  The EU may have “strategic partnerships” with these countries, but the agreements need to be reinforced and strengthened – and the EU has to learn to treat these nations with respect and use their insight to readjust its worldview.

Working only with the big guys of the emerging world is not enough.  The new world order is being fashioned not just by China and Brazil but also by countries like Indonesia and Mexico, Kenya, Australia and organisations such as ASEAN.  The EU  needs urgently to upgrade its ties with these nations and bring them on board as  partners.

The compelling need for better global governance in today's still-chaotic multipolar world demands such cooperation.

Relations with Turkey are an albatross around the EU's neck.  They need to be repaired urgently in order to allow for real consultation on regional and global flash-points.  Europe's relations with Turkey are under close scrutiny the world over, with people questioning just why the EU remains so reluctant to open its doors to such an important regional and international actor.  The answers are not edifying.

The EU's international and moral standing are conditional on its ability to build an inclusive society which celebrates diversity instead of fearing it.  Europe cannot condemn discrimination against minorities in Pakistan and Myanmar if its own track record in dealing with such issues is not above reproach.

Democracy and human rights

Europe's values - democracy, the rule of law, human rights (to name a few) - are important and should be promoted more actively across the globe.  But those doing the promotion should do so with sensitivity and humility.  The message is too important to be drowned out by arrogance.

While often irked by EU hectoring and lecturing on human rights, many countries are anxious to learn more from Europe about regional integration, reconciliation and reform.  Europe's "soft power" lies in its ability to teach an anxious world about conflict management and peace-building.

The point has been made most sharply by Asian leaders like former Indonesian foreign minister Hasan Wirajuda who have warned that the gains of the "Asian Century" are at risk because of unresolved historical conflicts and abiding mistrust in the region.

Ironicially while the new world order demands the establishment of networks and coalitions, the EU will become a more significant power if it builds on its uniqueness as a foreign policy actor.  As such, while the transatlantic relationship is vital and important, hanging on to US coat-tails, especially when it comes to Asia, is not a good option.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership certainly has its value in terms of jobs and growth on both sides of the Atlantic but it would be unfortunate if it is seen as the West "ganging up" against the rest.  For the moment, that is how China and other Asians see it.  The EU should act urgently to correct that impression - and invest more in the outcome of the Bali ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organisation in December.

Civil society actorsForeign policy today is not just the exclusive preserve of diplomats. Civil society actors, social media, sports personalities, artists, academics and think tanks are now an essential part of the game.  The EU's new global outreach must include such thought-leaders.  As the Arab Spring has shown, dealing only with governments is no longer an option.As Javier Solana, the EU’s former ‘high representative’ for foreign and security policy said recently, in today’s world of flux, the nature of power is changing. Power was once measured in the size of armies and population, not in terms of GDP per capita, reputation and whether you get to host the Olympic Games.  It is also about ideas, innovation, art and culture.It is worth remembering that while military force and interventions can provoke regime change, in the end, all parties — the victorious and the defeated — have to come to the negotiating table and find political solutions. And this is something the EU and Europeans are very good at.It is often argued that further EU integration will lead to a united, coherent, and effective European foreign policy. This is true of course.  But the integration process remains slow and painful.  The need for a smarter and more forceful EU foreign policy is urgent.

Exploring ideas on ASEM’s future (Originally published 03/06/13)

Ever since the first high-profile Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) in Bangkok in March 1996, Asian and European leaders, ministers and officials have been working on myriad fronts to forge a stronger region-to-region partnership on issues as diverse as green growth, global peace and prosperity, human rights, education and urbanisation.Their work may not always make the headlines. And the progress they make can appear slow, plodding and incremental. ASEM participants often complain that their work is not visible to the public, that ASEM does not punch its weight in the over-crowded field of global cooperation platforms and that 17 years after its launch amid much fanfare, ASEM is in need of a new lease of life.With the next ASEM summit set to be held in Brussels in autumn 2014, the race is on to try and inject fresh impetus into a process which all 51 ASEM partners agree is a compelling necessity – but one which must be deepened and made more dynamic to stay relevant in a rapidly-changing world.ASEM foreign ministers, who gather in New Delhi on November 11-12, are expected to come up with fresh ideas for reviving the Asia-Europe partnership.As illustrated at a recent symposium held in Yangzhou, China, the problem facing ASEM is not a lack of initiatives on revitalizing the relationship; rather, the challenge is to find common ground among the many suggestions being put forward by ASEM partners – and then to refine and streamline recommendations before presentation to ministers and leaders.Significantly, all 51 partners continue to underline the strategic significance of ASEM in the 21st Century. The fact that new countries continue to demand entry into the club – which began with 26 founding partners in 1996 – is seen as a mark of ASEM’s attractiveness and vigour.Over the years, ASEM has also served as a “new Silk Road” connecting the two continents and providing a unique platform for dialogue and cooperation, says an Asian official, adding: “Asia and Europe need each other…we are closely interconnected and interdependent and draw on each other’s’ strengths.”European policymakers say they are similarly confident that ASEM has great merits. “Its relevance has increased. ASEM is informal, comprehensive and still very attractive,” said one European official in Yangzhou.The challenge is to maintain ASEM’s unique informality, networking and flexibility but also make it more pragmatic, effective and result-oriented – and more relevant to partners’ economic and social priorities.ASEM should identify “more cooperation projects which are visible, tangible and serve the interests of people,” said an Asian official, adding: “ASEM should be a forum for action.”More frequent meetings of ASEM economic officials and ministers were mooted, with participants also suggesting that ASEM should be used to explore new ideas, to stimulate and facilitate progress in other fora and encourage capacity-building across sectors.The need for more ASEM contacts with civil society, including members of parliament, business representatives, scholars and journalists as well as local authorities, was underlined.The most difficult task facing policymakers is a much-awaited overhaul of ASEM’s working methods in order to make meetings – especially leaders’ summits held once every two years – more interesting, relevant and productive.Recapturing the excitement and energy evident at ASEM’s launch in 1996 will not be easy, however. Over the years, ASEM meetings have become more formal and ritualistic, with ministers and leaders reading out well-prepared statements instead of engaging in direct dialogue.Meetings of ASEM senior officials have also become long and drawn-out as participants talk more about procedures and dates than substantial questions. “These meeting are a bottleneck in ASEM” said one senior official in Yangzhou. “We have become a housekeeping body.”Instead of reviewing a series of global and regional developments, ASEM summits should have a more streamlined agenda, allowing leaders to engage in a real, in-depth and focused conversation on key concerns.Leaders and foreign ministers should also meet in a so-called “retreat” format to ensure more intensive and interactive dialogue. “We want them to really get to know each other, forge friendships and understanding,” said one participant.Chair’s statements and other documents issued at the end of ASEM meetings should be short, simple and to-the-point rather than long and procedural. They should be media-friendly and understandable to the general public, helping to enhance ASEM visibility.The long-running debate on whether or not ASEM needs a secretariat to provide institutional back-up was discussed. The drive to set up an ASEM Secretariat is essentially driven by Asian partners of ASEM who feel the need for such an institution on their side.Europeans, on the other hand, are generally satisfied with the current situation since the European External Action Service plays an important coordination role for European partners.As preparations intensify for the meeting of foreign ministers in Delhi, the conversation on strengthening ASEM is likely to gain pace. The aim is to prepare not only for the summit in Brussels in 2014 but for ASEM’s 20th anniversary celebrations in 2016.As participants in Yangzhou said, the upcoming anniversary should not only take stock of ASEM cooperation so far but also set it on a new and revitalised course for the future.

The challenge of choosing a new WTO director general (Originally published 05/02/13)

The Doha round of trade talks has long dominated the agenda of the World Trade Organization (WTO). An urgent priority for the organisation’s 157 members, however, is to appoint a new director general to replace Pascal Lamy, the much-respected former EU trade commissioner who has led the Geneva-based trade body since 2005, and who is stepping down in August this year.Over the coming months, WTO members must also make sure that a ministerial conference in Bali at the end of the year can reach agreement on a small package of “early harvest” deliverables from the long-running Doha round. The focus is on clinching a deal on trade facilitation – a move that Lamy says could stimulate the US$ 22 trillion world economy by more than US$1 trillion – as well as on special measures for least developed countries.First, however, the WTO must select a new director general to lead the organisation for the coming four years, a task made more difficult by the continuing deadlock on Doha. The new man/woman who takes the helm of the WTO faces the challenge of revitalising the long-term trade liberalisation agenda while also ensuring short-term results in time for the Bali meeting.A changed global landscapeMuch has changed on the global economic stage since the Doha talks were launched in the capital of Qatar in November 2001. The world economic recovery remains fragile, protectionism continues to be a threat even as global economic inter-dependence grows, the Group of 20 nations is a more powerful force in global affairs (China joined the WTO in 2001) and so-called “new” topics such as investments and competition policy are now firmly on the trade agenda.The proliferation of regional and bilateral trade deals, meanwhile, continues to distract from the multilateral trade agenda – despite hopes that these agreements will be transparent and inclusive and become “building blocks” to boost global free trade.Nine hats in the ringGiven the challenges facing the WTO, it is heartening to see that candidates from nine countries have thrown their hats in the ring to succeed Lamy. Under WTO rules, members have until the end of May to decide on the right person for the job.It’s a great line-up. A majority of the candidates are from developing countries and, for the first time, three women are in the race. So far only men have held the WTO’s top post, and only one previous director general, Thailand’s Supachai Panitchpakdi has been from a developing country.The final set of nominees includes three candidates from Latin America: Roberto Carvalho de Azevêdo, Brazil’s current ambassador to the WTO; Anabel González of Costa Rica, who is her country’s current trade minister, and Herminio Blanco, Mexico’s former minister of trade and industry.From Asia, Mari Elka Pangestu, who is Indonesia’s Minister of Tourism and Creative Industry and was trade minister from 2004-2011, and current South Korean Trade Minister Taeho Bark have been put forward by their countries.Kenya has nominated Amina Mohamed, the country’s former WTO ambassador, while Ghana has presented Alan John Kwadwo Kyerematen, former minister of trade and industry.New Zealand’s Minister of Trade, Tim Groser and Ahmad Thougan Hindawi, former trade and industry minister of Jordan, are also vying for the position.The nine candidates have already addressed a closed-door meeting of the General Council - the organisation’s highest decision-making body outside of its ministerial conferences.The selection and appointment of the new trade chief will follow consultations to be held in April and May and the final selection will be made by consensus, no later than May 31. The nominee will take over at the WTO on September 1. Qualities neededChoosing the right man or woman for the job will not be easy. Of course, qualifications, experience and competence should be the deciding factors in choosing the new head of the WTO. But in the real world of horse-trading and strategic alliances, other factors – such as geography, gender and whether the candidate has held a ministerial post - will play an equally pivotal role.WTO selection procedures state that “where members are faced in the final selection with equally meritorious candidates, they shall take into consideration as one of the factors the desirability of reflecting the diversity of the WTO’s membership in successive appointments to the post of Director-General.”The top slots at the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank have traditionally been held by a European and an American, respectively, as the result of a “gentlemen’s agreement” between decision-making members of the two Bretton Woods organisations. This is the case at the moment, with France’s Christine Lagarde at the IMF and Jim Yong Kim from the US at the World Bank.Further complicating the WTO selection process is the fact that the search is also on for a new head for the United Nations Conference on Trade and Development (UNCTAD). Speculation is that an African will be selected for the post.The next WTO head must be able to drive forward an organisation which has lost much of its lustre in the last few years. He or she must be a champion of free trade, able to keep protectionism at bay and also play bridge-builder between the concerns of emerging economies and the priorities and interests of developed countries.On a personal level, the new WTO chief must be an honest broker but also a pragmatist who can adapt the organisation to new challenges.

The focus must be on personal skills and qualifications, passion and commitment. The new man or woman at the WTO must make the case for free trade, not for its own sake but because global trade is the motor of world growth and development and of jobs.

September 11, 2001: A Watershed Moment for European Muslims (Originally published 09/09/11)

Ten years on, there is little doubt: September 11, 2001 was a watershed moment for Muslims, not just in the Islamic world and the United States but also in Europe. Largely unnoticed until then, 9/11 thrust the spotlight on Europe’s 20 million-strong Muslim community which suddenly found itself in the eye of the storm.Muslims were adamant that Al Qaeda and terrorism had nothing to do with their religion. Nobody believed them, however. It was a question of guilt by association.Europe’s struggle to build an inclusive society which recognises and accommodates Muslims and other minorities was made more difficult during the last decade. The tragic massacre in Norway this summer is a sad reflection of the strength of anti-Muslim feeling among Europe’s far-right.

The attacks on the World Trade Centre and the Pentagon, followed by London and Madrid, the tragedy in Mumbai and terrorist acts elsewhere, have prompted strengthened international counter-terrorism efforts. They have also meant increased suspicion, surveillance and stigmatisation of Muslim communities, including in Europe.

Today, the arrival of refugees and asylum seekers from North Africa in recent months is exacerbating fears of a rising Muslim presence in Europe, amid concerns that Muslims cannot be truly integrated as full-fledged European citizens.

The current economic crisis coupled with weak leadership - as well as increased contacts between far-right groups in Europe and America – is making it easier for populist politicians to spread a simple albeit toxic xenophobic message: Europe is turning into Eurabia and the Shariah is being introduced by stealth. This negative narrative has filtered into Europe’s political mainstream.

The reality is more upbeat, however. Despite the hand-wringing over the visible presence of Islam and Muslims in the public space, the last ten years have also been marked by transition and change in the lives of European Muslims.

While causing discomfort and unease, the spotlight on Muslims has also had a positive effect by helping Muslims and host communities to confront difficult issues of integration which had been neglected over decades.

Over the last ten years, European Muslims have become more active in demanding equal rights as full-fledged citizens, organising themselves into pressure groups, and emerging as influential politicians, entrepreneurs and cultural and sports icons.

Similarly, European governments are slowly combining an approach focused on security and counter-radicalisation with an integration agenda and Muslim outreach programmes. Government and business recruitment policies are being changed gradually to increase the employment of Muslims and minorities.

Business leaders are demanding an increase in immigration, including from Muslim countries, to meet Europe’s skills shortage. The EU has adopted a new anti-discrimination directive in the new Lisbon Treaty which strengthens existing rules on combating racism.

The challenge for European governments and European Muslims is to hammer out a fresh narrative which looks at European Muslims as active and full-fledged citizens rather than as exotic foreigners.

Despite recent comments by the French, German and British leaders on the failure of multiculturalism in Europe, the continent today is a vibrant mix of people, cultures and religions. Integration and mainstreaming is taking place although this is often not spotlighted by politicians or the media.

However, the voices of reason on immigration and Muslims remain strangely silent. European politicians are reluctant to tell the real truth about Muslims and immigrants’ contribution to their country’s economy, culture or history. Business leaders may sometimes point out – timidly – that ageing and skills-deficient Europe needs foreign labour, but their arguments are lost in transmission. In all honesty also, intelligent and reasonable Muslim voices are heard much too seldom.

Europe needs a rational, thoughtful debate on the challenges of reconciling justifiable European concerns on employment with efforts to build an inclusive society. If it is to compete on the global stage, Europe should seek to capitalise on the talents of all its citizens. Perhaps, after the storm, there will then be calm acceptance of diversity.

Debate needed on EU extremism (Originally published 29/07/11)

The terrorist tragedy in Norway should spur an urgent Europe-wide debate on the challenge of countering violent extremism, whether domestic or imported.In fact, the conversation should be global. Europe is not alone in finding it difficult to build – and sustain – societies which embrace diversity. Minorities, including Christians, Hindus and Islamic minority sects, face discrimination and violence in many parts of the Muslim world. Hindu Fundamentalists are a threat to India's inter-communal peace and harmony.Events in Norway are a powerful reminder that no country can claim to be safe from terror. Also, in an inter-connected and globalised world, where people, ideas and bombs can move rapidly across borders, extremism cannot be tackled by any one country alone.Anders Behring Breivik may have been a lone, unhinged, gunman seeped in anti-Islamic sentiments picked up from Islamophobic websites in Europe and in the United States. Let’s not fool ourselves, however: the climate of hate, intolerance and xenophobia propagated by far-right parties is certainly helping create an “enabling” environment for violence by self-appointed “counter-jihadists”.The poisonous rhetoric of the extreme right is filtering into Western political mainstream. European leaders with their claims that multiculturalism has failed have not helped.A commentary by Friends of Europe trustees published earlier this year, "An 8-point strategy to revitalize the EU",  underlined the need for EU institutions together with EU member governments to challenge populist parties more forcefully, not pander to them.“Instead of implicitly accepting the far-right rhetoric against immigrants and multiculturalism, EU political leaders at all levels must develop a convincing counter-narrative to the deceptively simple anti-European rhetoric of the far right, and place closer integration far higher on the political agenda,” the commentary said.“Europe must continue to be a place which welcomes immigrants who are needed to ensure the sustainability of our welfare systems, and the dynamism of our economies,” it added.Cecilia Malmstrom, European Commissioner for Home Affairs, is among the small number of EU policymakers who has expressed concern at the rise of far-right parties in Europe and their success in spreading fear of Islam.“This creates a very negative environment, and sadly there are too few leaders today who stand up for diversity and for the importance of having open, democratic, and tolerant societies where everybody is welcome," Malmstrom said in a post on her blog.Ask Sajjad Karim, the British Muslim member of European Parliament who has seen his house surrounded by 40 demonstrators of the English Defence League which says it is against “radical Islam”. The Conservative MEP has said he believes they wanted to intimidate him, his wife and young daughter as they are Muslim, "MEP Sajjad Karim 'threatened' over EDL protest by home".The EU and the US, among others, are engaged in active discussions on countering radicalization. Their focus, however, is mainly on “Islamist” groups, especially so-called “home-grown” American and European radicals of Muslim descent (or Muslim converts) who risk being recruited by Al Qaeda.The danger from Al Qaeda remains. However, a stronger focus is required on inconvenient truths which are much too often swept under the carpet: the rise in many parts of the world of groups and organizations which fuel hatred and violence on religious, ethnic and cultural grounds.The counter-narrative to the toxic anti-immigrant rants of the European far right requires a cool-headed separation of fact from fiction. It is easy – but wrong – to blame Europe’s economic troubles on immigrants. It is simple – but false – to argue that all Muslims are misfits, potential terrorists and marginalized outsiders who cannot speak local languages and adhere to orthodox views.Many Europeans are clearly tempted to find scapegoats at a time of unease and uncertainty over Europe’s economic future, the perceived threat posed by globalization and Europe’s place in an increasingly complex and rapidly changing world.But if Europe is to meet the many challenges of the 21st Century, its leaders must be able to counter the simple ideology of hate being peddled by the far-right.The truth is more upbeat than the far-right would have us believe: Europe is a vibrant and dynamic mix of people of many faiths, beliefs, cultures, languages and traditions. Instead of denouncing it as a problem, Europeans should celebrate the diversity of their societies.

Let the best man/woman win the IMF job (Originally published 23/05/11)

Prepare for an epic battle over the appointment of a new head of the International Monetary Fund (IMF) following Dominique Strauss-Kahn's resignation as the organisations's managing director. Europeans are insisting the job should once again go to a European candidate. Countries like China, India, Mexico and South Africa, however, say it's time to end Europe's traditional grip on IMF leadership and appoint a representative from an emerging nation.The struggle for influence in global institutions between old and new powers has been brewing for many years. Newly-empowered emerging countries are impatient for a stronger say in economic global governance. They are especially adamant that the Bretton Woods institutions should reflect the emerging world's rising economic clout.There’s no doubt: Europe is currently over-represented in international bodies like the IMF and the World Bank. The cozy deal under which Europe gets to appoint the head of the IMF while an American leads the World Bank has also run its course. The point has been repeatedly made in the G20. There is no agreement, however, on the timing of the change-over to a new system.Strauss-Kahn’s resignation offers an early opportunity to move to a more modern 21st Century system for selecting top international civil servants. Appointments should be based on merit and qualification rather than nationality, a point made by many emerging countries and by Australia.As many EU governments have underlined, French Finance Minister Christine Lagarde is well-placed to become the next IMF managing director. But they are wrong to insist that Lagarde should get the job because she is European. The EU argument, presented among others by German Chancellor Angela Merkel and EU Commission President Jose Manuel Barroso, that the new IMF chief must be sensitive to Eurozone economic woes is unconvincing – and inappropriate.The next IMF head should not be seen as doing special favours to Europe. EU policymakers’ insistence that Europe has a historical right to the job sends the wrong message to those who complain that Europeans are unwilling to cede existing power and privilege to newcomers.At stake in this debate is Europe’s ability to adapt to life in a globalised world and its willingness to accept the shift of power from older, industrialised countries to the world’s new and dynamic emerging economies. It is advisable therefore to open up the IMF competition, focus on merit and qualification and let the best man/woman win.The issue of IMF leadership was also discussed at our roundtable debate "Taming the turmoil: New rules for global finance" on 19 May 2011 and will be tackled at our Asia-Europe conference on 21 June 2011.