G8Deauville - France

May 2011

The authoritative magazine for VIPs, delegates and diplomats

A note by François Delattre, Ambassador of France to the United States

G8-G20 France 2011: New World, New Ideas

The G7 was conceived as a gathering of leaders of the most advanced economies to discuss informally matters of shared interest. The world has dramatically changed since the initial meeting. Russia joined the group to form the G8, and a handful of developing countries emerged as full players on the global economic scene. Logically, the September 2009 Pittsburgh Summit marked a milestone in the reform of global governance by making the G20 “the premier forum for international economic cooperation” to reflect these new global balances and the growing role of the emerging countries. Direct, informal and results oriented, this is how we envision the “new G8”.

As the group’s chair for 2011, France will organize a “back to basics” summit on May 26-27 in Deauville, Normandy, focusing on issues where G8 members can have a genuine impact, but carefully avoiding the duplication of the G20 agenda. We expect this summit to enable the Heads of State and Government of the most advanced economies to conduct direct and informal talks. After consulting all the members, President Sarkozy identified three priorities on issues of common interest for G8 countries.

First focus: The discussion on peace and security issues will be driven by the sweeping changes currently taking place in the Middle East and North Africa region. We all support, collectively and individually, the democratic transition in Egypt, Tunisia and beyond. But there is a clear sense among advanced countries that their success in the long term will also depend on our capacity to respond and to foster economic growth and opportunities in the region. Debating possible options on the table is precisely the kind of discussions that we need to have at a political level between G8 leaders. This is really G8 at its best. In addition, hot political issues such as Iran and non-proliferation, the Middle East, Afghanistan and Pakistan, new drug trafficking routes connecting Latin America, West Africa and Europe, as well as the fight against terrorism will be on the menu of the leaders.

Second focus: New common challenges such as the Internet and green growth. For the first time, at the Deauville summit a set of Internet-related issues will be addressed by the Heads of State and Government. The discussion will focus on a number of challenges such as Internet access, cyber security and Internet governance. With regard to innovation and green growth, the aim is to come up with concrete measures to develop these essential new growth and job drivers for our advanced economies.

Third focus: The partnership with Africa. The G8 plays a major role in rallying support for development, especially in Africa. It is also an issue of credibility for the G8: we must continue to deliver on our previous commitments to this continent. A broader G8 meeting including African leaders and representatives of international organizations will be organized. Discussion will be held on the major political and development challenges. We will take forward the exercise launched by the Canadian presidency on monitoring the G8 countries’ commitments, especially in the areas of health and food security, in a spirit of mutual accountability with African countries.

There is much to do in all three areas under consideration, and one meeting will not be enough, but we feel ready to face up to the challenge.

François Delattre

Table of ContentsG8-G20 France 2011: New World, New Ideas 6

A note by François Delattre, Ambassador

of France to the United States

Editor’s Note 12

EDITORIAL 14

Publisher’s Note 16

What Good are Multilateral Summits? 28By Kenneth Weisbrode, Contributing Editor, The Diplomatic Courier

The French G8 Summit Agenda: 30 Does it Address the Major Challenges? By Mark C. Partridge, Contributing Editor, The Diplomatic Courier

Nuclear Reforms in the Wake of Fukushima 34By Casey Coombs, UN Correspondent, The Diplomatic Courier

Confronting Iran’s Crusade for Nuclear Power 38By Michael Gillis, Hinckley Scholar, Hinckley Institute of Politics

Stuxnet, Internet System Flaws and Cyber Attacks: 42 The Perfect Storm? By Ryan Paul, Hinckley Scholar, Hinckley Institute of Politics

How the International Community 46 Beefs Up Pressure on Somali Pirates By Sigurd Neubauer, Washington,

DC based International Affairs Specialist

In Defense of Afghan Refugees and Asylum Seekers 50By M. Ashraf Haidari, Diplomat, Afghan Ministry of Foreign Affairs

What President Bush Got Right and Wrong in Iraq 54By Rami Turayhi, Contributor, The Diplomatic Courier

Bringing Change to Developing Countries’ 58 Modus Operandi: Optimizing Government Operations Through Capacity Building By Philip H. de Leon, President, Trade Connections International, LLC

Getting On the Highway to IP Harmony 62Ambassador James P. Cain and Kenneth S. Chang,

Partners Kilpatrick & Stockton LLP

Meeting Promises: 66 A Call for Moving Forward at the G8 Summit Monique Perry Danziger, Communications Director,

Global Financial Integrity

The Digital Divide: Reinventing Rural Community 68 Experience through Internet Access By Tisah M. Quarnberg, Jonathan A. Muir, Brady Alex Currit

and Ralph B. Brown, Brigham Young University

Humanitarian Organizations and the Economic 72 Downfall – Policy Implications and What the Future Holds By Andrew Reeve, Hinckley Scholar, Hinckley Institute of Politics

The Global Economics of Obesity 74By Lisa Gable, Executive Director,

Healthy Weight Commitment Foundation

G8 Should Deliver on Aid Pledges 76 to Sub-Saharan Africa Department of Economic and Social Affairs, and Rudi von Arnim,

Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of

Utah and Hinckley Scholar, Hinckley Institute of Politics

The G8 Africa Partnership Must Face 78 the Challenge of China By David K. Schneider, Professor of Chinese Studies

at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Promoting Economic and Political Liberty and Women’s Equality in Africa 82By Michelle D. Bernard, Chairman, Founder, President and CEO,

the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy

Helping the South Sudanese Diaspora Return Home 84By Sheldon Wardwell, Hinckley Scholar, Hinckley Institute of Politics

Tools of Engagement: 86 Winning the Social Media War Expanding dialogue can help develop and restore trust By Sheldon Wardwell, Hinckley Institute of Politics

Tunisia: Perfect Storm for Reform? 88By Abdulwahab Alkebsi, Regional Director for Africa

and the Middle East, Center for International Private Enterprise

Increasing Access to Workforce-Ready Talent: 90 A Look at the “Partnership for Lebanon” By Christopher K. Bramwell, America-Mideast Education

and Training Services, Inc. (AMIDEAST)

Social Media and Rethinking 92 ‘The Clash of Civilizations.’ By Graig Klein, Contributor, The Diplomatic Courier

Modernization of Russia: Real or a Pipedream? 94By Richard Rousseau, Professor, Azerbaijan

Diplomatic Academy in Baku

Welcome to the 37th G8 Summit in Deauville, France

When the Group of Eight (G8) leaders meet in Deauville, France this May they will be confronted with a litany of issues. With food prices at record levels, a nuclear meltdown in the horizon, a still-lagging global economy, and a string of revolutions in the Middle East, this G8 is confronted once again with challenges impossible to tackle in three days.

As is customary with every rotating presidency, this year the French Presidency put forth its list of priorities early, but some issues not already on the list are surely going to be discussed at the leaders’ gathering in Deauville.

The Internet and Green Growth. This is the first time that a set of Internet-related issues will be addressed by the Heads of State and Government. Drawing a road map for international cyber security and deciding upon consumer protection regulations becomes increasingly urgent, as 20% of global GDP is expected to come from the Internet economy by 2030.

If anyone is poised to blaze the trail for Internet security it is the Group of 8, as their economic futures are dependent upon communication infrastructures and their countries are home to the largest companies of the Internet economy.

While we’re reimaging our international economic incentives, the ambition is to simultaneously invest equally in green growth. Strengthening our international cooperation in these initiatives will propel the global knowledge economy into the high-gear necessary for confronting our upcoming challenges.

The Peace and Security Component. Peace and security will be an essential element of the French presidency of the G8. In addition to political issues such as Iran, the Middle East, Afghanistan, Pakistan and non-proliferation, the French presidency will focus on new drug trafficking routes connecting Latin America, West Africa and Europe, along with fighting terrorism, particularly in the Sahel.

Tackling the Pandora’s box of unfolding drama in the Middle East within a three-day summit is certainly challenging. Remembering that a foundational objective of the G8 is to “counter terrorism and work toward the non-proliferation of weapons of mass destruction,” the world’s leaders should leave this year’s meetings with at least a few proposed plans of action to consider for increasing international security in the region.

And despite continuing turmoil in the earthquake aftermath, Japan will be in attendance, seeking to strengthen partnerships in order to bolster recovery efforts.

The partnership with Africa. The G8 has always prioritized African developmental issues, and this year will be no exception considering the unrest spreading across the entire continent. The group will focus on how to increase African capabilities to deal with regional crises and new common threats, as well as how to assist development in the failing states. “I would like our double presidency to prioritize Africa,” said French President Sarkozy at a recent Press Conference.

Food Security. Food price volatility has tripled over the last 20 years. This is all the more extraordinary when you consider that agricultural production will need to have increased 70% by 2050 to feed what will by then be nine billion people on our planet. Rising food prices have already caused instability in a number of nations, and while they weren’t the cause of political outbreaks in Northern Africa they certainly didn’t help.

President Sarkozy told reporters January 24 in Paris that “If we don’t do anything [about rising food prices], we run the risk of food riots in the poorest countries and a very unfavorable effect on global economic growth.”

Life’s Certainties. On the long untouchable tax havens, 600 tax transparency and information exchange agreements have been signed since April 2009. Thirteen countries have waived banking secrecy for tax purposes. And we will have the first evaluations from the Global Forum on national legal frameworks so that we can start making decisions.

“Our presidency’s ambition is simple: we live in a new world, so we need new ideas,” said President Sarkozy. “This new world is marked primarily by an extraordinary change in the balance of world economic powers.”

Ana C. Rold

Editor-in-Chief

* Kaeleigh Forsyth contributed to this note.

G8 Summit 2011

12

EDITOR-IN-CHIEFAna Carcani Rold

EXECUTIVE EDITORSKirk L. Jowers

Courtney H. McBeth

MANAGING EDITORRochelle M. Parker

CONTRIBUTORSAbdulwahab Alkebsi

Rudi von ArnimMichelle D. Bernard

Chris BramwellRalph Brown

Ambassador James P. Cain Congressman Jason Chaffetz

Kenneth S. Chang Casey Coombs Kaeleigh Forsyth

Monique Perry DanzigerPhilip H. de Leon

Ambassador Lisa GableMichael Gillis

M. Ashraf HaidariGraig Klein

Sigurd NeubauerRyan Paul

Mark C. PartridgeRichard Rousseau

Andrew ReeveDavid K. Schneider

Jomo Kwame SundaramRami Turayhi

Ambassador Pierre VimontSheldon Wardwell

Kenneth Weisbrode

GRAPHICS DIRECTORHenri de Baritault

COVER DESIGNEllesse Sorbonne

LEGALThe G8 Summit Magazine is a yearly publication independent of political affiliations or agendas published by The CAT Company. The articles in the G8 Summit Magazine represent the views of their authors and do not

necessarily reflect those of the editors and the publishers. While the editors assume responsibility for the selection of the articles, the authors are responsible for the facts and interpretations of their articles. Authors retain all legal and copy rights to their articles. None of the articles can be reproduced without the permission

of the editors and the authors.

EDITORIAL

PublisherThe CAT Company IncG8 Summit Magazine Company Ltd The CAT Company IncPresidentChris Atkins

Advisory BoardPeter AtkinsChris Atkins Jennifer Latchman

Graphic Design and Art directionHenri de BaritaultFounder intro60.com

President of Sales Mike Nyborg

Sales Executives Chris AtkinsDoug LambertGuy FurlJessica LaneJohn Armeni Lloyd MurrayMike NyborgRay Baker

Hinckley Institute of Politics - University of UtahDirectorKirk JowersIntern ManagerCourtney McBethCommunication and Outreach CoordinatorRochelle McConkie

Thanks To Ana Carcani RoldDiplomatic CourierHinckley Institute of Politics intro60.com

Special Thanks To Marie-Helene GlonProfesseure de francais diplome de l’universite de la Sorbonne, ParisDoug BreitmayerHead of ITDavid CastletonK Street MediaWeb Master

In MemorandumMark Marshall (1961-2010)President of sales

Dear Summit Readers,

I would like to take this opportunity to thank all those involved for their dedication in helping make this a successful 15th issue of the G8 Summit publication.

The CAT Company is the only enduring publishing company in the field, having published a G8 Summit publication for 15 consecutive years, continuing the tradition and continuing to get great recognition as the Summit’s foremost publisher.

The CAT Company continues to increase the exposure of the magazine with help from the massive growth of digital technology, using Scribd.com, Android and iPhone apps.

As a result of the high quality of our publi-cations, we are truly honored to be chosen to publish the official APEC/CEO Summit magazine for the APEC 2011 USA host committee.

I hope you enjoy our magazine and we look forward to seeing you in Cannes for the G20 Summit and the APEC Summit in Hawai’i this November.

Yours Sincerely

Chris AtkinsPublisher and Founder, CAT Company Inc.

Chris Atkins

Publisher’s Note

Hyundai Reveals New Brand Direction & StatementAt the 2011 Detroit Motor Show

- Hyundai defines new brand concept as ‘Modern Premium’

- 3-door coupe Velo-ster and Curb concept vehicle embrace new attitude

- Hyundai to “satisfy new values by creating new possibilities with new thinking about our customers and our cars,” says Vice Chair-man Chung

Hyundai Motor Company, the world’s fastest-growing auto-motive company by brand, of-ficially announced its new brand direction and statement today at the 2011 North American Inter-national Auto Show in Detroit.

New thinking. New possibilities.

Hyundai’ new brand statement will be “New Thinking. New Possi-bilities.” This encompasses Hyun-dai’s new brand concept, “Modern Premium,” which aims to provide customers with emotional value and experiences beyond expectations through new thinking and new pos-sibilities. The new brand direction also captures the spirit of change at the automaker, which has shown dramatic growth in all areas of busi-ness.

“Today, customers do not believe that expensive cars with unnecessary technology are pre-mium,” Euisun Chung, Vice Chair-man of Hyundai Motor said during a speech at the Detroit motor show. “Instead, they want their core needs fulfilled at an accessible price and with a car that exceeds their ex-pectations; a car that reflects their values and the times in which they live.”

“Hyundai is not just a com-pany that makes cars. Hyundai is a company that creates new possibili-ties. Our goal is not to become the biggest car company. Our goal is to become the most-loved car com-pany and a trusted lifetime partner of our owners,” said Vice Chairman Chung.

While traditional premium is usually linked with high prices for

the privileged few, Hyundai’s `Mod-ern Premium’ concept is based on the idea that high quality does not necessarily require a high price for a limited class. Hyundai will offer high-end, high-quality values at a surprisingly attainable price and values that customers never expe-rienced or expected. This will not be limited to just the product, but throughout Hyundai’s entire busi-ness, operations and services.

Hyundai’s new thinking and change in attitude has already been applied in various areas with proven

results, such as the highly-success-ful `Hyundai Assurance Program’ launched in the U.S. market last year and the 2011 Sonata, which shook up the mid-size family sedan segment with its dynamic `fluidic sculpture’ designs and unrivalled powertrain package. Genesis, which won the prestigious North American Car of The Year award in 2009, also redefined luxury with its attainable price compared to its award-winning powertrain and advanced audio and convenience features.

Now, at the 2011 North Ameri-can International Auto Show in Detroit, Hyundai unveils its latest creations that capture this spirit: Veloster, a three-door compact coupe that brings innovation to the segment. Veloster offers a coupe design with the functionality of a hatch and a unique third door on the passenger-side for easy rear-seat access.

Hyundai will also display its HCD-12 Curb concept vehicle in Detroit, while at the recent 2011 Consumer Electronics Show (CES) in Las Vegas, the automaker launched its global telematics brand Blue Link® and other independently developed in-vehicle technologies, presenting its advanced vehicle information technology systems to the world.

* More detailed press releases on Veloster, Curb and Blue Link® available.

Advertisement

Hyundai Proclaims Vision 2020 and Introduces New Group CI

“Together for a better future”

- Hyundai Motor Group’s new vision en-compasses Hyundai’s determination to firmly establish itself as glob-al leader

- Hyundai announces five core values to re-alize its vision for the next decade, along with the new group CI

(Seoul, Korea) Hyundai Motor Group today unveiled its new corporate vision named “Vision 2020” that will guide the auto-motive group for the next de-cade, as well as its new Group logo.

Based on Hyundai Motor Group’s new management philoso-phy “Realize the dream of mankind by creating a new future through ingenious thinking and continu-ously challenging new frontiers,” the Group proclaimed “Together for a better future”’ as its vision.

Hyundai Motor Group, led by Hyundai Motor Co. and formed in 2000, has achieved remark-able growth in all areas related to the automobile sector, including production of cars, vehicle material, parts, auto finance and logistics. In particular, the opening last year of its blast furnaces at its eco-friendly integrated steel mill, Hyundai Steel Co., further strengthened the Group’s status as a comprehensive automotive manufacturer.

To note, Hyundai has made a giant leap forward in brand value over the last ten years thanks to its focus on quality management, advancing from the world’s 10th largest car maker in 2000 to the No. 5 position in 2010.

As a result of relentless effort and continuous global manage-ment, Hyundai Motor Group now has 42 affiliates compared to 10 in year 2000, while its total asset jumped 219 percent to 115 trillion won from 36 trillion won in the same period. The total number of em-ployees worldwide also increased 81 percent to about 177,000 from 98,000 in 2000.

Furthermore, with the recent acquisition of Hyundai Engineer-ing & Construction (Hyundai E&C),

Hyundai Motor Group will have 50 affiliates, 126 trillion won in assets and about 184,000 employees worldwide.

Hyundai Motor Group’s new vision, “Together for a better future,” expresses its will to create ultimate value and promote harmonious growth for all stakeholders through eco-friendly management and re-spect for mankind.

Along with the Group vision, Hyundai Motor Group also an-nounced its vision and strategies for its three core sectors. By adding the construction sector to its cur-rent driving forces, the automotive and steel sectors, Hyundai Motor Group will be able to enhance its global presence and contribute to a better society and economy.

Vision & Strategies

Automotive VisionVision slogan: ‘Lifetime partner

in automobiles and beyond’“To become a trusted lifetime

partner of our customers, we will bring a new perspective to auto-mobiles through innovative mobility solutions based on human-centric, eco-friendly technologies and services.”

Advertisement

Hyundai Begins Construction for Plant in Brazil

Steel VisionVision slogan: “Leading the

new era of steel”“As an eco-friendly, resource-

circulating company, we will lead a new era in the steel industry by providing high value-added prod-ucts and services and realizing world’s best competitiveness based on cooperative relations with our stakeholders.”

Construction Vision

Vision slogan: “We build tomorrow”

“As a global leading provider of high-value engineering solutions, we will create the foundation for a better life through cross-business synergy and convergence with future technologies.”

Core ValuesHyundai Motor Group unveiled

five core values that will help imple-ment the company’s new manage-ment philosophy:

Customer: The customer will be top priority in all corporate values.

Challenge: Hyundai wil l al-ways explore new possibi l i t ies, refusing to be complacent.

Collaboration: Create synergy among all stakeholders and con-cerned parties.

People: Create a corporate culture that respects talent.

Globality: A combination of Global + Ability, signifying Hyundai’s strive to become a globally respect-ed enterprise based on diverse backgrounds.

Group CIThe Corporate Identity rep-

resents Hyundai’s management philosophy to “Realize the dream of mankind by creating a new future through ingenious thinking and continuously challenging new frontiers.”

The word Hyundai, rising from the ocean’s horizon, symbolizes the challenging and innovative spirit and the confidence of the Hyundai Motor Group.

The main color, `Hyundai Blue,’

embodies hope, possibility and trust. The straight line represents the unwavering, indomitable sense of responsibility, the will to ac-complish, and the compassion for humanity. The ultimate message is the bright future that Hyundai will unfold.

Established in 1967, Hyundai Motor Co. has grown into the Hyundai Motor Group which has ranked as the world’s fifth-largest automaker since 2007 and includes more than two dozen auto-related subsidiaries and affiliates. Hyundai Motor, which has six manufacturing bases outside of South Korea, sold approximately 3.6 million vehicles globally in 2010. Hyundai vehicles are sold in 186 countries through some 5,300 dealerships and showrooms. Further information about Hyundai Motor and its products is available at www.hyundai.com.

- Hyundai holds groundbreaking for 150,000 units-a-year plant in Piracicaba, Brazil

- New plant will pro-duce exclusive models for region starting in 2H 2012

- Brazilian plant will be Hyundai’s gateway to Central and South American markets

Hyundai Motor Company, South Korea’s largest automaker, started construction on its seventh overseas plant in Piracicaba, Sao Paulo state, to actively respond to soaring demand in one of the world’s fastest growing markets and to bring its manufacturing pres-ence in so-called BRIC countries full circle.

The groundbreaking ceremony for Hyundai Motor Brazil (HMB) was attended by over 300 VIPs, includ-ing Sao Paulo Governor Geraldo Alckmin, Sao Paulo’s former Gov-ernor Alberto Goldman, Piracicaba Mayor Barjas Negri and other gov-ernment officials, executives and

Advertisement

employees of Hyundai Motor and its parts suppliers, as well as local dealers and media members.

“Brazil is growing into one of the world’s biggest economic powers through stable economic growth and increased foreign investment, and the state of Sao Paulo is the heart of Brazil’s econ-omy,” Jong-Woon Shin, Hyundai Motor’s Vice Chairman, said during his welcome remarks. “Hyundai Motor, together with its suppliers, will create new jobs and contribute to Brazil’s auto industry. Our new plant, Hyundai Motor Brazil, will produce and sell only the best qual-ity cars to strengthen the trust that Brazilian consumers have shown in our products.”

Hyundai, which is investing a total of US $600 million in the plant, aims to start production in the sec-ond half of 2012, eventually reach-ing a maximum capacity of 150,000 units annually.

The first model to be produced at HMB will be a small hatchback specifically designed for the Central and South American market. Ad-ditional models will be added after 2013, depending on the market situation and demand. All these cars will be flex-fuel cars (which can run on both gasoline and ethanol), as 90 percent of cars in Brazil run on this type of fuel.

The plant, which is located 160 km northwest of Sao Paulo city, will be built on a 1.39 million square meter site, while the plant will have a floor space of 69,000 square meters, featuring complete vehicle production facilities such as stamp-ing, welding, painting, assembly and module lines.

Piracicaba, which has a popula-tion of 380,000, is located in Sao Paulo state, which is central to Brazil’s automobile industry. The state and city governments have

provided Hyundai with a wide range of incentives such as free use of land, support in infrastructure such as roads and some tax breaks.

Furthermore, to secure the highest quality, Hyundai Motor will enter the market with eight reli-able parts suppliers, as it has done at other overseas manufacturing bases. By doing so, Hyundai Motor anticipates that it will create about 3,800 new jobs, including jobs created at its plant and at its parts suppliers.

Hyundai Motor will apply its extensive plant construction knowl-edge to Brazil. Hyundai has set up successful manufacturing bases in other emerging markets such as India, China and Russia, not to mention its plants in the U.S., the Czech Republic and Turkey. Hyun-dai’s greenfield investment experi-ence in diverse markets will ensure that HMB’s critical start-up phase will proceed smoothly in all areas of operation, from manufacturing to administration and community relations.

Hyundai Motor sold about 80,000 units in Brazil last year, a 19 percent increase from 2009. While the i30 was the best-selling car in its segment, Hyundai’s eye-catch-ing ix35 and Sonata also boosted sales momentum upward. Increas-ing sales of its premium lineup, such as the Azera luxury sedan and Veracruz, has also helped enhance Hyundai’s brand image in the market. Hyundai expects sales to continue growing in 2011, aiming at sales of about 93,000 units in Brazil.

Hyundai’s presence in the region has gradually expanded over the years and will reach a climax in

2014, when the 2014 FIFA World Cup™ takes place in Brazil. Hyun-dai has an 11-year association with FIFA, serving as the official automo-tive supplier to all FIFA-sanctioned events around the world. Hyundai is currently one of FIFA’s top partners and has extended its strategic sponsorship agreement with FIFA to cover the 2022 FIFA World Cup™ in Qatar.

Hyundai, which exported its first car to South America 1976 (the Pony, to Ecuador), has been carry-ing out a variety of Corporate Social Responsibility (CSR) activities in the region, including building houses and fixing public facilities, as well as delivering donations in Brazil to contribute to the local commu-nity. Earlier this year, Hyundai sent a third round of its Happy Move Global Youth Volunteers group to Brazil.

Established in 1967, Hyundai Motor Co. has grown into the Hyundai Motor Group which has ranked as the world’s fifth-largest automaker since 2007 and includes more than two dozen auto-related subsidiaries and affiliates. Hyundai Motor, which has six manufacturing bases outside of South Korea, sold approximately 3.6 million vehicles globally in 2010. Hyundai vehicles are sold in 186 countries through some 5,300 dealerships and showrooms. Further information about Hyundai Motor and its products is available at www.hyundai.com.

For more media information on Hyundai Motor and high-resolution product photos, please go to: www.cisionwire.com/hyundai-mo-tor-company

Hyatt Regency Paris-Madeleine“Your Parisian Residence in the City of Light”

Hyatt Regency Paris-Madeleine, a five-star boutique hotel, is nestled in a convenient and bustling area of the 8th district in the cen-tre of Paris.

Situated on the typically Parisian Boulevard Malesherbes, this luxury

hotel is close to the city’s most important fashion streets, among them Faubourg Saint-Honoré, Rue Royale and Boulevard Haussmann, home to the department stores Printemps and Galeries Lafayette.

Hyatt Regency Paris-Made-leine is also near the city’s iconic attractions of Opéra Garnier, Place de la Madeleine, Place de la Concorde, the river Seine and the Champs-Elysées.

Glamorous, chic and sophis-ticated, Hyatt Regency Paris-Madeleine offers 86 rooms and suites. The hotel specialises in a discreet personalised service, with particular attention paid to each guest’s individual preference.

La ChinoiserieLa Chinoiserie, spectacularly

redecorated by the talented French architect Pascal Desprez, sets the sophisticated tone for the entire hotel.

Rich sofas and a contemporary decor influenced by tones of black and silver, and subdued illumination creates areas for discreet, personal gatherings enveloped in a soothing atmosphere, making this a special place to experience the personally created menu prepared with expertise by Chef Frédéric Charrier.

La Chinoiserie is the ideal location for a moment’s respite between shopping expeditions. A large number of celebrities have discovered the elegance of a club on the Left Bank of Paris here among the most prestigious addresses for luxury shopping. A place where, in the evenings, candlelight and an open fireplace create a magical atmosphere for joyful gatherings of friends or, perhaps, the most secret of rendezvous.

Café M & Champagne Bar

Continuing in the spirit of glamour and professionalism, Pascal Desprez introduced a new decor and atmosphere to Café M with the elegant tones of a lounge bar, featuring natural wood, dark drapes, and accents of black and gold. During the evenings, Café M transforms into a champagne bar, offering an unrivalled selection of cocktails and champagnes.

Our barman, Alexis Martinez, has personally selected a menu that features the best champagnes from the biggest names in champagne production, and welcomes guests to discover the exclusivity of products from Selosse and Gratien, the most reputable Champagnes in Paris.

Banquet RoomsMeeting rooms and banqueting

areas offer the perfect space for events.

Advertisement

All rooms are designed by Pascal Desprez following the theme for the entire hotel. Any event, party or conference enjoys a streamlined decor and outstanding service, perfect for privacy and concentration.

All banqueting rooms are also equipped with the latest in technology and services. They also offer extensive banqueting menus designed by Chef Frédéric Charrier, and available for breakfast, lunch, dinner and cocktail occasions.

In each of hotel’s rooms, four lighting levels are monitored to personalise the atmosphere of guests’ events, from business meetings or audiovisual events to dinners and cocktails. A video projector is installed in the largest room, while all the other areas have plasma–screen TVs with network hook-up available. Unlimited Internet access and mini bar facilities are at guests’ disposal, while, for their security and comfort, a safe and cloakroom are available.

The smallest room, Manhattan, reflects the hotel’s professional-ism in terms of confidentiality and discretion. This room can cater to up to six people and enjoys natural light with a view of the boulevard.

M’Eating Performance conceptToday, as performance is linked

closely to the notion of speed, Hyatt Regency Paris-Madeleine has developed a “non-stop” meeting concept.

M’Eating Performance has been created to answer the growing needs of companies that approach hotels to organise their meetings, seeking first and foremost luxurious space, efficient service and benefits that meet their needs.

Business guests can experience

this “non-stop” meeting special offer for just €105 per person, including bento boxes prepared by Chef Frédéric Charrier, a candy bar and a mini bar.

The bento boxes, prepared

according to the season, feature mixed salads, sandwiches (Club sandwiches and wraps), a fruit salad and macaroons from Ladurée. Practical, quick and modern, this makes guests’ lunches both delicious and energising!

In addition, the set-up displayed before the beginning of the meeting assures guests total autonomy, as well as flexibility and complete con-centration.

Spa Kéraskin EstheticsReinforcing its luxury positioning,

Hyatt Regency Paris-Madeleine recently launched a unique Spa offer in collaboration with Kéraskin Esthetics.

As part of its efforts to provide guests with tailor-made services, the hotel has partnered with Kéraskin Esthetics to develop a special beauty offer featuring specific esthetic rituals that involve high performance and wellness.

This new brand of excellence offers a menu of facials and full-body treatments, combining the best formulas of Advanced Research at L’Oreal and novel techniques for exceptional results and deep well-being.

Created two years ago, Kéraskin Esthetics has positioned itself as the leading brand in the market for esthetic treatments and confirms the success of today’s selective implantation.

As a result of the collaboration, customers have at their disposal a complete spa menu offering mixed facial care (New Youth), body treatments (Body Immersion) and express treatments. This turnkey service reflects the hotel’s desire to meet and exceed the expectations of increasingly demanding guests.

Treatments are provided at the Spa, which is open daily and offers a fully redecorated treatment room, a fitness room equipped with modern machines, a sauna, a steam room, two cloakrooms and a relaxation room.

What Good are Multilateral Summits?By Kenneth Weisbrode, Contributing Editor, The Diplomatic Courier

Few people pay much attention to summits nowadays. The attention they get comes more often than not from the street antics of those protesting them. There’s simply no comparing them to other multilateral gatherings: the Olympics or the World Cup, for example, which are watched by millions around the globe.

Perhaps this is how it should be: discussions among the world’s leaders cannot be subject to constant popular approval. And, unlike sporting events, they are not meant to result in winners and losers, but instead in the advancement of mutual agreement on particular questions.

All this is true in theory, at least. Today’s multilat-eral summits are so stage-managed as to give the impression that they are nothing more than photo op-portunities. And who needs any more of those?

Yet the world would be worse off without them. For there has yet to appear another means for the leaders of the world to manage expectations on a collective, global basis, in spite of all that has been said and written about the power of informal networks and associations in communicating directly to societies in the age of the Internet. The latter has transformed much of diplomacy, to be sure. But face-to-face meetings of the world’s top leaders are still considered vital to what in the past was called “world order” and today goes by the name of “global governance.”

Accordingly, these summits are as symptomatic of the state of the world as they are essential components of it. In other words, they “are” as much as they “do.” Another way to understand this distinction is to invoke the old dual nature of republican government: elected legislatures and executives are both representative and representational of the will of the people. That is, they try to represent both the interests of those who elect them and the idea of what an elected representative should do.

In recent years the latter form of representation has increasingly overtaken the former in many countries. This trend is just as apparent internationally. Do the topics and problems discussed at the G8 represent the true interests and concerns of people around the world? How real and definitive are the usual designations of such representation: “rich countries,” “developing countries,” “Asian nations,” and so forth? Are not most delegates to the G8 and the G8 itself just as preoccupied with promoting a certain image of global governance as they are with actually governing the globe?

An empiricist would answer that it is impossible to separate the two roles. Hence the usage of a single word—represent—to signify both. Maybe that is also as it should be. If the G8 were to deny its symbolic role it would be accused of hypocrisy; if it were to deny its operational role, it would be accused of futility.

The long history of multilateral conferences suggests some continuity with the G8 in the above respect. Rarely has a conference succeeded in accomplishing its aims if held entirely in secret; when conference delegates, on the other hand, have seemed mainly interested in publicizing pet causes—as in the last Copenhagen climate conference—the event is taken to be a failure. Generally bilateral summits are considered more con-sequential than multilateral ones, but not always. During the Cold War, some of the bilateral Soviet-American summits produced little besides an agreement to hold another summit, whereas the 1975 Helsinki Summit that established the Conference for Security and Cooperation in Europe is considered to have been one of the most important meetings of the 20th century.

Traditionally, the most memorable summits are those convened to make or validate a peace treaty. From the Congress of Gela and similar instances one reads about in Thucydides to the Congresses of Vienna and Versailles, these multilateral summits (though they were not called that) were momentous affairs. By contrast, most gatherings held during peacetime, and called for the purpose of preserving, rather than making or enforcing, peace, are less memorable. Thus the context of summitry matters a great deal. Who can remember the positive achievements of a particular UN General Assembly meeting? The multilateral conferences of the interwar years gave their name to a particular style of diplomacy—called, logically, “conference diplomacy”—but achieved little else that is remembered by anyone besides diplomatic historians. Most of the meetings of the G-groups—G7, G8, G20, and so on—have taken place more or less regularly since the 1970s. But most of us would be hard pressed to state a single, tangible achievement from any of them.

Yet, as any diplomat or legislator will tell you, “process” is important and often overlooked. The norms, language and even the ideology, of global governance are written, negotiated and interpreted at such gatherings. They are essential purveyors of consensus and, occasion-ally, of disagreement. They may not solve all the world’s problems, and may only constitute a small portion of the actual governance and consensus–building that goes on in the world by governments and non-governmental groups, leaders and citizens alike. But, to the extent they make possible and visible a forum for such consensus at the very top, they will continue to serve a purpose, and won’t disappear any time soon.

Kenneth Weisbrode is a Senior Contributing Editor for The Diplomatic Courier magazine. He is a diplomatic historian and author of The Atlantic Century.

G8 Summit 2011

28

The French G8 Summit Agenda: Does it Address the Major Challenges?By Mark C. Partridge, Contributing Editor, The Diplomatic Courier

The enduring challenge of any gathering of in-ternational leaders is to make sure the event is more than a photo op. And recent meetings have meet that challenge serving as the primary platform for the world’s largest and most powerful governments to coordinate their responses to the economic collapse and continuing recession.

The implosion of the financial system unified the world. The panic that was sparked by Lehman Brothers’ collapse caused investors to pull funds from even the safest asset classes. Markets around the world lost billions.

In November 2008, in the wake of the collapse, the world leaders came together at a G20 meeting and agreed to “use fiscal measures to stimulate domestic demand to rapid effect” and to take “whatever further actions are necessary to stabilize the financial system.” At that moment, leaders were united by a common threat and responded with a united front: stimulus, low interest rates, and bailouts.

With the G20 serving as the “premier forum for in-ternational economic cooperation,” the G8 has looked to redefine itself. One of the explicit aims of the group under the French presidency is “avoiding duplication of the G20 agenda.”

With economic coordination and response removed from its purview—particularly important now given the sovereign debt crisis in Europe—what should the G8 focus on?

Surely there is no dearth of challenges that need attention. The devastation in Japan, NATO’s engagement in Libya, the democracy movement sweeping through the Middle East, high oil prices—yet these issues are not on the agenda for the upcoming meetings in France. In their stead are: Internet-related issues; peace and security, particularly drug trafficking and terrorism; and partnership with Africa.

No doubt the agenda highlights important issues that need action—particularly Africa. But they are not the pressing global issues of the day. Why?

Firstly, gatherings of international leaders always need to be planned long in advance, and preset agendas can hardly predict the next crisis. For example, when this agenda was set, Japan had yet to be hit by the double blow of an earthquake and tsunami.

Also, just because something is not on the agenda does not mean it will not be discussed. Libya will probably be a hot topic since six nations at the meetings are members of NATO, which is overseeing the bombing campaign.

Finally, these gatherings hope to set long-term consensus, rather than the most recent crisis.

However, the unavoidable truth is that the G8 meetings are no longer the preferred decision-making body for global consensus. A recent illustration of that was President Nicolas Sarkozy’s failed attempt to get a no-fly zone in Libya through the body, only for one to be approved by the United Nations a few days later. The group also took the commendable step of passing up economic coordination to the G20 group for this exact reason: a group that did not include Brazil, China, and India could hardly develop consensus within the global economy during a time of crisis. Having ceded authority on military and economic policy matters to other bodies, what is the role of the G8 then?

The forum recognizes that it is in the process of transformation. If that is the case, then it should take the time to transform itself.

The G8 members first came together because they represented the largest economies in the capitalist world. Using this same metric, the group is missing the world’s second, eighth, and eleventh largest economies—China, Brazil, and India, respectively. By expanding the group to include a limited group of countries, it would almost immediately include all the major and up-and-coming players on the world scene, while also keeping the club small enough to make policy proclamations. The G8 currently claims to represent 15 percent of the world’s population and 65 percent of its GDP; including these three nations would jump those numbers to over 50 percent of population and about 75 percent of global GDP.

This idea has been floated before. The so-called “Plus-Five” group of Brazil, China, India, Mexico, and South Africa has been invited to past meetings, and President Sarkozy pushed to formally expand the G8 to include them in 2008; however, little came of the initiative.

With the global economy on the mend again, this may be the time to look to expand. For even if the G8 is able to reach meaningful conclusions at the upcoming meetings, it is missing some of the most important actors on the very issues they hope to resolve. No agreement on Internet policy, for example, can be reached without China, which is often cited for censoring and security issues.

The world and its challenges have changed. Now its institutions need to respond.

Mark C. Partridge is a Senior Contributing Editor to The Diplomatic Courier magazine.

G8 Summit 2011

30

G8 Summit 2011

32

Nuclear Reforms in the Wake of Fukushima By Casey Coombs, UN Correspondent, The Diplomatic Courier

Fukushima, the worst nuclear accident since Chernobyl a quarter century earlier, may provide the impetus for far-reaching nuclear safety and disaster response reforms. In the wake of the disaster, Nicolas Sarkozy, President of nuclear-powered France, is advocating international nuclear safety standards by the end of the year. Yukiya Amano, Director General of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), is pushing to overhaul an anachronistic emergency response framework. The proposals could mark the beginning of big changes to the nuclear industry, changes that could reassure the wary masses of nuclear energy’s safety. Or they could just be hot air.

Given that the calls were made in the global spotlight leading up to several major meetings of the nuclear powers that be, it is unlikely they are hot air—the stakes are too high. But neither do they seem to have been made entirely in good faith, at least in Mr. Sarkozy’s case, as the deadline by which he proposes to accomplish safety standards is exceedingly ambitious.

Ulterior motives aside, the leaders have placed themselves at the forefront of a debate that will unfold with two powerful interests in mind: national electorates, who stunted nuclear energy’s growth following Chernobyl, and a reinvigorated nuclear industry that has been thriving in the present regulatory environment. Mr. Amano and Mr. Sarkozy’s leadership on the reforms may well determine whether nuclear energy continues its recent and rapid expansion, or enters another post-Chernobyl period of atrophy.

Windows of Opportunity

Calls for bolstering nuclear safety standards and disaster response efforts came at a critical period on nuclear decision-makers’ calendar. In early April, the world’s 72 countries operating land-based atomic power plants held their triennial convention at IAEA headquar-ters in Vienna to discuss industry safety issues. Spe-cifically, the powers exchanged country reports they are obliged to submit as Contracting Parties to the Convention on Nuclear Safety (CNS), a key safety treaty adopted in 1994.

Mr. Sarkozy’s call for reform is squarely aimed at the non binding status of the CNS. As a non binding treaty, Contracting Parties are not compelled to follow CNS standards; they are merely incentivized by a common interest to formulate and achieve its international safety benchmarks. The French President’s March 31 call for reform in Tokyo seems to suggest that non binding standards are akin to no standards at all: “We must address this anomaly that there are no international safety norms for nuclear matters. We want internation-al standards because the world is a village and what happens in Japan can have consequences elsewhere.” Though he has yet to detail a plan of action, his words imply binding enforcement at the international level. In Tokyo, he pledged to take up the reform issue further by convening a special G20 meeting in Paris in May, in addition to addressing it at the previously schedule G8 meeting the same month.

While Mr. Amano’s call for reform does not take aim at the CNS, since a different Convention governs emergency response efforts, he encouraged the Contracting Parties in Vienna to consider lessons learned from the Fukushima disaster. One such lesson he reported to the IAEA Board of Governors on March 21: “the current international emergency response framework needs to be reassessed. It was designed largely in the wake of the Chernobyl disaster in 1986, before the information revolution. It reflects the realities of the 1980s, not of the 21st century.” A week later, he called for a high-level IAEA Conference on Nuclear Safety to be held in Vienna before the summer. On April 4, during his opening statement at the Vienna CNS meeting, he reiterated his position to the Contracting Parties that “We cannot take a ‘business as usual’ approach.”

The G8 Summit, to be held in France in late May, will be chaired by Mr. Sarkozy and thus presents an excellent

G8 Summit 2011

34

opportunity to marshal support from his elite group of peers. Indeed, he has a viable argument: the Fukushima disaster appears to be more the consequence of inadequate safety standards than deficient response efforts. The fact that the island’s seaside reactors and

the electrical infrastructure needed to cool them, which lie along the ring of fire, were not built to withstand a massive tsunami seems to reflect a major shortcoming in the current system of safety standards. Even so, Mr. Amano’s brainchild will also be an appropriate topic of discussion at the Summit, for the Group of 8 house the majority of the world’s nuclear energy capacity.

Rhetoric into Results

Translating rhetoric into results will be far easier for the Director General than the French President. Imple-menting Mr. Amano’s reform proposal would facilitate quicker distribution of more accurate information to the public and shave critical hours off of response times. That could stave off a more severe crisis and even save a few lives. And the Director General’s ideas should be implemented rather painlessly in coming months, much in the same way the present disaster response framework was created within seven months following Chernobyl—the reason being that the IAEA plays a co-ordinating, consultative role in disaster response that does not greatly restrict states’ sovereignty.

Implementing Mr. Sarkozy’s more ambitious reform proposal would lead to stricter safety standards across the board, such as heightened protective measures against earthquakes, tsunamis and other hazards, as well as prolonged alternative power sources during blackouts. But Mr. Sarkozy’s ideas will not prevent all

future disasters, as Black Swans manage to thwart even the toughest, most well thought out safety measures. And his dirigiste-style approach to implementing reforms, if he goes the binding treaty route, will meet strong resistance from the 72 sovereign nations whose nuclear safety is presently enforced by national laws created in consultation with CNS benchmarks. Convincing the nations to cede enforcement power to the international level will be an uphill battle: considering the non-binding CNS took two years to draw up, aspirations for a binding one by the end of the year are ambitious even for the notoriously dynamic French leader.

All that said, at the forefront of both leaders’ minds throughout the reform process will be to reassure a fearful global public that measures are being taken to reduce the likelihood of the next nuclear Black Swan. Public perception is perhaps the most crucial consider-ation in implementing reforms.

“There Is No Alternative Now”

As Mr. Sarkozy noted in his Japanese visit, “the problem is more about establishing safety norms than it is about the choice of nuclear energy, for this there is no alternative right now.” In a similar vein, Director Amano emphasized in his address to the Board of Governors that “nuclear power will remain an important and viable option for many countries as a stable and clean source of energy.” Nearly 500 nuclear power plants currently produce about 14% of the world’s electricity and, according to the OECD’s Red Book; the industry holds the potential to double by 2035. Nuclear energy is indeed here to stay for generations to come as part of the solution to rising world energy demand, worries about climate change, unpredictable fossil fuel prices and energy security concerns. But the size and scope of the industry, whether it is a principal alternative energy or an ancillary one, hinges on the way in which Director General Amano and President Sarkozy lead calls for reform. If orchestrated properly, public confidence in nuclear safety will not fall further, a necessary condition for continued expansion of the industry. If mismanaged, by failing to reassure national electorates of the alternative energy’s safety, the calls for reform could well be remembered as nothing more than hot air.

Casey Coombs is a New York-based UN Corre-spondent for The Diplomatic Courier magazine.

Global Security

G8 Summit 2011

36

Confronting Iran’s Crusade for Nuclear PowerBy Michael Gillis, Hinckley Scholar, Hinckley Institute of Politics

World leaders have remained concerned with Tehran’s clandestine nuclear program since it was uncovered in 2002. The Iranian regime has proven to be a master at stalling the efforts of the international community. Games of “cat and mouse” with Interna-tional Atomic Energy Agency inspectors have given way to talk of inspections. These talks of inspections have ultimately given way to negotiations for further negotia-tions. With the exception of a few rounds of sanctions, the Iranian regime has largely managed to nurture a capable nuclear technology program.

Western leaders are also concerned with the parallel development of advanced missile technology, which could easily become the ideal delivery platform for a nuclear payload.

As Iran continues to build up its stockpile, Arab leaders in neighboring countries are increasingly showing signs of concern. The United States has begun selling state-of-the-art missile defense hardware to help preserve the current balance of power in the region.

Although slightly further away, Israel—Iran’s sworn enemy—has voiced frustration at the inability of the international community to stop the Iranian nuclear program. In 1981 the Israeli Air Force executed a daring strike mission against the Osirak nuclear facility in Iraq. Although this tough action drew fierce international con-demnation, Israeli leaders never regretted undertaking the mission. A similar Israeli airstrike destroyed a secret Syrian nuclear facility in 2007—only this time, the Israelis did not draw strong criticism from the international community.

Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has publicly questioned if the holocaust did indeed occur. He also grabbed headlines in 2005 when he mentioned that Israel must be “wiped off the map” when speaking at an annual anti Israel demonstration in Tehran. The Israeli government does not take these threats lightly. Israel is a small nation geographically. If even a single nuclear warhead was detonated within Israel’s borders, her very existence would be threatened. One thing is certain, Israel is capable of, and has a proven record of

G8 Summit 2011

38

using force when it has felt compelled to do so. If they feel that the threat of nuclear holocaust is imminent, the Israelis will not hesitate to use force, regardless of the consequences.

There are several options the international community must develop in order to stop the Iranian regime from being able to develop nuclear weapons.

The first option involves diplomatic engagement. In hindsight, it has become evident that the Bush adminis-tration missed an opportunity to engage with the then-willing Iranian regime. President Barack Obama tried to reengage with the Iranians shortly after he became president. Sensing weakness from an overstretched military, the Iranians responded coldly to these attempts at reaching a diplomatic solution.

The use of sanctions has often been controversial and difficult because a broad consensus is needed to pass them in the United Nations. Furthermore, there is no guarantee that other nations will not simply ignore these sanctions in the pursuit of lucrative trade deals. Iran has been subjected to several rounds of sanctions which are applying pressure on the regime. Though not a silver bullet, sanctions weaken the Iranian regime from the inside by eroding public willingness to support their brazen policies.

The use of military force always catches the most headlines in the media. The Iranian nuclear program was built from its inception to withstand a military strike. With the Osirak attack in mind, the Iranian regime has compartmentalized its nuclear infrastructure in hardened facilities which are located deep underground. If a military strike did indeed occur, most experts believe that it would only be successful in slowing down the Iranian nuclear program by a few of years, at best.

One last approach is the use of espionage. Nobody knows who is behind the target assassina-tions of top Iranian nuclear scientists, but the chilling effects are very real. The discovery of the Stuxnet computer virus has also wreaked havoc on Iranian nuclear hardware. The rapid spread of this advanced computer virus has cast suspicion on Iranian scientists who have access to sensitive areas of the program. Israeli officials estimate that the Stuxnet virus has slowed down the Iranian program by at least three years—making it just as effective, if not more so, than a conventional military operation.

There is obviously no simple answer to such a complex and intriguing problem. Stuxnet and targeted assassinations of Iranian nuclear scientists have provided very real, but short-term solutions that can only slow down Iran’s nuclear program. The only long term solution that has any possibility of stopping the Iranian nuclear program is regime change.

Sanctions—though an external force—have added internal pressure on the regime. Young Iranians are feeling disenfranchised by their government’s inability to meet their daily needs. Many young Iranians have expressed frustration while trying to find jobs in a stagnating economy. They are also upset with ever increasing fuel prices. Although Iran is a net exporter of crude oil, it lacks the refining capability to produce its own gasoline. The rising fuel prices have become especially burdensome to the low and middle class.

During the run up to the 2009 Iranian presidential election, young Iranians mentioned that the winds of political change were blowing. President Ahmadine-jad’s challenger was a political moderate, concerned with Iran’s internal problems—like job creation—rather than focusing on outside “enemies of the state.”

After widespread reports of voting abnormalities, these youthful voters took their demonstrations to the streets of Tehran. The Iranian regime’s heavy handed response underscores the fact that they have lost touch with the will of the people. Unlike the current Iranian regime, the majority of the Iranian people are not obsessed with developing nuclear technology let alone “wiping other nations off the map.” They are more interested in finding meaningful jobs in order to control their own destiny.

The international community must keep ratcheting

up the pressure on the Iranian regime through the use of sanctions, espionage, and opposition support if it is truly committed to bringing the Iranian nuclear program to a halt.

Michael Gillis, a Hinckley Scholar, graduated from the University of Utah with B.S. degrees in Political Science and International Studies. He recently worked in the United States Senate as an aide to Senator Robert. F. Bennett.

Global Security

G8 Summit 2011

40

Stuxnet, Internet System Flaws and Cyber Attacks: The Perfect Storm?By Ryan Paul, Hinckley Scholar, Hinckley Institute of Politics

Cybersecurity has always been important for the security and economic well being of every nation. What is troubling is that several incidents over the past two years show an increase in the potential damage cyber attacks can cause and reveal that increasingly sophisti-cated methods are being employed to carry them out. These incidents, which show the emergence of sophis-ticated new malware, or malicious software, vulnerabili-ties in the Internet’s structure, and also cyber attacks against governments, show that solutions to cyberse-curity problems are sorely needed and the time to find them is beginning to run out. Governments will need to work with their citizens, the private sector, government agencies and with the governments of other countries to solve these problems and create a safer, more secure Internet.

The Chinese government has been suspected to have been directly involved in two high profile cyber attacks. One of these attacks was against commercial entities and the other was directed toward foreign governments. China is suspected to have had a direct involvement because of the nature of the attacks and the information which was stolen, but there is no evidence to implicate them directly.

“Operation Aurora” occurred in early 2010, and according to reports from Google and the U.S. China Economic and Security Review Commission, it involved

a highly sophisticated and targeted attack on Google’s corporate infrastructure that originated from two schools in China, one of which has ties to the Chinese military, and resulted in the theft of the source code for Google’s systems. The source code of these systems is considered to be highly valuable and is kept under very close guard. Along with Google, 81 other companies with an additional 33 possible others were also targeted.

“Shadows in the Cloud” was another elaborate ex-ploitation campaign in which a China-based computer network targeted several of India’s government systems, as well as 35 other countries, including the United States and even the office of the Dalai Lama. According to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Com-mission’s report, “the full extent of the exploitation remains unknown; the investigators determined that those responsible successfully obtained sensitive files, apparently belonging to the Indian government.” It is speculated that several files were encrypted diplomatic correspondence. Security experts have speculated that the attack was carried out by agents of the state rather than direct Chinese involvement.

The discovery of the Stuxnet virus in Iranian industrial systems reveals the first time a virus has been engineered to directly attack systems of this type. It was an amazingly complex piece of software and Symantec reportedly took six months to reverse engineer the virus

G8 Summit 2011

42

G8 Summit 2011

43

and determine how it functions. They determined that the virus’s main purpose was to reprogram industrial control systems, which are primarily used in gas pipelines and power plants, while remaining invisible to the operators and administrators of the systems. In addition to the Iranian facilities, Symantec reported that Stuxnet also infected 155 facilities in other countries as well, although these infections were believed to have been collateral damage.

Symantec estimated that it would have taken “six months and five to 10 core developers, not counting numerous other individuals” to develop the virus, and due to the limited evidence it is nearly impossible to know who is responsible, although it is suspected that it would be a state entity. Copycat attacks are unlikely

to appear in the near future because of Stuxnet’s complexity, however, according to Symantec, “Stuxnet has highlighted direct-attack attempts on critical infra-structure [that] are possible and not just theory or movie plot lines.” Stuxnet’s existence brings the idea of cyber warfare one step closer to reality.

One major incident demonstrated just how vulnerable the systems that manage and route Internet traffic are. Due to an error in a system, a large amount of Internet traffic was directly routed through a Chinese ISP’s servers. It is largely believed that this was an accident, although according to the U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission “evidence related to this incident does not clearly indicate whether it was perpetrated intentionally ... the capability could enable severe malicious activities.”

At this point it should be clear that Internet systems are vulnerable and the ingredients necessary for cyber warfare are beginning to fall into place. The problems are very complex and there are no simple or quick solutions for any of them. Experts in the technology sector have come up with several proposals that will at least partially fix the situation. In his article addressing cybersecurity responses to threats, Scott Charney, the Vice President of Trustworthy Computing at Microsoft, proposed that making the Internet less anonymous may help deter some cyber attacks and provide more accountability since the perpetrators of these attacks would be more easily found and held accountable for their actions.

A greater degree of education among the general population would also go far in minimizing the number of compromised systems that are connected to the Internet. Charney also proposes a sort of digital health certificate to allow safe systems to connect to the Internet and to deny compromised systems access.

There have been past attempts to address vulner-abilities in the Internet’s systems, but no agreements or solutions have been made. It should be considered as a high priority and governments need to work together with the private sector to fix these vulnerabilities. Until a solution is found, the best solution for the average citizen is to encrypt data being sent from their computer to the Internet.

Other possible solutions involve action solely on the political level. The World Trade Organization and the United Nations could adopt policies punishing countries that are lax on preventing cyber attacks that originate from within their countries. This could be done through the use of international law or through industry standards that help avoid the creation of a kind of Geneva Convention for cyber warfare. These actions may be necessary to prevent cyber warfare that would wreak havoc on infrastructure that affects civilian populations.

Ryan Paul is a new media producer who specializes in documentary production and Internet media. Ryan is a graduating with a degree in Mass Communication from the University of Utah. He grew up in Spokane, WA, but has lived across the United States, and is a proud citizen of Canada and the United States.

How the International Community Beefs Up Pressure on Somali PiratesBy Sigurd Neubauer, Washington, DC based International Affairs Specialist

As Somali pirates become bolder by the day, the United States and its allies are responding by beefing up naval operations while rapidly expanding their base-line for attacks from deep into the Indian Ocean. Given the severe impact decreasing maritime security has on

broader Middle East commerce and stability, Washington is starting to adopt similar punitive measures to fight piracy as it does international terrorist networks.

Taking note of the rapidly deteriorating security situation in the Gulf of Aden, Admiral Michelle Howard of the U.S. Joint Chiefs of Staff emphasized in a recent Pentagon interview that the overall solution to the piracy problem is on land, and noted that: “strengthen-ing the Somali transitional government in concert with the African Union’s peacemaking mandate is a key U.S priority.” Admiral Howard also noted that until a legitimate government takes control over the conflict-torn country, pirates will continue to operate with impunity.

As piracy has become one of the few thriving businesses for coastal communities in Somalia, U.S.

officials also believe that lawless groups operating in the high seas are increasingly engaging in other sorts of organized crimes including kidnapping, arms smuggling, human and drug trafficking.

U.S. Calls for Partnership Against Piracy

In the middle of our Pentagon conversation, Admiral Howard took a pen and passionately pointed to a map hanging on her office wall as she described in great detail how counter-piracy operations are carried out: “For instance, if a joint American, Singaporean and South Korean naval patrol receive word of a suspected pirate attack, the Singaporean frigate could scoot over and assist their German and Spanish counterparts to fight off the attack.” Similarly, she emphasized: “A Japanese, Russian and even Chinese vessel could assist the Spanish and German commandos.” She explained that decisions to assist allies are made in real time by local commanders at sea, there is no bureaucratic hurdle waiting for orders from the respective home offices.

G8 Summit 2011

46

“It’s all about partnership,” Howard reiterated.

American partnership efforts also include conducting joint naval exercises with its Gulf-Arab allies through the Strait of Hormouz and beyond. In a separate interview with Bahrain’s Foreign Minister, Sheik Khalid ibn Ahmad al Khalifa about the American presence in the strategically located Emirate, the Sheik emphasized: “if it wouldn’t be for the U.S. navy presence, pirates would plague the entire Arabian Gulf all the way up to Kuwait.” While, the Iranian regime continues to remain skeptical of the U.S. Fifth Fleet’s permanent presence in Bahrain—there are hints that Iran and the United States may be on the brink of coordinating antipiracy efforts as well. International media outlets reported in December 2010 that Iranian naval commander Admiral Gholam Reza Khaem Bigham met with U.S. counter-parts on the sidelines at an international anti Piracy summit in Sri Lanka. Confirming that media report, an unnamed Middle East scholar speculated whether U.S. Iranian counter piracy cooperation could serve as a confidence building measure, since ties were officially cut between the two countries following the Islamic Revolution of 1979.

No Links Between Pirates and Regional Extremists

In a testimony to the severe impact piracy has on the estimated 23,000 to 25,000 ships annually passing through the Gulf of Aden’s ”International Recommended Transit Corridor,” 2010 became a record year for Somali pirates as they hijacked 53 ships and held close to 1200 sailors hostage. Since December last year, 28 vessels and 638 hostages are still held for ransom by pirates.

Across the Aden Gulf, as Yemen is facing increasing instability by Houthi separatist rebels in the south, the Sanaa government is also battling an emboldened Al Qaida in many of the country’s rugged and barren provinces. When asked whether pirates are cooperating with Al Qaida affiliated groups operating out of Yemen, or with the local Somali Islamist, Al Shabaab group, Admiral Howard said that so far, there is no intelligence based evidence to suggest that such an axis exist.

Comprehensive Solution Needed

As of today, most experts believe that while there may be pirates operating out of southern Somalia, the northern gangs are by far the most dangerous. Hence,

the combination of a rapidly deteriorating Yemeni government and the already lawless Somali lands have complicated long-term anti-piracy strategies to the point where many experts believe that to fully eradicate the problem, pirate havens on land must be properly targeted. On the other hand, while some 90 percent of global trade travels by sea, Howard underscored that the more successful counter piracy operations on the high seas are, the more effective long-term stabilizations efforts of Somaliland will be.

As part of a compressive anti-piracy strategy, the French Parliament l’Assemblee Nationale recently passed legislation giving its naval forces full authority to detain pirates and try them in a court of law, irrespec-tively of their nationality or that of their captives. While the new law gives the French navy effectively the same powers as the country’s police, many pirates have until today been released after capture due to the lack of proper legal framework to arrest them and bring them on trial.

Questioning the immediate effectiveness of the new French law, NATO’s Ocean Shield anti-Piracy Commander Admiral Michiel Hijmans stated in an e-mail interview that the new legislation “could have limited impact at first, but when the word has spread that pirates are being prosecuted and have to spend many years in prison, it can have a positive impact on reducing the will to become a pirate.”

Although similar legislation has already passed in several NATO countries, NATO itself does not have a legal framework to detain and prosecute pirates, Admiral Hijmans explained. According to Admiral Hijmans, “if a warship operating within a NATO mission is involved in a piracy attack, the decision whether to detain and prosecute the suspected pirates rests with the warship’s national authorities—and not at sea.” As of today, the United States and Britain have agreements with the governments of Kenya and the Seychelles that suspected pirates can be deported from their waters and then extradited to face prosecution.

Explaining the new legislation’s impact, Hijmans noted how South Korea, the Netherlands and Germany are currently prosecuting pirates “caught in the act.”

As case in point, German Deputy Defense Minister Christian Schmidt articulated in an interview how his country has deployed 1,400 troops to naval bases in

Global Security

G8 Summit 2011

47

Djibouti and in Mombasa, Kenya to assist EU’s Naval Force’s (EUNAVFOR) counter-piracy operations. Schmidt also stated that additional German naval vessels are par-ticipating in joint patrolling exercises through the Strait of Hormuz while assisting U.S. and NATO forces to secure the Gulf from pirates.

How Pirates Adapt to International Pressure

At the Pentagon, Admiral Howard described how pirates effectively adapt to new counter-piracy strategies. “Since the beginning of my tenure, I’ve witnessed pirates

going further and further out. From being 200 miles off shore, they went to 400 miles—and now they’re 450 miles from India.”

Echoing that sentiment, Hijmans, the NATO commander stressed how pirates have begun launching their attacks from larger already hijacked vessels as they often use the kidnapped crew as “human shields” while seeking protection from navy commandos. “As they are becoming more confident in their abilities to overpower a ship while taking control, NATO in close cooperation with EUNAVFOR offers guidance and advice to commercial vessels on how to best transition the most dangerous waters.”

However, while Hijmans refused to speculate whether bolder attacks were caused by a deliberate strategy by pirates and their backers on land, the Admiral emphasized how piracy was “opportunity driven.” “Groups of pirates are sent out to sea with the means, orders and equipment to attack with the intentions to

bring the vessel back for ransom negotiations. Once at sea, pirates immediately look for a target of opportunity.”

Case in point, recent data released by the Interna-tional Maritime Bureau (IMB) finds that 92 percent of all pirate attacks take place off the Horn of Africa by Somalis. The same agency report revealed that pirate attacks increased by 10 percent from 2009 to 2010, with a total of 445 attacks last year alone.

Therefore, as pirates respond more aggressively to the multinational naval presence, the Commander of the U.S. Fifth Fleet, Admiral Mark Fox, was quoted calling for a new robust strategy to uncover their money trail and supply networks on shore with equal emphasis as those carried out in counter-terror investigations.

In perhaps the boldest counter measure today, Admiral Fox also suggested resorting to more military action usually associated with the U.S. counter-terror campaign, including pre-emptive assaults and strikes by armed drones.

While NATO does not have the mandate to carry out the operations proposed by Admiral Fox, the Alliance has provided a series of instructions to commercial vessels on how to win time, in the event of an attack, before naval forces arrive to their rescue. Among those instructions: install racer wire/barbed wires on all ships—and if attacked, respond with the vessel’s firefighting equipments from the upper deck to steer off pirates.

Moreover, as part of a strategy to strengthen overall security, South Korea’s Samsung Heavy Industries developed recently a new anti-piracy alert system capable of detecting smaller boats operating in the vicinity often undetected by current marine radar systems. According to a company statement, while the new system will issue an automatic alert when a vessel is approaching, it does not respond to ship-to-ship radio communications. The state of the arts technology would also leave sufficient time for sailors to remotely operate water cannons from the ship’s deck without being in harm’s way, in the event pirates should attempt opening fire while boarding.

Perhaps, after all, Admiral Howard was right: A comprehensive strategy targeting piracy assets on land would be the best option to prevent pirates from operating with impunity. On the other hand, the need for a joint U.S.-NATO mandate allowing for the arrest of all pirates seems equally apparent in order to fully combat piracy.

Global Security

G8 Summit 2011

48

In Defense of Afghan Refugees and Asylum Seekers By M. Ashraf Haidari, Diplomat, Afghan Ministry of Foreign Affairs

One last trek, which often tragically ends the lives of many boat refugees on the turbulent and sometimes stormy waters of high seas before they reach the shores of Greece or Australia, is only the tip of the iceberg. Afghan refugees, including many families with children, are not an exception and take the same life-threatening risk for a possible secure future. Last January, a ship going to Italy with 260 people on board sank near the Greek island of Corfu. Twenty two refugees, mostly Afghans, were reported to have been missing and drowned. And last December, a wooden boat packed with asylum seekers, including Afghans, smashed against jagged rocks in a storm off an Australian island, killing at least 27 people.

But those refugees who survive such frequent tragedies are no longer welcome in developed countries. Critics in those countries consider Afghan refugees as “economic migrants,” wrongly comparing them with such migrants from peaceful but poor countries. But it is imperative that countries with the strictest immigration policies reconsider their position towards Afghan refugees, who have proven time and again over the past 31 years that if the security conditions were good in Afghanistan, they would hardly abandon their villages of origin internally, let alone taking the long deadly trek to countries as far as Greece or Australia.

It is not surprising that even the United Nations agency mandated to protect the rights of desperate refugees is sometimes compelled to succumb to the tough immigration policies of certain countries. The

Executive Committee of the United Nations High Com-missioner for Refugees (UNHCR), which governs the agency, consists of 76 member-states that annually meet in Geneva to review and approve the agency’s programs and budget. In the process, some member-states ensure that their domestic immigration policies are taken into full account, before the agency’s operations are adequately funded.

In spite of these constraints, however, UNHCR has enlisted the support of many outspoken celebrities not only to draw global attention to the plight of refugees but also to speak up for the rights of refugees and basic human rights everywhere. Through UNHCR’s assistance, Afghan refugees have never hesitated to return home as soon as promising conditions have given them hope for restoration of peace and justice in their homeland.

Buoyed by international re-engagement in Afghanistan after the fall of the Taliban in late 2001, more than five million Afghan refugees returned home from Pakistan and Iran, as well as from other countries beyond the region, during the early 2000s. This made the largest voluntary repatriation in the history of UNHCR. But the basic expectations of Afghan returnees were dashed, as improved security, enhanced protection and reintegration assistance, and increased employment op-portunities did not materialize in the years following their return home.

Beginning 2004, however, the security situation rapidly started deteriorating in the country, and each following year witnessed intensified conflicts that indis-criminately killed, injured, and displaced Afghans, most of them recent returnees, who have lacked the financial means or coping mechanisms of others to survive. And as reintegration assistance, a critical component of UNHCR’s durable solution to the Afghan refugee problem, has failed to come forth, the returnees have either ended up becoming internally displaced or fled Afghanistan again.

In his December 2010 report on the situation in Afghanistan, UN Secretary-General Ban Ki-Moon highlighted worsening security throughout the country, noting that that the number of security incidents was 66 percent higher than during the same period in 2009. He added that anti-Government elements had continued to increase their use of improvised explosive devices and to directly target civilians through abductions and as-sassinations. At the same time, he reported that suicide attacks had averaged three per week, targeting primarily

G8 Summit 2011

50

military forces but killing scores of civilians. In 2010, unfortunately, more than 2,400 civilians were killed in Afghanistan, while over 3,200 others were injured.

Against this grim security background in Afghanistan, all countries must honor the principle of non-refoule-ment, rooted both in international and Islamic law, to refrain from forcible deportation of Afghan refugees and to avoid indefinite delays in the processing of their genuine claim for refugee status. Past experience proves that resettlement of Afghan refugees in the developed countries will go a long way in helping rebuild and develop Afghanistan.

Resilience and high achievement motivation that characterize most refugees will quickly enable resettled Afghan families to adapt into their new societies, taking advantage of social and economic opportunities there to establish themselves and to continue supporting

their relatives at home. In the long run, most resettled Afghans will have gained wealth and higher education which they will use to invest in Afghanistan, evident from the return of many well-off Afghans who have made significant contributions to Afghanistan’s reconstruction since 2002.

Almost 2,500 years ago, Euripides wrote that “there is no greater sorrow on earth than the loss of one’s native land.” Indeed, for most Afghan refugees—like those desperately landing on the shores of Greece and Australia for protection—no foreign land can ever replace Afghanistan where they will return as soon as they feel secure to do so.

A former refugee and internally displaced person,

M. Ashraf Haidari works with Afghanistan’s Ministry of Foreign Affairs. He formerly served as the chargé d’affaires and political counselor of the Embassy of Afghanistan in Washington, DC.

G8 Summit 2011

52

What President Bush Got Right and Wrong in IraqBy Rami Turayhi, Contributor, The Diplomatic Courier

Mentions of President Bush tend to provoke strong reactions from both his partisans and critics. He is often accused of irresponsibly going to war in Iraq and precip-itating that country’s slide towards civil war in 2006. At the same time, President Bush’s financial and economic policies are often conveniently overlooked in retrospect, as today’s political alarmism over a growing fiscal crisis in Washington drowns out thoughtful analyses of the past

decade’s undoing of this nation’s financial regulatory regime. The irony is that most partisans and critics have largely gotten it wrong: President Bush’s Iraq war will likely turn out to have been the catalyst of positive change in the Middle East and Islamic world, while his financial and economic policies have led to both an in-creasingly unstable and unequal economic environment in the United States.

First, let’s start with Iraq. President Bush is often accused of irresponsibly going to war in Iraq, and thereby causing bloody Sunni-Shiite strife in that country after the removal of Saddam Hussein. While it is true that President Bush’s oft-cited reason for war in Iraq – weapons of mass destruction – largely turned out to be false, his accompanying broader rationale for war – planting the seeds of democratic reform in the Arab heartland – has indeed come to pass. We are witnessing in early 2011 the growing pains of a new Arab political order, one that would likely not have been possible without substantive change in Iraq over the past decade. While the peoples of Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya theoretically could have thrown out their respective autocrats without the removal of Saddam, his ouster and the subsequent birth pangs of democracy in

Iraq have not gone unnoticed in the greater Arab world. Shame is a powerful catalyst for change, and one cannot look toward a relatively freer Arab population without asking oneself: “If they can talk, argue, and debate, why can’t we?”

Underlying the assertion that Iraq has been and will continue to be a force for positive change, there is also a related question of who or what caused Iraq’s civil conflict, largely fought between Sunni and Shiite Arabs in the 2006-2008 post-invasion period. Some would argue that President Bush, if nothing else, dismantled the structures of an orderly prison state and thereby let the figurative genie out of the bottle: if not for his ouster of the dictator Saddam, Sunnis and Shiites would have continued, albeit grudgingly, holding hands and singing songs of peace in a Saddam-led Iraq.

This assumption is largely made by those who either do not understand Iraq, or who have convenient-ly chosen to ignore the yearnings of large swathes of Iraq’s population. Iraq was never a model for stability or inclusion. Indeed, Iraq’s Shiites were systemically excluded from power over many generations, with the Sunni Arab ruling class often looking down at them as pre-Civil War white southerners regarded African-American slaves: Shiites were non-people, not worthy of self-rule, autonomy, or political power. Of course, not every Sunni Arab thought this way, and not every Shiite Arab played the part of the faultless victim, but this political-cultural dichotomy – of a Sunni Arab ruling political class and a Shiite Arab underclass – persisted in the broader Iraqi mindset for decades, if not centuries.

Overturning this accepted order would have necessarily led to civil strife and a violent reordering of the Iraqi political structure whether or not it was President Bush or the Iraqis themselves who ultimately overthrew Saddam. If one can accept this logical construction, then the blame that is often placed on President Bush for Iraq’s intra-communal killings in the mid-2000s appears conveniently misplaced. It was not in fact the American intervention that caused the civil war, but rather the democratic reform itself that did so. Hence, as long as one accepts the notion that the removal of Saddam and the introduction of democratic reform in Iraq was and is a good thing – and I certainly fall into this camp – then it is really quite unfair to blame the precipitator of regime change for the Sunni-Shiite strife. The long-accepted Iraqi political order itself, with all of its grotesque lack of humanism and compassion, was largely the root cause of the violence – not President Bush.

G8 Summit 2011

54

Global Security

G8 Summit 2011

56

Now, moving along away from Iraq and toward the political and economic decisions that President Bush got very wrong, we find ourselves delving into the oft-misunderstood world of domestic fiscal and financial policy. When he came to office in early 2001, President Bush presided over a relatively robust economy and a government that inherited a budget surplus from the late Clinton era. By the time President Bush left office, the United States was in the midst of a terrible financial recession, with large swathes of its population left unemployed, underwater, or otherwise destitute. How did this happen?

While there were many causes and drivers of the Great Recession and its accompanying fiscal crisis, President Bush and his economic team certainly did their part to undo regulatory safeguards, encourage irresponsible lending, and pass along massive fiscal obligations onto the next generation of voters. On the latter point, this nation has had a “debt crisis” for a long time now. Despite the political rhetoric in Washington today blaming everything from our nation’s money woes to purported American “decline” on President Obama, the truth of the matter is that America has had a spending problem long before 2008, and indeed long before 2001. Instead of paying down the nation’s debt when he came to power, however, President Bush enacted a series of tax cuts while engaging in massive unfunded spending binges, including a Medicare Part D prescription drugs benefit and both the Afghan and Iraq wars. While one can certainly make a strong case for any of these spending priorities a responsible politician would have asked his nation to pay for these expenditures, rather than pass the buck along to the next generation. Indeed, President Obama has found himself in the unlucky position of having inherited the backend of many of these spending binges, while at the same time having less of the fiscal resources to pay for them.

In addition to fiscal irresponsibility, President Bush also did his part – along with numerous Presidents before him – to undo much of the regulatory regime that kept banks and financial institutions from behaving recklessly with other people’s money. Lost in today’s heated partisan battles over appropriate solutions to our nation’s very real long-term fiscal problems is the admission of responsibility for allowing financial entities to take massive risks– and thereby garner massive gains – mostly at the expense of the American taxpayer and mutual and pension fund holders. This past decade has seen a massive transfer of wealth from many hard-work-ing, ordinary Americans to an aristocratic financial elite.

It is also increasingly unclear whether this moneyed elite has actually created enough economic productivity in America to justify the alarming levels of systemic risk they have produced, as increasing leverage ratios and massive counterparty risk inherent in many of today’s new financial products have helped to undermine the very stability necessary for a well-run and international-ly-regarded financial system.

Of course, there are many hours that can be spent debating the pros and cons of each of the myriad political and economic policies and prescriptions from the Bush era on up through today, but it would appear that the presidency of President Bush has been mis-characterized by many pundits all along the political spectrum. Indeed, President Bush’s unflinching goal of removing Saddam Hussein from power in Iraq has likely helped precipitate a genuine Arab political rebirth in the Middle East, both in Iraq and in neighboring countries. His economic policies, on the other hand, are in large part to blame for both the financial and fiscal messes we find ourselves in today. We do the nation, and ultimately ourselves, a great disservice by blaming President Bush for the wrong ills, while irresponsibly absolving him of his own very real political sins.

Rami Turayhi, is an Iraqi-American graduate of Columbia Law School in New York and a Senior Contributor at The Diplomatic Courier magazine in Washington, DC.

Bringing Change to Developing Countries’ Modus Operandi: Optimizing Government Operations Through Capacity BuildingBy Philip H. de Leon, President, Trade Connections International, LLC

Undoubtedly industrialized countries and internation-al organizations have played a critical role in helping draft policies for developing countries to help them rise out of poverty and strive towards political stability, economic development and prosperity. Many components of these policies are proven concepts such as good governance, ethics, accountability, transparency, etc. However, these policies are rarely directly coupled with a capacity building work plan to enable governments, state institutions and their civil servants to carry out those policies consistently throughout the administra-tive food-chain and over an extended period of time that can resist leadership changes at any level. Considerable amounts of time, money and efforts end up yielding little or sporadic results, raising doubt on the ability of these countries to benefit from any type of assistance. Such a conclusion is unfair. Yes, there are intrinsic factors that can derail the best-intended projects such as corruption, nepotism, or simply resistance to change due to vested interests and as change can bring to light question-able actions or lack thereof. However, there are many committed civil servants whom, if properly instructed, would want to carry their mission in a professional way. The eagerness of many of these officials to learn and to successfully implement policies that can improve food security, education or health conditions should not be underestimated.

A Capacity Building Strategy Is Often the Missing Link

Assistance policies and programs abound, carried out by governments, international and non-profit or-ganizations, consultants and experts tasked to share their professional experience. Many are well crafted and can generate good results but they are not optimized, and often fail short of their intended objectives. There is often a disconnect where the wheel hits the road. How can anyone expect an often underpaid and under-qualified local staff to feel truly committed? Furthermore, the sanctions one may incur when showing too much initiative in top-down societies is a deterrent for the most well-intentioned and motivated civil servant from sticking his neck out.

So instead of lamenting over failures of the system, let’s identify some simple and concrete capacity building measures that could be adopted, either on their own or preferably incorporated in these policies and programs.

- Designing a Clearly Identified Point of ContactWho’s in charge? That question should be answered

with a named individual that can be traced down rather than with the name of an office, or department no one ever seems to know what is going on. That point of contact should be made known to all parties as well as an identified back-up. An entire program should not be allowed to go amiss simply because the front person is not around, temporarily or permanently.

- Elaborating Statements of WorkOnce a person is in change, he needs to know what

he is supposed to do. This requires the elaboration of a statement of work that defines what is expected of that person, sets measurable milestones to be met, and also gives some background information as that person may not have enough perspective to put things into context. For instance, explaining that certain tasks have to be carried out before date X because a review board will use the results of those tasks to identify the next steps to be taken may sound obvious but we should never assume that what is obvious to us is to all.

- Providing Proper TrainingBeyond the basic fact that someone who is going

to work on something needs training, we also have to keep in mind that it is hard for anyone to implement alien concepts if one has never been exposed to these concepts. Meeting deadlines for instance may be a given but many countries have a rather liberal approach to time that can be detrimental. The mentality of “something will happen God willing” should be converted into “the right thing will happen if you take a proactive approach so act now.”

- Encouraging the Sharing of InformationOne of the most debilitating aspects of working

with developing countries is the compartmentalization of information and the lack of culture of sharing it. This results in the absence of institutional memory and every time a person holding to some sort of knowledge leaves his position, everything comes to a stop and the wheel needs to be reinvented over and over. The sharing of information and an open dialogue should be encouraged through regular staff meetings and barriers (hierarchic, ethnic, gender-based, etc.) should be broken down to allow an exchange of information and an open dialogue that transcend local customs.

G8 Summit 2011

58

G8 Summit 2011

60

- Supporting Initiative

The concepts of “everyone at his place” and “speak when asked to” should also be shaken down to allow initiative and accompanying action. Failing this, pro-crastination and indecisiveness settle in and motivation falters. At the same time initiative should be protected and not arbitrarily sanctioned. If one can take initiative and be rewarded accordingly, this greatly supports accountability and transparency over what is being implemented. A recognition system should be instituted with rewards, which does not solely have to be money. A medal, a framed certificate given during a ceremony, or extra vacation days can be considered.

What to Do Next? Money Is the Sinews of War

The assistance road is paved with good intentions but let’s be practical and look at human nature: unless there is a system of carrot and stick, goodwill is not sufficient over time to implement changing policies, even more so as it may take years before their beneficial effects become obvious. The stick approach with developing countries should not necessarily be patronizing, stringent and coercive: rather it should

be based on a system of rewards and guarantees of future continued assistance. After all, with limited resources and many needs, it makes sense to condition assistance to a shared commitment to achieve success. Capacity building should be an integral and indissociable component of the implemented policies and programs.

We also have to recognize our responsibility when there is a lack of results: our inability or reluctance to work on the ungratifying work of monitoring, implement-ing, and enforcing regular follow-ups defeats our best intentions. In the end, the greatest ideas lead nowhere

if no one is there to properly carry them out.

Philip H. de Leon is president of Trade Connections International, LLC, a Washington, DC based international business consultancy. Mr. de Leon spent 10 years at the U.S. Department of Commerce promoting exports to and investments in Eurasia.

Getting On the Highway to IP HarmonyAmbassador James P. Cain and Kenneth S. Chang, Partners Kilpatrick & Stockton LLP

As the global economy continues to struggle, the world increasingly seeks more efficient mechanisms to facilitate recovery. A key to that recovery is the harmo-nization of the global patent laws.

For over a century, nations have attempted to harmonize their patent systems. The last 20 years witnessed a slew of treaties adopted with the intention of harmonization, with each falling short of its intended goal of real consistency in patent laws across nations.

For example, the Agreement on Trade Related Aspects of Intellectual Property (TRIPS) laid down specific, substantive principles regarding intellectual property rights. And indeed, these principles applied to all who belonged to the World Trade Organiza-tion (WTO). Yet, agreements such as TRIPS form an incomplete patchwork of principles, not acts, and only highlight the inability of nations to agree on important patent-related issues such as patentable subject matter, access to essential medicines, compulsory licenses, and foreign filing requirements, to name just a few.

The differences between nations is understand-able. The diversity of patent laws can be attributed to the territorial nature of patent doctrine. As exclusion-ary rights, application of patent laws are limited to the legal rules of the jurisdiction in which they are granted. As such, countries develop their own sense of proper incentives for invention and what assets they wish to protect, consistent with each country’s culture and societal goals.

While countries such as the United Kingdom and the United States historically have fostered individual reward for invention, and have characterized patent rights as individual “property,” other cultures such as those in Asia emphasize commonality. For centuries the Chinese believed that society owned inventions and creative works. The concept of intellectual property as individual property rights is new, and thus many Asian countries’ patent systems remain either underdeveloped or have weak enforcement provisions. Understandably, the populace of these countries is reluctant to embrace strong patent rights, particularly when developed Western countries cannot agree on a unified set of patent law principles.

To ensure a sustainable global economic recovery, we need a strong push towards real, substantial harmo-nization of patent laws. In a global economy, all aspects of business extend beyond the territorial limits of one’s

own country. Multinational corporations, the top 500 of which control the majority of worldwide trade, simply cannot efficiently function in a sea of inconsistency regarding the acquisition and enforcement of patent rights. The current fragmentation means companies make fewer and less substantial investments in innovation. Inconsistent outcomes in multi-jurisdictional patent disputes erect barriers to trade and complicate global marketing efforts.

The majority of the international patent community continues to be supportive of harmonization. As previously stated, several treaties such as the Paris Convention for the Protection of Industrial Property (Paris Convention), the Patent Cooperation Treaty (PCT), the Patent Law Treaty (PLT), and the Trade-Re-lated Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) all serve to lay a framework for harmonization, but none accomplish the goal. The international community can take a cue, however, from one bright spot of harmoniza-tion: the Patent Prosecution Highway (“PPH”).

The PPH is a collaborative effort between par-ticipating patent offices to speed multi-office patent prosecution. In essence, when the PPH requirements are fulfilled, the work performed by a first patent office can be used to accelerate examination of a patent application in a second patent office. In so doing, one patent office may defer to the findings and avoid repeating the work of another patent. What started as a pilot project in 2006 between the United States and Japanese Patent Offices has expanded to cooperation between 16 countries (six of which are members of the G8) and the European Patent Office. By most accounts, the PPH has breathed new life into the sails of innovators, enabling faster and less costly global patent protection, and has helped reduce the backlog of applications in the various patent offices around the world.

G8 Summit 2011

62

Global Economic Recovery

G8 Summit 2011

64

At the upcoming 2011 business summit, the G8 can take the success gleaned from the Patent Prosecution Highway to another level by committing to harmoniza-tion of patent laws and practice in three areas. First, the G8 should commit all of its members to the PPH and formalize the various PPH pilot programs currently in place. In so doing, remaining nations likewise will adopt PPH programs to realize the advantages of the system and avoid being left behind.

Second, the G8 should reach agreement on the patentability of software, allowing patenting of such inventions in compliance with Article 27 of the TRIPS Agreement. Harmonizing this area of the law will encourage additional innovation of computer technology and applications across a multitude of industries throughout Europe and Asia, and increase foreign investment in these geographies.

Finally, the G8 should confront the conflict between the “first-to-file” rule awarding priority of invention to the patentee who first filed their patent, and the “first-to-invent” rule. The U.S. follows the latter rule, with much of the rest of the world following the former. Complete harmonization cannot be achieved without common ground between these conflicting practices.

With these three steps, the G8 and others with substantial interests in intellectual property rights can begin the journey down a path to consistent and economical acquisition of patent rights. Such harmo-nization will assist in the integration of these rights, and associated obligations, into developing nations’ juris-prudence and economic policy. Moreover, harmoniza-tion would allow all of us to hear the music of sustainable global economic recovery much sooner.

James P. Cain served as U.S. Ambassador to Denmark from 2005 to 2009. Through Kilpatrick & Stockton and Cain Global Partners, LLC he now provides legal and strategic advice for international firms seeking U.S. expansion and U.S. firms broadening their international operations.

Kenneth S. Chang, Partner, Kilpatrick & Stockton, focuses his practice on intellectual property litigation and counseling. Mr. Chang was named one of Denver’s “40 Under 40” by the Denver Business Journal, and a 2011 Super Lawyer by SuperLawyers magazine.

Meeting Promises: A Call for Moving Forward at the G8 SummitMonique Perry Danziger, Communications Director, Global Financial Integrity

When G8 meets this month the agenda will reflect a shift in global issues since the last G20 meeting in Seoul. At what promises to be an emotional and diverse meeting, it will be vital that the G8 retain its momentum on reforming global finance. Increasing transparency and accountability in financial practices is a key part of efforts to foster economic recovery and create a world economy more robust and resilient against volatility and decline.

Progress to date on achieving greater transparency and accountability in financial practices and financial in-stitutions has been uneven.

In what was seen as a setback, the long-awaited Guidance to the Bribery Act published by the UK Ministry of Justice released in early April significantly eased previously strong standards of corporate liability as set out in the original UK anti-Bribery Act. Watchdog groups decried the watered-down guidelines a concession to the UKL business lobby and called on the Obama Administration and the OECD, to press for a more acceptable standard of enforcement from the UK.

Measures to open the extractive industries to greater visibility, on the other hand, represented a major gain for proponents of transparency. Section 1504 of the Dodd-Frank Wall Street Reform Act One would require extractive resource issuers to disclose payments made to governments. This requirement, which was inserted into the legislation during conference negotiations, is based upon earlier proposals by Senator Richard Lugar, Senator Benjamin Cardin, and others seeking to mandate disclosures by extractive industry participants which are currently voluntary under initiatives such as the Extractive Industry Transparency Initiative.

The shadow financial system lays at the heart of much of the economic and political turmoil that has dominated headlines and no doubt will feature prominently in the discussions at the G8 and G20 this year. Money is the lifeblood of most global ills: corruption, despotism, terrorism, crime, and human rights violations.

Recent events have also thrust illicit finance and tax havens into the spotlight, once again. The political

upheaval in the Middle East and North Africa resulted in broad speculation as to where the illicit wealth of heads of state Ben Ali (Tunisia), Mubarak (Egypt), and Ghaddafi (Libya) was hiding. The freezing of $30 billion of Libyan assets in the US raised eyebrows and “brought the issue home” for many Americans.

Recent analysis by Global Financial Integrity (GFI) measured significant illicit financial outflows from Tunisia, Egypt, and Libya which led to increased income inequality and helped foment the political upheaval now reshaping the Middle East and North Africa regions. Egypt, for example, lost $57.2 billion in total from 2000 to 2008 while Algeria lost $25.7 billion over the same time. These outflows of illicit money helped sustain corrupt dictator-ships and choke off gains in quality of living standards despite strong economic growth.

The problem is systemic, requiring comprehensive solutions. The G20 pledged to tackle tax havens and foster greater communication and cooperation between member countries on financial matters. Restoring the UK Bribery Act to its original form, moving on key pieces of U.S. legislation like the Incorporation Transparency Act, and getting the OECD to revamp its tax information exchange agreements would be a solid start.

In an increasingly globalized world, where the markets and economies and fates of nations are increas-ingly interlinked, implementing measures to prevent the cross-border flow of illicit capital is a necessity. The massive annual loss of assets from developing countries sets back poverty alleviation efforts and forestalls attempts to reach sustainable economic growth in poor countries and stands in the way of achieving a stable, prosperous global economy.

The G20 has established a strong intent to tackle the shadow financial system. The world of late has been a chaotic and uncertain place. Moving ahead with plans to implement measures set forth in the G20’s Economic Development and Anti-Corruption plans represent a solid and dependable route towards greater global stability and economic prosperity.

Monique Danziger is the communications director for Global Financial Integrity, an organization which promotes national and multilateral policies and agreements aimed at curtailing the cross-border flow of illegal money.

G8 Summit 2011

66

The Digital Divide: Reinventing Rural Community Experience through Internet AccessBy Tisah M. Quarnberg, Jonathan A. Muir, Brady Alex Currit and Ralph B. Brown, Brigham Young University

A significant portion of the world’s populations (49.4 percent, according to the United Nations Population Division) still reside in rural areas. Accordingly, it is important for political leaders, city planners and social scientists to examine the changing dynamics of such locations. This becomes particularly relevant in light of social changes to modern society which increasingly requires a new breed of highly mobile individuals as well as the rapid advancement of new distance-demolishing communication technologies, such as Internet services.

High-speed Internet service has successfully emerged as a necessary market tool for networking, communication and business transactions as well as increasing social interaction and recreation. However, the Internet is not only an individual necessity, but it also has immense power in influencing basic elements of community experience. Rural communities with access to the Internet, as compared to other rural communities which currently lack Internet access, have higher levels of community participation, social capital

and community satisfaction and attachment. Internet access also constitutes an emerging tool for community growth and sustainability through increasing access to information.

In an information-based world, information is central to communication, attainment, commerce, growth and success. Access to and use of the Internet, therefore, is critical to survival in the information age. This access is not limited to individuals; community access to and use of the Internet is also an ‘empowering tool’ that not only positively affects communities and community outcomes, but also connects people, goods and services within communities and between communities. Thus, the Internet constitutes a revolutionizing technology in increasing social integration regardless of relative geographic isolation. However, when individuals and communities are not connected to the Internet, they may feel the effects of social isolation and ‘perceived non-existence’ across a digital divide.

G8 Summit 2011

68

Global Development

G8 Summit 2011

69

The digital divide— or the critical gap in society between those who do and those who do not have access to the Internet— has serious implications for community development. These gaps arise as members of society have increas-ingly divided levels of access to the information available only on the Internet—information that researchers have deemed critical to the growth of a community and its people. These gaps usually tend to widen along socio-economic lines such as between the rich and poor and suburban and inner city residents.

While Internet service and adoption is almost ubiquitous in more urbanized areas, access to Internet service is unpredictable in rural areas. Urban areas have had the utility of broadband Internet use for some time while many rural communities continue to have no service or limited Internet service. Further, there is unequal distribution of Internet access among rural residents within a given rural community. Individuals with greater education, income and higher social status are the ones that typically have greater access to the Internet. This serves to further broaden an already broad gulf between the rich and the poor throughout the world.

However, this gulf is not a purely economic issue as non-access has been shown to create serious social issues such as social isolation and perceived non-existence of individuals. This happens because community access to new information mediums enables community members to learn about and access the resources available inside (with community information, announcements, invitations, forums and commerce more and more often taking place on the Internet) and outside the community. Thus not having access to the Internet not only limits an individual’s connection to the outside world, but also their access to resources within their local community. Studies such as “Falling Through the Net” (published by the National Telecom-munications and Information Administration division of the U.S. Department of Commerce) capture this idea that those who do not use the Internet are left behind in a world that is advancing incredibly fast. Furthermore, it could be argued that rural communities in some ways are already “forgotten” and isolated, and therefore the lack of Internet or other high-speed telecommunications technology serves to increase the danger of perceived non-existence that much more. With these dangers in mind, policy makers must increasingly consider how to

best distribute such technology over social strata.

Bridging the digital divide isolating individuals and communities from the Internet

constitutes a new challenge for urban and rural planners, government officials and political leaders. Answering this challenge is critical for rural communities who are already vulnerable due to their geographic isolation. In an age where access to the Internet symbolizes a significant step forward in terms of improving quality of life, enhancing individual and collective freedom and creating more sustainable communities, rural communities can’t afford to be left behind.

Tisah M. Quarnberg is a graduate candidate in

Sociology at Brigham Young University (BYU). Her areas of study include survey research, community and rural development. Prior to entering the Master of Sociology program at BYU, Tisah completed a bachelor degree in Sociology.

Jonathan A. Muir is a graduate candidate in Sociology at Brigham Young University. His areas of study include social change, social stratification, community and rural development. He maintains a specialization in research pertaining to Southeast Asia. Prior to entering the Master of Sociology program at BYU, Jonathan completed bachelor degrees in Asian Studies and Sociology while minoring in International Development.

Brady Alex Currit is a graduate student in Sociology at Brigham Young University. His areas of study include community development, rural communities, social change, gender, applied research methods and social capital. Prior to entering the Master of Sociology program at BYU, Brady completed bachelor degrees Sociology while minoring in International Development.

Ralph B. Brown is a Professor of Sociology and Director of the International Development Minor at Brigham Young University. He is also the Executive Director and Treasurer of the Rural Sociological Society. His Ph.D. (1992) is in Rural Sociology from The University of Mis-souri-Columbia. His research has centered on community satisfaction and attachment in rural communities and on social change and rural development both in the U.S. and Southeast Asia.

G8 Summit 2011

70

Neil Garner, Founder and CEO of Proxama explains how the use of near field communications (NFC) is about to revolutionise the use of mobile phones

Much has been written and dis-cussed about the global unification that technology offers us. Without a doubt the web has facilitated a greater democratisation of com-munications in recent years through social media applications such as Facebook and Twitter but the next major milestone in the evolution of technology is going to be focused on the mobile phone.

This Spring will witness the first generation of smart phones that will be enabled with near field communications (NFC) technology. NFC enables the transfer of media-rich content through short-range wireless signals between a mobile phone and an NFC-enabled source.

The two main NFC applications - contactless payments and instant brand experiences - will revolution-ise the way consumers use mobile phones. NFC capability presents a whole new world of opportunities for commercial and not-for-profit organisations.

Contactless mobile payments – or m-payments – are much like the pay-ments you can make currently with con-tactless credit and debit cards, except they are made by tapping a mobile phone on a payment terminal. This money transfer is made possible by a ‘mobile wallet’ – a software application - that we at Proxama have designed and will be an integrated feature on new smart phones. Users simply pre-load the ‘mobile wallet’ with money via an online transfer from their bank account and can then make tap’n’pay transac-tions. The benefits for both customers and retailers are many.

m-payments should be consid-erably quicker than Chip&Pin and cash transactions which means less time queuing for consumers and greater through traffic and improved

customer experiences for retailers.Security and convenience are

high on the agenda too. Take travel for instance. Because commut-ers won’t need to fish out cash or a card from a wallet or bag, in the hustle and bustle of train and bus stations, they will be less vulnerable to theft or loss. Instead, they’ll just tap’n’pay for tickets or fares need-ing only to hold their mobile. And this scenario might only be months away from becoming reality as Proxama’s ‘mobile wallet’ – which is compatible with major contact-less payment systems - is currently being road tested for a potential introduction as a payment option on the Johannesburg public transport network.

So, let’s turn now to the other significant opportunity that NFC-enabled mobile phones offer. Not only is NFC going to breathe new life into more traditional media such as posters and bus shelter ads but it has great potential as a commu-nications medium for Governments and public bodies.

Much like with m-payments, mobile users will be able to tap their phones onto postage stamp sized tags that are embedded in posters, product packaging or point-of-sale displays. High quality, media-rich content will then be instantly downloaded to their phone without requiring 3G access or a URL link. Typically this tap‘n’load transaction could be a coupon or voucher that the user can then redeem immedi-ately in-store. Or, it could be a pro-motional extra such as a pop video that will grow a brand’s relationship with a customer. And, the beauty of NFC is that the downloads can then be passed on easily to other NFC mobile users - simply tap‘n’share.

The key to this is the Proxama-built NFC application that is loaded onto the phone at source and the data embedded in the tag that is supplied by Proxama along with the tools to enable organisations to cre-ate their content.

But it’s not just commercial ap-plications that will benefit from NFC. This vision is that governments – national and local – and other public bodies can reap the rewards of creating more relevant, impactful and longer-lasting communications.

For instance, in developing economies where mobile usage is the primary channel of communi-cations, NFC applications can be used to provide vital information on health issues to the popula-tion quickly and cost effectively by enabling them to tap’n’load con-tent onto their phone and then to tap‘n’share with family and friends.

There is huge potential us-age for NFC mobiles to be used by government and emergency services for disseminating informa-tion in situations such as the recent earthquakes and tsunami in Japan, educating people about life-threat-ening issues such as malaria or AIDs or even raising awareness of upcoming elections.

One very valuable execution NFC offers the pharmaceutical in-dustry is the validation of drugs and medication. Individuals will be able to check details like the source, ingredients, suitability, dosage and expiry dates by simply tapping their mobile on the packaging’s tag, thus preventing wrong usage or exces-sive dosage.

There is also the potential to save significant sums of money and lessen the impact on the environ-ment by not having to print leaf-lets. And of course there’s greater longevity - whereas leaflets have a limited shelf-life, information con-tained on a mobile phone will re-main usable until the user chooses to delete it.

NFC is undoubtedly going to have a seismic impact on the way the world communicates over the next few years. We’ll wonder what we ever did with out it.

Advertisement

Humanitarian Organizations and the Economic Downfall – Policy Implications and What the Future HoldsBy Andrew Reeve, Hinckley Scholar, Hinckley Institute of Politics

The last few years have been an economic roller-coaster. With the boom and crash of economies all over the world, there have been major side affects in almost every region and market. Philanthropy has suffered as a result of a variety of factors, including the financial squeeze of big and small business and tight economic situations many individuals find themselves in today. As a result, the organizations that carry out humani-tarian work in the world have found themselves facing problems such as lack of funding, how to handle the global recession and how to continue their work for humanity in the most effective manner.

For humanitarian organizations to sustain their programs that better society during a global economic downturn, they need to create their own ‘survival kits’ that give them the ability to weather economic storms in order to continue the development of the communities in the world that need the most help. One solution that helps change the way these programs function would be to decrease the funds to programs that are not working, allowing for reform within the system.

Another way these organizations could sustain their development in the world would be to create reserve G8

Summit 2011

72

Global Development

G8 Summit 2011

73

funds that allow them to sustain their most successful programs. This would allow these organizations to examine the program outcomes while fighting the global problem and look at programs that may have deviated from the original reasons for which they were created. We can see this issue facing the American Red Cross and possibly the Red Cross organizations around the world, especially as we see the continuation of natural disasters such as the recent tsunami and earthquakes in Japan and the devastation that ensued due to an earthquake in Haiti.

This presents us with a formula for calculating the way things should work in the humanitarian realm. When a recession hits, funding decreases, leading to a decrease in the revenue of these organizations. This means either expenses need to decrease or the organi-zations can use funds that are on reserve—a prepared pre-packaged financial kit. Next, these organizations need to sustain the programs and welfare of the global community while weathering the economic storm. This will allow them to rethink and reform the inner-work-ings of the goods and services they are providing, and also allow them to logically prepare for the next growth cycle in the global economy. The key to the equation is never to allow the successful programs to cease.

Although humanitar-ian organizations may have suffered due to the recent housing bubble that had crippling affects on the global economy, there is still hope for these organizations to carry out work in the future to fight the world’s humanitar-ian problems. These organi-zations can create their own ‘survival kit’ and diversify the way they receive funding; rather than accepting money from donors, governments or revenue building, they will be able to continue their work in bettering the world. Humanitarian organizations need to approach their spending and the way they receive their funds in a more diversified manner in order to face upcoming challenges, including the booms and busts that always occur in today’s economic climate. There are many ways in which this ‘survival kit’ can be created. The best way would be to create an inner financial structure where these organizations would be able to sustain the

welfare of those individuals in society that are in the most need of help. If the welfare of society is not kept at a sustainable level the world may go into another era of turmoil where ideals, not markets, would once again become the key factor at which governments look.

An article in The Journal of the Operational Research Society entitled “Humanitarian Aid Logistics: Supply Chain Management in High Gear,” argues that logistics are key in order to create sustainability. The article notes that many humanitarian organizations leave the “definition of logistics open to loose interpre-tation” but they generally define it as “the process of planning, implementing and controlling the efficient, cost-effective flow of storage of goods and materials as well as related information, from point of origin to point of consumption for the purpose of meeting the end ben-eficiary’s requirements.” This is another key aspect that needs to be examined in these organizations’ financial ‘survival kits’ so they can sustain their growth into the future. Being able to receive funds, create the goods and services needed to combat problems in the global community and then in turn use them to fulfill the re-quirements and goals of these organizations, like the Millennium Development Goals of the United Nations,

will allow these organizations to grow and fight disasters into the future.

As we continue on our economic rollercoaster, hu-manitarian organizations must stay focused on logistics, sustainability and efficiency. We will be able to watch the world grow in a peaceful manner in which the global community, like a child, grows in to a developed world where all can enjoy the benefits of

economic efficiency and success.

Andrew Reeve graduated from the University of Utah in Political Science, Economics and Interna-tional Studies. He served Hinckley Institute of Politics internships, in Washington, D.C., with the Center for American Progress and in Riobamba, Ecuador, with Ascend Humanitarian Alliance.

The Global Economics of ObesityBy Lisa Gable, Executive Director, Healthy Weight Commitment Foundation

Obesity is a problem without borders. It is capturing the attention of the world, especially as more and more children suffer from it. Last year, childhood obesity was the subject of a panel I participated on in Toronto, held in concert with the G8 meeting nearby.

Around the world, people share similar concerns, such as their families’ health and their children’s future. Obesity threatens both. It is a problem in which the U.S. seems to be taking a dubious lead, but other countries are not far behind. According to the U.S. Centers for Disease Control, about 70 percent of Americans are overweight. About half of them are obese. Globally, the World Health Organization projects that in 5 years about 1.6 billion adults will be overweight, and about 400 million will be obese.

Countries in which the problem of obesity is only beginning to emerge should consider the impact it is having in the United States. About 1 in 3 kids are obese or considered “at risk”, and other industrialized countries are not far behind.

The impact of obesity on our physical health is bad enough. But it also undermines our fiscal health. Americans, for example, spend 1 percent of our economy every year treating obesity-related ailments.

That’s the equivalent of an ongoing recession. But unlike a recession, the economic cost of obesity just keeps going and growing. The economic consequences of obesity show up every day in offices, factories and other workplaces. Over the course of a year in the United States, obesity-related disorders are responsible for nearly 40 million lost workdays, 239 million restricted activity days, and 63 million doctor visits by employees.

And while the economic costs of obesity are high, so are the potential economic benefits of addressing it. In fact, improving the health of employees is one of the best investments a company can make. A meta-analysis of studies in Health Affairs found that for every dollar companies spend on employee wellness, medical costs fall an average of $3.27. That is the balance sheet of obesityClearly, obesity poses a major health, social and economic challenge. We can address it only if we understand it: what causes it and what we must do to solve it.

But too often, the facts become overwhelmed by misconceptions, including a failure to fully recognize its two-sided character. Yes, obesity is largely about how we eat, and how many calories we consume. But it is also a consequence of how we live, and how many calories we expend – or fail to expend – through physical activity.

G8 Summit 2011

74

G8 Summit 2011

75

As the World Health Organization puts it: “The fundamental cause of obesity and overweight is an energy imbalance between calories consumed on one hand, and calories expended on the other hand.” Along with a global shift in diet, the WHO has cited “a trend towards decreased physical activity due to the increas-ingly sedentary nature of many forms of work, changing modes of transportation, and increasing urbanization.”

Our increasingly sedentary lifestyle seems to start in childhood. In addition to the lure that video games, computers and videos have for children, parents concerned about their children’s safety increasingly keep them from parks, playgrounds and sports fields. And many municipalities and school districts are unable to afford an adequate parks and recreation budget. In the United States, less than four percent of elementary schools, less than eight percent of middle schools, and just over two percent of high schools provide physical education or its equivalent for the entire school year.

The reduced access to physical education in

schools is a double threat. Healthy physical activity is important for both the body and the mind. For example, a 2007 Journal of Sports and Exercise study in the U.S. state of Illinois found that children who got good

marks on aerobic fitness and body-mass index tended to have higher scores in reading and mathematics, regardless of gender or socioeconomic differences. A study in the southern U.S. state of Georgia found that after 14 weeks students who spent 40 minutes a day in organized physical activity demonstrated academic and cognitive gains that were twice as large as those who spent only 20 minutes a day. It’s no wonder that Harvard psychologist Dr. John Ratey has described exercise as “Miracle Gro for the brain.”

The benefits of energy balance are clear. To reap them, we have to take in fewer calories, and expend more through physical activity. We must transform our sedentary culture into a culture of fitness and physical action.

It sounds like a simple formula. But we can’t be simplistic in how we pursue it. We can’t nag people into living or eating healthier. No one likes being told what to eat. That is why the Healthy Weight Commitment Foundation – a unique coalition of more than 150 retailers, food and beverage manufacturers, sporting goods and insurance companies, trade associations, NGOs and professional sports associations – is pursuing an agenda based on balance and moderation. We believe that the only effective approach is to promote solutions that make it easier for people to make healthy choices, to manage “calories-in with calories-out.”

Food manufacturers are making that easier for consumers through such measures as reducing portion sizes of existing single-serve products, developing lower-calorie options, or reformulating recipes. A study conducted by the Center for Human Nutrition found that portion-controlled packaging may increase awareness of portion size, leading to reduced consumption.

But at the same time, it is important that all stake-holders work to encourage people to increase physical activity, while decreasing the calories they consume. The problem will be solved only if we deal with both sides of that coin.

Lisa Gable is Executive Director of the Healthy Weight Commitment Foundation and a Senior Advisory Board member of The Diplomatic Courier magazine. Prior to her work with the Foundation, Gable held personal rank of ambassador when she represented the United States at the 2005 World EXPO in Aichi, Japan. At 30, she served as an advisor to the Secretary of Defense holding the protocol status of a 3 star general.

Global Health

G8 Should Deliver on Aid Pledges to Sub-Saharan AfricaDepartment of Economic and Social Affairs, and Rudi von Arnim, Assistant Professor of Economics at the University of Utah and Hinckley Scholar, Hinckley Institute of Politics

In 2005 at the Gleneagles Hotel in Scotland, leaders of G8 countries made commitments to debt relief and increased aid to the poorest countries, especially in sub-Saharan Africa. The G8 countries had committed to the Millennium Declaration in 2000. It was clear that a concerted effort was needed to achieve the Millennium Development Goals (MDGs) by 2015. Progress, however, has been slow. G8 aid to Africa falls well short of promised levels, and falls even below contributions from the Nordic countries.

Meanwhile, growth in sub-Saharan Africa has picked up, mainly due to increased world demand for minerals and other natural resources. The acceleration of growth rates of gross domestic product (GDP) in sub-Saharan Africa during the past decade has fueled hopes that the continent will finally begin to catch up after a lost quarter century. The acceleration of growth is real, but needs to be put in perspective. (Together with Oliver Schwank, we discuss these issues in detail in Working Paper No. 102 of the United Nations’ Department of Social and Economic Affairs. In this brief essay, sub-Saharan Africa excludes South Africa unless otherwise noted.)

First, sub-Saharan African annual per capita real GDP growth averaged a respectable 2 percent in the 1960s, but slowed down during the 1970s. Between 1980 and 1999, real per capita income for sub-Saharan countries shrank by about three quarters of a percentage point annually. From 2000 to 2008, growth was again faster at 2.4 percent per year. Sub-Saharan Africa has been second only to East Asia in recovering from the global crisis, but a lot of ground still needs to be made up.

Second, growth during the last decade was largely

driven by a worldwide boom in minerals and further discoveries of mineral deposits in the continent. The share of primary commodities in total exports reached almost 90 percent in the past decade, up from 86 percent in the previous decade. Economic performance often closely follows the vagaries of the global commodity price cycle. High commodity prices might be here to stay—due to a combination of high demand from emerging market economies, ‘peak oil’ and political events in oil-export-ing countries—but such bubbles always end. Further, natural resource extraction does not have the same potential as manufacturing to impact development.

In fact, no country in the world has successfully

developed without experiencing a substantial increase in the share of manufacturing in GDP. On this score, sub-Saharan Africa does not do well. The share of manufacturing in GDP for the region is 8 percent, and has fallen to that level from a high of 12 percent in the 1980s. The manufacturing share for all developing countries averaged 23 percent in the past decade, with 27 percent in developing Asia. Premature trade liberal-ization has further damaged already limited manufac-turing and related export capacities. The region’s share of world merchandise exports fell from 5 percent in the 1950s to 1.8 percent during 2000-08; its share of world

G8 Summit 2011

76

G8 Summit 2011

77

manufactured exports stands at a paltry one-fifth of one percentage point.

With deindustrialization came a retreat of government—even though government must facilitate private sector economic activity by enforcing the rule of law, providing political stability and financing public infrastructure, services and education. Since many transactions in developing countries are informal and hence untaxed, poor developing country governments have traditionally relied on tariffs to raise revenue. Trade liberalization has reduced the ability to do so, without providing alternate sources of financing. (A good chunk of government revenues in the region are, in fact, taxes on natural resource extraction and exports.) As a consequence, the share of government spending in GDP has fallen from about 16 percent during 1980-99 to an average of 13 percent during 2000-08.

Unfortunately, private investment has not picked up the slack. The share of investment in GDP in sub-Saharan Africa has steadily fallen during past decades, to only 17 percent now. Many years ago, Nobel Laureate Arthur Lewis suggested that the principal problem of development is to transform an economy that saves only a few percent to one that saves a larger share of national income, to finance productive investments.

External financial liberalization in the 1980s and

1990s was supposed to mobilize foreign resources. But portfolio investments in sub-Saharan Africa are negligible, and ill-suited to facilitate sustainable growth. Foreign direct investment (FDI) has more potential to make a positive impact. Appropriately structured and targeted, FDI can lead to diffusion of technology. However, Africa’s share of FDI to all developing economies has fallen from 21 percent in the 1970s to only 11 percent in recent years, or from 5 percent to only 3 percent of global FDI.

Moreover, FDI in sub-Saharan Africa overwhelm-ingly targets natural resource extraction. For example, the five sub-Saharan countries with the highest share of regional FDI during the past decade are Angola, Nigeria, Sudan, Equatorial Guinea and Chad—all oil-exporting countries. Positive spillovers from these investments are, of course, limited.

While sub-Saharan growth has resumed after more than two lost decades, concentration of growth

in natural resource extraction activities has limited its poverty reducing impact. According to World Bank estimates, the share of sub-Saharan African population living in extreme poverty stood at 50 percent in 1980, and rose to a peak of 58 percent in 1998 before falling back to 50 percent in 2005. Certainly, this is a welcome development, but not enough. G8 member countries should lead the international community, especially the OECD economies, to fulfill their decades old pledges of aid to Africa.

Jomo Kwame Sundaram (jomo@un.org) Jomo K. S. has been Assistant Secretary General for Economic Development in the United Nations’ Department of Economic and Social Affairs (DESA) since 2005, and (Honorary) Research Coordinator for the G24 Inter-governmental Group on International Monetary Affairs and Development since 2006. Jomo has authored or edited over 100 books and translated 12 volumes besides writing many academic papers and articles for the media. During 2008-2009, he served as a member of the [Stiglitz] Commission of Experts of the President of the United Nations General Assembly on Reforms of the International Monetary and Financial System. In 2007, he was awarded the Wassily Leontief Prize for Advancing the Frontiers of Economic Thought.

Rudiger von Arnim (rudiger.vonarnim@economics.utah.edu) is Assistant Professor at the University of Utah in Salt Lake City, UT, USA. He received the doctoral degree in Economics from the New School for Social Research in New York, NY, in 2008. His research focuses on international macroeconomics, trade and development, particularly the application of computer simulated models for policy analysis. Von Arnim has consulted the ILO’s International Institute of Labour Studies (IILS), Oxfam, UK, and the Inter-governmental group of Twenty Four (G24), among others.

The G8 Africa Partnership Must Face the Challenge of ChinaBy David K. Schneider, Professor of Chinese Studies at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst

On the G8 agenda this year is the partnership with Africa—development assistance, debt relief, AIDS programs, food safety, and health. Yet, promoting development will require not only an approach to these perennial problems, but also an answer to the challenge of China’s vision for the continent.

Indeed, the Forum on China-Africa Cooperation (FOCAC) assumes the “injustice and inequality” of the international system and seeks to establish “a just and equitable new international political and economic order.” As the vastly stronger partner in the relationship, Beijing will determine what this new order will look like.

The risk for Africa, and the problem for the G8, is that Africa may well be swallowed up in China’s own unbalanced economic structure, while losing opportu-nities to build a private-sector driven system, with free connectivity with global trade and capital markets.

Employment and political stability in China depend upon massive capital investment in heavy industry and cheap exports. Beijing therefore needs two things: reliable access to resource supplies and a competitive yuan exchange rate.

The first is essential for the viability of the state-owned–socialist–industrial sector, and the second to keep exports competitive–the engine of China’s capitalist sector. Both are highly sensitive to commodity inflation on the one hand, and exchange rate apprecia-tion on the other.

China’s quest for reliable flows of commodity resources involves not the West, but Central Asia, the Middle East, and Africa. The diplomatic organiza-tions that govern these relationships–the Shanghai Cooperation Organization, the China-Arab Cooperation Forum, and the FOCAC–operate as mercantile organi-zations.

As in Central Asia and the Middle East, Beijing is committing considerable investment to the infrastruc-ture and resource capacity of a number of African countries, with robust government support for Chinese enterprises building transportation, communications, water conservancy, electricity, and energy projects.

Growth rates in Africa have risen as a result. But the economic boost may not last as long as many hope. Over dependence on China risks making Africa a mere

regional component of China’s state-owned industrial sector. Beijing’s development credits are tied; the continent exports energy and raw materials to China’s heavy industries as payment for imports of Chinese capital equipment and machinery. African economies will thus develop as mirror images of the Chinese economy.

That reflection, however, will not include an African private sector with global connectivity and growing export industries, the very factors that produced all post-WWII development miracles. It is not only resource exports and infrastructure investment that produce development. Deregulation and integration into global free trade must follow for a breakout to occur. It was when New Delhi began to disempower the “License Raj” and to empower its private sector to trade with the world that the Indian economy began to take off.

But the best example is China itself. Rapid growth in trade and foreign investment came with China’s opening to global markets over the past 30 years, facilitated by Beijing’s capitalist economic diplomacy, a web of trade and investment agreements with the West and Japan, and later, full membership in the World Trade Organiza-tion (WTO).

The reforms have now advanced to the point where China’s trade is regulated not so much by administra-tive means but by the exchange rate. An undervalued yuan prolongs China’s dependence on low value-added exports—whose profit margins are sometimes so low as to require state subsidies to maintain employment—and denies other developing countries, including African countries, opportunities to invest in these same industries.

The need to keep exports running at a sprint pace entails pegging the yuan to the dollar and other currencies and keeping it undervalued, not a sustainable development model over the long term. While the government has begun an effort to reduce China’s dependence on exports and to move toward a domestic, consumer-driven economy, the transition will be difficult.

As the yuan appreciates, Chinese domestic purchasing power will rise and inflation will diminish. But the export engine will slow, putting growth and employment in that sector into decline before growth in the consumer sector can generate a compensating source of employment.

G8 Summit 2011

78

G8 Summit 2011

80

This would raise the risk of an economic crash similar to that Japan experienced at the beginning of the 1990s, with one significant difference: in China such an outcome would lead to serious social and political upheaval, threatening Communist rule. Thus, significant exchange rate liberalization is highly unlikely in the near term.

This places African nations in a double bind: first, integration into China’s socialist-mercantile system links Africa with the least efficient sectors of the Chinese economy, while embedding the continent in a web of managed trade regulations, tied to the vicissitudes of Beijing’s economic priorities.

Second, China’s exchange rate dilemma crowds out significant opportunities for African development of the very export industries that are now lifting China, India and other emerging economies out of poverty, thereby limiting Africa’s potential for lucrative connectivity with global trade and capital markets.

The G8 must craft an approach to Africa that deals with these problems. One important step will be a firm multilateral effort to work with Beijing to implement a sustained transition toward a more balanced growth strategy that emphasizes consumption as well as

investment and exports, designed to move China toward full integration with the world free trade and investment regime, and leading eventually to full con-vertibility of the yuan.

In the meantime, the traditional aid strategy will not be enough. The G8 governments must offer a strong alternative program of trade liberalization, privatization, private sector investment financing and tax incentives, especially for small and medium sized enterprises, and debt relief, combined with vigorous public and diplomatic support for African linkages with global markets and private capital investment.

After decades of stagnation, some African nations are poised to lead the continent toward a bright economic future. But to get there, Africa, like China before it, will need extensive inflows of private capital from the West and access to global free markets to make the transition from stagnation and dependence to prosperous independence.

David K. Schneider, formerly a U.S. Foreign Commercial Service Officer with posts to Beijing and St. Petersburg, is a professor of Chinese Studies at the University of Massachusetts, Amherst

Promoting Economic and Political Liberty and Women’s Equality in AfricaBy Michelle D. Bernard, Chairman, Founder, President and CEO, the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy

Public attention is focused on Libya, but internation-al poverty underlies much of the conflict in the Middle East. The suffering of billions of people around the globe remains one of our most serious challenges. The West learned the secrets of economic growth centuries ago. Asia is now catching up economically. It is Africa’s turn to provide its people with freedom and opportunity.

The history of humanity was one of poverty. The rise of commercial society transformed the old social order.

Today, the G8 members demonstrate how capitalism uplifts the poor. Markets are not enough to ensure that everyone prospers, but markets are essential for prosperity. And that prosperity is necessary for most other measures of social progress, such as providing better health care.

Democracy also matters. Accountability of political leaders, respect for the dignity of the human person, protection for personal and family autonomy—all of these are necessary to build prosperous and good societies.

Related to both is the status of women. The point is

not just the immorality of treating women as chattel. It is the practical waste of treating women as chattel. As columnist Kathleen Parker noted: “Without exception, every nation that oppresses women is a failed and, therefore, dangerous nation.”

At its May summit the G8 should make Africa’s transformation a priority. No doubt, there is fatigue in the West dealing with decades of crises in Africa. Indeed, experience demonstrates that traditional foreign aid

often hinders progress. Government-to-government transfers tend to entrench political and economic elites. But only the democratic, capitalist nations in the West have answers for Africa’s problems.

After years of distress, Africa has been growing over the last decade. However, many countries, such as Sierra Leone and the Democratic Republic of the Congo, remain limited by past crises. Moreover, a number of African nations risk taking a counterproductive detour through Beijing.

No doubt, the People’s Republic of China has grown spectacularly. And it has done so because its rulers chose to abandon Maoist collectivism for relatively free markets. But the Chinese model has limits. Most obviously, no African nation has the PRC’s large reservoir of low-paid workers for employment in Western enterprises. Moreover, even China may be running into economic constraints: the supply of Chinese workers is not endless and many now are demanding sizable pay increases. More important, China’s attempt to expand an economic marketplace within an autocratic political framework risks social explosion. Even the Beijing authorities acknowledge tens of thousands of protests every year. These would overwhelm most African nations.

Chinese investment in Africa has proved useful, but the Chinese are no less controlling than European colonial overlords. For instance, Zambia has been rocked by protests over Chinese mine managers who shot 13 protesting workers last year.

Perhaps the best African model is Botswana. It is more democratic and capitalist than China. Botswana shows African nations how to succeed. And it shows the G8 countries what Africa needs to succeed.

Africa doesn’t need more promises of aid. Observed economist Bill Easterly, “The G8’s solution to the problems of the poor is apparently to bore them out of poverty through sheer wordiness. They reaffirm previous reaffirmations, amplify previous amplifications, and clarify previous clarifications.”

At the upcoming G8 Africa summit both rich and poor nations need to take a different approach. The first is to expand market opportunities for African nations. That can be best achieved by reducing Western protec-tionism. The U.S. and Europe should stop protecting

G8 Summit 2011

82

G8 Summit 2011

83

their farmers at the expense of poor peoples around the world. The Doha round of the World Trade Organiza-tion needs to be reinvigorated. Wealthy nations should unilaterally reduce trade barriers.

The second approach is sensible debt cancel-lation. The West should not reward political improvi-dence by routinely relieving indebted governments of their obligations. But when an earlier dictatorial regime ran up the debts, reforms have been made, and new leaders commit to limit future borrowing, debt relief may be warranted.

Third, the G8 should continue to promote democracy. Rather than emphasizing human rights, the West should point to stability. Political repression has wrecked Zimbabwe. A stolen election in Ivory Coast led to national conflict. A potent mix of autocracy and poverty exploded in the Middle East. Even China may eventually realize that more popular participation is necessary to promote social stability.

Finally, the West should promote the role of women. Although human rights underlie the case for equality, there is a more practical objective: to employ all of Africa’s human talent. The status of women in Africa is not as bad as that in some Middle Eastern nations, but they nevertheless suffer from social discrimination, inadequate education, and violent mistreatment. Yet, even today the rate of female entrepreneurship is higher in Africa than in any other region of the world.

Countries that have suffered the most have the greatest need to draw upon their women’s talents. For instance, in Rwanda women have been making substantial economic and political advances. The U.S. Department of State recently sent a women’s technology delegation to Liberia and Sierra Leone, explaining that these two nations “are now positioned to lead change and build better futures for women and girls.”

The road ahead remains long and difficult. It is critical to improve education and economic opportu-nities. But long-term economic growth also requires political and social reform. The G8 cannot force Africa to change. But the West can, and must, encourage greater home-grown change.

Michelle D. Bernard is the chairman, founder, president and CEO of the Bernard Center for Women, Politics & Public Policy and an MSNBC political analyst. Ms. Bernard is a regular panelist with Hardball with Chris Matthews, the Dylan Ratigan Show, and The McLaughlin Group. Ms. Bernard is the author of Women’s Progress: How Women Are Wealthier, Healthier and More Independent Than Ever Before.

Helping the South Sudanese Diaspora Return HomeBy Sheldon Wardwell, Hinckley Scholar, Hinckley Institute of Politics

Amid this year’s political change in North Africa, many forget that history is also being made to the south and east of Libya, Tunisia and Egypt. 2011 will also usher in the birth of the world’s newest country: South Sudan. Despite a great deal of international support and a promising financial boon from oil reserves, South Sudan faces many challenges in establishing a functioning state.

In an extremely poor and volatile region composed primarily of former rebel fighters and returning refugees, loyalty often belongs to tribal leaders, not to the nascent government run by the Sudanese People’s Liberation Movement (SPLM), whose army led the fight for inde-pendence. In order to avoid a massive internal conflict and establish trust among its citizens, the government must implement widespread public services and institu-tions aimed at developing a middle class and giving the people a voice.

Beyond the tribalism, there remains an important

distinction between southerners: those who stayed and fought as rebels, and those who fled the region as refugees, most ending up in refugee camps in poor

neighboring countries. Though neither situation is something to be scoffed at, those who fought in the bush faced atrocious conditions, often went for days without food, gave up any possibility of receiving an education and continued fighting with no end in sight. Understandably, these former soldiers, who form a bulk of the ruling SPLM, are hesitant to share their new-found power with others.

Though many experts believe it will be at least a lifetime before significant power is shared, the SPLM has shown willingness to include others in establishing the new government. Such was the case at the political parties’ conference held in October 2010, in which 23 political parties united, calling for timely and transparent conduct of the referendum, which would later allow them to vote for unity or separation with the north. The gathering resolved that if the south achieved independence the government would establish a consti-tutional review committee composed of members from various parties.

Months later, the south went on to win its right for in-dependence with an astonishing 99 percent of the vote,

G8 Summit 2011

84

G8 Summit 2011

85

set to take effect on July 9, 2011. The government has since been criticized after some key political parties pulled out of the constitutional review committee for what they called the SPLM’s “dominance over all decisions.” In response, the government has assured the people that the interests and views of all South Sudanese will be considered when writing the new constitution, and citing the opposition parties’ extreme demands (50 percent of power in parliament, the cabinet and state governments) as the source of the committee’s fracture.

Although the government’s sincerity about addressing the interests of the people may be ques-tionable, one thing remains clear: the time for taking full responsibility of the country is very near, and if the government wishes to avoid a catastrophe similar to the ones which have plagued the region for the last 50 years, it needs to make sure the people are heard. The government’s success and livelihood will depend, in large, on its ability to ensure that public services are accessible to all ordinary people, which is a daunting task, especially considering the lack of infrastructure in the region and the fact that the ruling SPLM is dominated by semi-literate military figures.

Creating a competent government is going to require a forged relationship between those who stayed and fought, the ruling SPLM, and the refugees who have been pouring in since the 2005 comprehensive peace agreement. Largely untapped, and potentially one of the most valuable resources available to the south, are the thousands of refugees currently living in developed western countries, namely the United States, where they have been receiving advanced educations and gaining critical skills in fields such as business, public policy, engineering, health and education. They have also become accustomed to democratic processes and norms, attributes which will prove indispensable for building a new democratic state.

With 6.8 billion barrels in proven oil reserves, and an abundance of untapped minerals (gold, copper, iron ore and more), a stable South Sudan offers the exciting

prospect of a major natural resource exporter, as well as a moderate ally in a dangerous neighborhood. For this and many other reasons, leading countries such as the United States and China have shown a great deal of interest in seeing that the region achieve stability. As in-dependence draws nearer, assisting a broad workforce of skilled and educated South Sudanese to return home may be the most effective form of aid the international community can offer.

Over the past two years, I have had the opportunity to interview several South Sudanese, including soldiers and citizens in Juba, South Sudan’s capital, and refugees currently living within the United States. Despite reports of resentment between SPLM leadership and those wishing to return home, nearly every interviewee expressed a strong sense of camaraderie with their distant brothers, many in Juba noting the crucial support they had received from the diaspora in the form of remittances, small loans and construction projects. Conversely, a majority of South Sudanese within the U.S. clearly long to return home and assist with recon-struction; the major factor holding them back, however, is the prohibitive cost of relocating and finding work.

Programs offering assistance to such refugees have already been proposed, such as the Return of the Lost Boys and Lost Girls of Sudan Act, introduced in the United States House of Representatives in 2007. The bill sought to assist the well-known group in voluntarily returning to South Sudan to assist in reconstruction. Citing the resilient and ambitious nature of this group, their reputation for maintaining employment while pursuing higher education, as well as their expressed interest to return, the bill proposed creating a program which, in coordination with the Sudanese government and international actors, would identify projects that could benefit from the talents and skills of those returning and appropriate funds to help cover the travel, living, student loan repayment and other costs associated with the transition. Though the bill never passed the House Committee on Foreign Affairs, it offers an outline of what G8/G20 governments could potentially do, though the eligibility of such a program should be expanded to include all Southern Sudanese refugees, not just the Lost Boys and Lost Girls.

Sheldon Wardwell graduated from the University

of Utah in 2009 with a B.S. in Political Science and Inter-national Relations Certificate. After graduation, Sheldon served a Hinckley Institute of Politics Internship with the Rwanda Governance Advisory Council, and conducted field research in South Sudan.

Africa

Tools of Engagement: Winning the Social Media WarExpanding dialogue can help develop and restore trustBy Sheldon Wardwell, Hinckley Institute of Politics

More than 200 years before the invention of the Internet, a Boston tradesman gave a powerful demon-stration of the efficacy of social networking. As British troops prepared to march toward the American cities of Lexington and Concord on April 18, 1775, Paul Revere and William Dawes rode through the night on separate routes delivering a message meant to mobilize opposition. Author Malcolm Gladwell, in his book The Tipping Point, described how the well-traveled Revere’s many social connections enabled him to set the countryside on fire in a way Dawes was unable to match. The success of the famous “Midnight Ride” helped the American colonists win a decisive military and public relations battle.

Today, digital technology has brought new tools to quickly and effortlessly bring people together. Reports of protests aided by technology are not new. Text messages were said to have aided the successful 2001 ouster of Philippine President Joseph Estrada and were also credited with galvanizing support in Ukraine’s 2005 Orange Revolution.

More recent events in Iran, Moldova, Egypt, Libya and Tunisia have demonstrated the global reach of newer social media tools such as Facebook, YouTube and Twitter. These tools do not drive revolutions any more than Paul Revere’s horse mobilized an army. But they do act as an accelerant allowing natural events to organize and take shape much more quickly and broadly than they otherwise might have.

The response to these tools has ranged from hope to fear. Any tool that brings together protestors who can bring down governments is powerful. Depending on where you stand, a digitally-networked population can be your strongest weapon or your worst nightmare.

Sensing a potential threat, some governments have tried to censor or shut down access to social media. These efforts will fail. Social networking technologies are here to stay. Their influence and reach will only continue to grow. And frankly, that’s a good thing. Today’s digital delivery services offer unprecedented opportunities for governments and citizens to engage and interact.

Recognizing the power of social media, U.S. Speaker of the House of Representatives John Boehner asked me to lead a Technology Operations Team to

expand the dialogue between the American people and their elected leaders. Speaker Boehner recognizes the potential of these technologies to help us more effectively unite people, monitor public perspectives and share information.

When Paul Revere and his fellow colonists initially fought the British, they did so as a single colony. But as word slowly began to spread, all 13 colonies came together, forming Committees of Correspondence to coordinate their efforts. Today in America, those connections among the like-minded are happening faster than ever. The swift rise of a freshman Illinois Senator to President of the United States was aided in part by social media tools. Similarly, the surge of the so-called Tea Party movement in response to President Obama’s policies was equally rapid and significant. Such movements can develop quickly. If we don’t run with these tools, we will be run over by them.

In addition to uniting the like-minded, digital tools provide a critical portal into public opinion. Had King George III and the British Parliament in 1775 been able to see the thought bubbles of the American subjects (thoughts we now see expressed on Twitter), they might not have been so surprised by the response to the battles at Lexington and Concord. From 3,000 miles away, the British expected American colonists to be grateful for the protection provided by the King. They were completely unaware how deeply the message of freedom and in-dependence was resonating across British America. It is incumbent upon leaders to listen to the people we represent and to address the concerns that resonate within our communities. Instead of shutting down dialogue, we win the social media war by encouraging engagement and even participating in it. To the extent there is widespread dissatisfaction with government policies, we can work to address concerns before they develop into full scale revolts. Although social media does not give us an omniscient perspective of public opinion, it provides valuable snapshots that can confirm public support or warn us of danger ahead.

As beneficial as connecting with and receiving public feedback can be, the real advantage of social media is the ability to join the conversation. Public perception is shaped by facts. People are smart. When we make public policy, they want to understand the facts that drive our policies. G8

Summit 2011

86

G8 Summit 2011

87

Therein lies the greatest opportunity and challenge of a social media age.

The American colonists understood that winning

the public relations battle meant getting the truth out first. Anticipating that the British version of events would likely differ from theirs, Boston’s Sons of Liberty hastily compiled narratives describing the battles at Lexington and Concord from the American perspective. Recognizing that British General Thomas Gage’s report was traveling on a slow ship, the Americans deliberately sent their stories via the fastest ship they could find. By the time General Gage’s version of events arrived in England, British newspapers had already reported the facts of the battle from the American perspective.

In order to build support for our policies and positions, it is necessary to address misperceptions with real facts. Complex problems can be intimidating to understand and difficult to explain. Some citizens will see complicated issues like foreign or monetary policy as a big elephant they could never eat. But social media allows us to feed people that elephant one bite at a time – sharing facts over time that ultimately educate and enlighten. If we want to build support for our policies and positions, we have to be able to compete with a

broad range of messages in the public marketplace. The surest way to build support is to have facts on our side. When our solutions make sense, our facts are unimpeachable and our message resonates, there’s virtually no limit to how far and fast our message can travel in today’s digital age. The axiom that “if you’re explaining, you’re losing” does not have to be true.

Social media does not create or even drive political revolution. But the effectiveness of these tools in accel-erating existing movements means leaders ignore them at their peril. Instead, we must use these tools to earn and instill public trust in our institutions and account-ability in ourselves. Paul Revere’s success came from his ability to deliver a message that resonated to people who shared his concerns. To the extent we are willing to govern responsively, we have more to gain from social media than we have to fear.

Congressman Jason Chaffetz was elected in 2008 to represent Utah’s Third Congressional District. He distinguished himself by building a grass roots campaign organization rooted in principle and with a demonstrated commitment to fiscal discipline.

Tunisia: Perfect Storm for Reform?By Abdulwahab Alkebsi, Regional Director for Africa and the Middle East, Center for International Private Enterprise

In recent months, the Tunisian and Egyptian people have peacefully overturned decades of authoritarian rule, withstanding an onslaught of state apparatuses that have kept them in fear for decades. The new face of the Arab people – young, vibrant, educated, organized, connected, and hungry for democracy – has replaced stereotypes of a people mired in authoritarian political structures. The claims that the Arab world does not want democracy may finally be put to rest.

In Tunisia, the immediate challenge is for the people to shift from protesting against, to deciding what they are for as they shape their country’s future. But in a worrisome trend, politicians are not offering substantive reform solutions, calling instead for populist “quick-fix” responses such as government salary increases, subsidies, and public sector expansion. While such measures may appease Tunisians in the short term, they will provoke massive capital flight if they continue, and lead to a vicious circle of shrinking opportunity, rising anger, and further chaos.

That said, Tunisia has every chance of improving economic life for its citizens as well as attracting foreign investment if it follows through with a democratic trans-formation and includes the right economic reforms. A democratic state that is dependent on revenues generated from its citizens and businesses will necessarily become accountable to its citizens. Unlike other countries in the region, Tunisia’s economy is not solely dependent on natural resources but on the pro-ductivity of its workforce and the ability and innovation of its private sector. Tunisia has many valuable assets at the ready: ample human capital, including an educated and hardworking youth population; connectivity to the developed world; a secular middle class; and a reform-minded private sector. Tunisia’s many assets create the opportunity for this period of transition to become a perfect storm for reform.

Ultimately, the country’s leaders must come together and develop their own roadmap for reform. Yet, it is clear that any plan would have to include some basic elements:

Legal & Regulatory Reform – There is an urgent need to harmonize and simplify the laws that govern the local economy and investment. Reducing legal and regulatory burdens will reduce opportunities for corruption, foster private sector growth, increase transparency, and strengthen rule of law. This will have a direct influence on consolidating democratic governance and improving economic growth.

Anti-Corruption – Tunisians must make combating corruption a national priority and address it from an in-

stitutional level, including developing a robust respect for the rule of law. Transparency in decision-making means not only addressing opportunities for corruption in government institutions, but also supporting businesses’ understanding of corporate governance and the many linkages between improving private and public governance. One prominent example is the improvement of customs offices and regulations to eliminate the opportunities for bribery.

Public Sector Reform – Current levels of public sector employment are an untenable strain on resources. Reform of this inefficient sector must be a national priority. Improved governance of state-owned enterprises would increase the efficiency and effective-ness of the public sector. In a new Tunisia, the private sector needs to be the engine of growth, competitive-ness, and high-value job generation.

The Role of Civil Society – Civil society organiza-tions represent a diverse group of reform-oriented institutions, including chambers of commerce, asso-ciations, and think tanks. They need assistance with strategic planning and advocacy techniques so that citizens from all positions on the political spectrum can participate in the marketplace of ideas and enrich Tunisia’s democratic experience.

The private sector’s immediate and dedicated political engagement is crucial for Tunisia to attain its development goals and take its place as the economic powerhouse of the region. This includes active dialogue with emergent political parties as they develop substantive economic platforms. In Tunisia, youth used its collective voice to demand democratic change. Tunisia can be the test case for a new development model for the entire region, leaving behind authoritarian-ism and economic stagnation and moving forward with healthy improvements in economic growth, high-quality jobs, and democratic, accountable governance.

This model will only succeed if the new policymak-ing process for the country includes input from diverse actors within Tunisian society – political parties, civil society, labor, and, importantly, the voice of the private sector. Crucially, the enormous excitement generated by a “perfect storm” of favorable conditions for reform must be harnessed into positive energy if Tunisia is to realize the full potential of this golden opportunity.

Abdulwahab Alkebsi recently conducted a trip to Tunisia, where he met with political leaders from government and the opposition, as well as leaders of the private sector, labor, and civil society.

G8 Summit 2011

88

Does your marketing message get remembered?

Where to use itIn an email campaign

In your email signature

On your web page

On your facebook page

On Linkedin and Twitter

When to use itMonthly email news letter

Send a tip of the month

Daily email correspondence

Personal greeting

Follow up

How it worksYou provide us a 15-60 second script or completed video

We can provide you a spokesperson of your choice

We put your video marketing card together

We attach links to the front and back of your card

We send you the code to embed it in your online marketing

- Don’t just tell’em...SHOW’em

www.intro60.com . email@intro60.com . 801-694-6449

Be unique and be remembered

Instantly establish personal connection and credibility

Outstanding results - Modest investment

Increasing Access to Workforce-Ready Talent: A Look at the “Partnership for Lebanon” By Christopher K. Bramwell, America-Mideast Education and Training Services, Inc. (AMIDEAST)

The ability to hire workforce-ready employees is one of the most mission-critical requirements for any orga-nization. For decades, U.S. companies have expanded operations in international markets, but there is something emerging here: a “disconnect” that demands companies’ attention.

We are entering an era of talent scarcity where lack of access to ready talent threatens a favorable business climate and creates drag on a company’s achievement of its performance goals, or those of its partners, including suppliers and distributors.

When education systems produce professionals with basic knowledge, but not the skills to apply it in the workplace, multinationals face a talent gap that slows their performance.

Closing the Talent GapOnly 25 percent of Indian professionals are

considered employable by multinationals, according to research published by Hewlett and Rashid in the May 2010 issue of the Harvard Business Review.

Companies that ignore the other 75 percent—using the India example as an illustrative case—will face an ever-deepening talent gap as they and their partners attempt to penetrate or expand into new international markets and have to manage the risks related to hiring unprepared labor.

Corporate decision makers walk a fine line between expanding international operations into areas that are not workforce ready and waiting for interven-tions that will produce a more prepared labor force.

They could expand operations too quickly or too soon and play catch up with local talent that is ill-pre-pared to meet job demands.

Or they could wait, but wait for what? Wait for local education systems to produce job-ready talent? Wait for cultural shifts that encourage such values as collabo-ration across networks, continuous learning, or leading by influence?

Companies don’t have to wait for major sectoral changes in a country’s education system to achieve the workforce readiness they require to grow. Nor do companies have to “fix” education systems. They can instead focus on market segments and create

alternative pathways for getting professionals into the workforce. The result is enhanced career oppor-tunities for the community and a more innovative and effective workforce for the company and its partners. This advances the company and creates the favorable business climate necessary for performance and shareholder value.

“Partnership for Lebanon”In 2007, Cisco Systems teamed with the non-gov-

ernmental organization America-Mideast Education and Training Services, Inc. (AMIDEAST) under the “Partnership for Lebanon” to create alternative pathways to employment. The plan pipelined high-potential talent into pathways that served as direct feeders into the Lebanese workforce.

Qualified Lebanese professionals worked as interns with companies in Lebanon and in the U.S. One group of interns was placed with different Cisco Systems partners in Lebanon—companies that were not in a position to take on new staff. Through this program, Cisco covered the costs, allowing the interns to develop revenue-gen-erating work streams and otherwise add value to the partner company. At the end of the 11-month program, all the interns were hired by the partner companies as full-time employees, where they continue to enhance business operations and generate new revenue.

Other groups of Lebanese professionals were pipelined into six-month internships with the Cisco Systems corporate headquarters in San Jose, California. All returned to Lebanon and found full-time employment with Cisco Systems, Cisco partners or other institutions, including a bank that became a Cisco client after the intern it hired convinced them to purchase Cisco products.

In the partnership, AMIDEAST provided support that Cisco preferred to outsource: identifying the talent, developing the corporate internships in Lebanon and monitoring the progress of the interns in Lebanon and those in the U.S. Cisco Systems funding supported the activities, Cisco headquarters worked directly with U.S.-based interns, and it was Cisco’s vision that determined the objectives and overall direction.

As a result of this program, Cisco Systems stands to gain market share in Lebanon through greater innovation from the interns, new growth and strength from its partner companies, increased market reach and growth, and increased competitiveness.

G8 Summit 2011

90

G8 Summit 2011

91

The program not only empowered the interns and increased their sense of well-being, but it has a multiplier effect in doing so for the interns’ families and the communities in which they live. In this way, Cisco has also contributed to a more favorable climate in which to conduct business and they enhanced their brand and reputation.

Corporate Social Responsibility Funding or Busi-ness Strategy Investing?

Workforce-readiness programs that are accountable to advancing the company and creating a favorable business climate can be articulated as a strategy of investing in high-value programs and partnerships that promote human progress and economic development. An education and training focus within that strategy, such as pipelining talent through internships, will achieve a better workforce and a better community in which the business can operate.

Improving the business and investment environment and services for the company makes capital safe. Improving the capacities of the company to operate makes capital welcome. And improving the impact of investment on the educated, but unprepared labor force is where we talk about profitability for companies and their partners.

In other words, this strategy with its focus on education and training addresses three dimensions of capital. Human capital development results in a more prepared labor pool. Increased social capital provides a better community and business climate in which to

operate. Financial capital advances the business and achieves required performance with profitability and financial return.

A surprising bonus is that where these three areas overlap, you have what might be called “strategic philan-thropy” that companies can capitalize on for reputation and employee retention, which are both important business drivers.

Companies can fund this kind of program as a corporate social responsibility strategy that has business value or invest in this as a business strategy that also has social value. Either way, companies have the most convenient platform of all to work with—their own business operations. Through mentoring and internship pathways that use that platform, companies can serve as direct feeders for talent into the workforce, driving their own core business strategy, and creating social capital.

For more information about the Cisco-AMIDEAST partnership or details about the program to pipeline high-potential talent, contact Ms. Kate Archambault, karchambault@amideast.org.

Christopher K. Bramwell is based in Washington, D.C., and has worked on development assistance programs with non-governmental organizations for over 25 years. Chris has experience in over 50 countries, speaks three languages, and holds a bachelor’s degree from Brigham Young University and a master’s degree from Harvard University.

Social Media and Rethinking ‘The Clash of Civilizations.’By Graig Klein, Contributor, The Diplomatic Courier

The rapidly maturing field of social media, spe-cifically websites such as Facebook and Twitter, has powerfully challenged dictatorial legitimacy, becoming a platform for democratic discussion under repressive regimes, challenging the way we theorize the nature of conflict itself. While dictatorial countries might have tried over the past decade to control social media outlets, China and Iran, for instance, censure and sometimes block websites including Facebook, Twitter and Flickr, these same websites, have played a significant role in the initiation and the brevity of the overthrow of dictators in Egypt and Tunisia, and are currently influencing pro-democracy movements throughout the Middle East including in Bahrain and Syria since the beginning of 2011.

As the nature of peace and conflict has so greatly shifted in the past decade so must the dialogue. Since Foreign Affairs published Samuel Huntington’s influential article, “The Clash of Civilizations,” in 1996, it has become a relic, a symbol of the dynamics of conflict before the average citizen was given an internation-al cyber venue. Huntington argued on the nature of conflict after the Cold War: While cultures may mitigate geographic boundaries (i.e. the Western culture, the Arab culture) and form alliances based on broader ideologies (a phenomena attributed to the Cold War), differences between countries that share the same ideology would diminish in significant as globalization intensified and civilizations with dissimilar cultural norms and ideologies would also more frequently interact resulting in the new frontier of conflict–the clash of civi-lizations. But as the world becomes more technologi-cally advanced, can this theory be applied to the future nature of conflict as we have observed it over the past few months? Could it instead be argued that cultural differences and cleavages are lessened by the greater level of cross-cultural communication and interaction that social media outlets have provided; that instead of becoming more distinguishable culturally and letting our differences divide us, are we in fact, the younger generations, becoming more united under democratic principles?

The lack of cross-cultural communication has been a challenging dilemma for nation states, especially repressed countries, to overcome in the past decade, yet, recently it seems as though these cyber platforms, becoming more utilized, have helped aid revolutionary thinking and have stimulated the brevity of revolution itself. The effortlessness of disseminating opinion, photographs and activities and the overly easy viewing

of such information provides a new dimension in cross-cultural communication and develops a new frontier for transcending ostensible cultural blockades and impasses.

Aside from challenging Huntington’s perception of the dynamic path of conflict, technological advance-ments confront nation states’ relative monopoly on technology to influence peace and security. Social media platforms provide a means of quickly arousing a critical mass, an ingredient for a successful revolution. By providing a platform for mass communication and mass dissemination of protest locations and information, it can enable activists to quickly assemble support and achieve the critical mass required to initiate reform. As technology continues to increase in importance, in both 21st century revolutions and other political and social demonstrations, it has become a crucial aspect for any group to accomplish its agenda.

The recent non-violent protest movements in the Middle East and North Africa provide a good example of this utilization: as early as April 2010, Facebook groups were formed not only in Egypt, but throughout the Middle East in support of Mohammad El Baradei’s return to Egypt and suspicion of his political ambitions. When protests began in Cairo in January 2011, they centered around the leadership of youth who utilized Facebook to organize and vent frustration over the torture and death of innocent individuals throughout the country. Egypt quickly recognized the influence social media had on the democratic movement and attempted to stop the organizing ability of social media platforms by shutting down internet connectivity. An example of government attempting to maintain the monopoly over technological advantages in conflict, but it did not work. Several international organizations and countries urged Egypt to reactivate internet connectivity. Twitter and Google did not wait for Egypt’s response; instead the two companies violated this monopoly: undermining the dynamics of the country’s political system. A service was created that turned mobile phone calls into tweets. Pro-democracy dissidents managed to topple a thirty year regime in mere weeks through the effective use of social media platforms, thus sending a stunning and stern warning to dictators around the world.

Although Egypt is the best example of the success of internet technology challenging the peace and security of a nation state, there have been other recent examples of opposition movements widely and effectively utilizing this platform. In 2009, after corrupt elections in Iran, anti-gov-G8

Summit 2011

92

G8 Summit 2011

93

ernment protesters took to the streets and the internet. Videos were sent around the world of police brutality and Neda Salehi’s death via mobile phones and social media outlets. Not only did these images spur greater protests in Tehran, they encouraged international pressure for foreign intervention. Social media proved incapable of change in Iran, but less than two years later, it greatly aided in overthrowing the Egyptian regime.

As the wave of democratization continues to spread throughout North Africa and the Middle East, countries that border these regions have taken notice of the magnificent effect cyber connectivity has had in revolu-tionary movements. Sudan, a volatile borderland between Islam and Christianity, resources and bareness and au-thoritarianism and democracy, has experienced pro-democracy propaganda disseminated via the internet. Bashir’s rule has already been dealt a significant blow by the results of the South Sudan referendum and he refuses to cede anymore authority to opposition leaders within the territory he continues to govern. Additionally, though Bashir is aware of these pro-democracy changes, instead of listening to the online dissidents, Sudan is releasing “cyber jihadists” to monitor social media sites and intimidate possible free speakers through government oversight and violations of the human right of freedom of speech. While cyber warfare is not something new, Sudan’s approach to online security extends far beyond the normal parameters of government oversight and in-vestigation into online speech; Bashir is not monitoring social media cyber waves for state security, he is using government resources to monitor it for his personal and political security.

The influence of the cyber venues on political and social demonstrations and progress has primarily affected underdeveloped and developing autocratic countries, but developed, pluralistic, liberal democracies are not immune to the impact of social media platforms. For example, the United States, the beacon of democracy, has experienced the effects of these online venues. Sarah Palin has maintained popularity by frequently tweeting dissatisfaction with politics or indi-vidual’s statements, anti-union legislation in numerous states was met with heavy handed online responses through pro-union solidarity petitions, pro and anti union Facebook groups and a steady stream of tweets offering support for both sides. In pluralistic societies, social media often does not pose a direct threat to the ruling regime; it simply acts as the new frontier of freedom ofspeech and propaganda dissemination and serves as a public soap box.

Although the internet may present less danger to democratic governments, social media empowers these democracies in a unique way. Instead of protecting government secrets or attempting to infiltrate foreign hard drives and networks for their government secrets, as China, the United States and Russia have been routinely charged with orchestrating, governments could engage in covert missions to spread more democratic and secular ideology. Government operations could largely remain faceless by creating and maintaining fake online accounts. While this cannot serve as the only means of disseminating democratic ideals and working to democratize the world, establishing false online identities and working to assist pro-democrat-ic groups provides a cheaper and easier means of reaching the next generation of leaders in a language they understand; especially in the Middle East where internet access and literacy is rapidly increasing in part by globalization, in part to infrastructure development and in a large part due to the rapidly increasing youth populations.

The average citizen, with the internet, experiences unprecedented access to political and social develop-ments minute by minute and can thus influence political discourse from his couch. The amount of effort and time required to reach a critical mass has been exponential-ly reduced. When laughing babies can attract twenty million views on Youtube, social media can catalyze the overthrow of a thirty year regime in a country of eighty million within a few weeks, changing our theoretical definition of conflict itself. Opposition leaders, once in danger of assassination, can avoid public appearances that put themselves in grave danger by organizing in the comfort of their home or secure location. Social media is an international language understood by and ingrained in the younger and future generations of the world which has knocked down the wall to cross-cultur-al communication, lessoning the “clash” between civili-zations.

The unprecedented popularity and successful use of social media platforms opens the stage for a new age of political discourse, challenging the theoretical nature of conflict as it has existed between different countries and cultures throughout history.

Graig Klein is a Contributor with The Diplomatic Courier magazine in Washington, DC.

Middle East

Modernization of Russia: Real or a Pipedream?By Richard Rousseau, Professor, Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy in Baku

During his first trip to the U.S. in June 2010 Russian President Dmitry Medvedev tried to show the world that Russia is open to innovations and investment from the West since these are the pillars of his plan to improve the country’s economy. He also made known to all that he keeps abreast of rapid technological advances: He and a group of other Russians met with high-tech industry leaders in Silicon Valley, including Apple CEO Steve Jobs. Medvedev bought the latest model iPhone and created a Twitter account. At home, he unveiled plans to develop an ultramodern technology hub (called “innograd” or innovation city) in Skolkovo, not far from Moscow.

In 2009, President Medvedev announced that Russia will travel the road to prosperity and modernization. In an article posted on the official website of the President of Russia (Kremlin.ru) he self-confidently criticized the “primitive economy based on raw materials and endemic corruption” and the “paternalistic attitude” of Russian citizens. He set five modernization priorities: Improving energy production and transportation efficiency, raising nuclear technology to world standards, upgrading information technology by using “supercom-puters” and other equipment, developing the country’s ground and space infrastructure by putting new space satellites into orbit with the capacity to “observe the whole world” and becoming a leader in the production of medical equipment and medicines for the treatment of various diseases.

Since then, the President has encouraged public debate on the modernization of Russia. Political parties have been encouraged to develop their own visions on this issue. Ordinary citizens have been given the opportunity to send e-mails to the Kremlin with their proposals. The President has already referred to some of these in his official speeches and statements.

Medvedev’s modernization rhetoric is an appropriate response to Russia’s current economic situation. The Russian economy relies heavily on revenues from energy exports. The level of corruption has increased steadily since 2001. In 2004 Russia was ranked 90th out of 149 countries in the global corruption index of Transparency International, whereas in 2010 it was 154th, alongside notoriously corrupt countries such as East Timor, Sierra Leone, Zimbabwe and neighboring Ukraine. Despite police repression, mass demonstrations are becoming more frequent in each of the country’s 9 time zones, from Kaliningrad to Vladivostok. The situation in the North Caucasus is more problematic than ever, with frequent terrorist attacks from Islamic and Al Qaeda-

affiliated rebels. Disasters caused by human error, such as the explosion in August 2009 at Russia’s biggest hydropower plant in southern Siberia, have claimed dozens of lives and last summer’s terrible wildfires will prove one more ordeal for hundreds of thousands of Russians.

The Kremlin has taken a restrictive approach to modernization: it is only interested in making technologi-cal progress. One segment of the Russian elite wants to adapt to the new global realities, including those resulting from the economic crisis and the predicted decline of conventional energy, without undertaking a substantial political transformation. “We are not going to hurry up. Rush and hastiness in the matter of political reforms had already caused tragic consequences a number of times in our history,” repeats Medvedev.

For all the media hype concerning the modernization of the economic framework, the ruling class is intent on implementing only cosmetic changes in the way Russia is managed and governed. In Medvedev’s opinion, the enhancement of information technology will make it possible to introduce more democratic freedoms. To support his argument, he often points to China and Singapore, two countries which have been successful in modernizing their economies without deep political liberalization.

Unfortunately this authoritarian modernization, rather than liberal-oriented modernization, has found support among the elite and large segments of Russian society. A national survey conducted in March 2010 showed that nearly half of Russians believe their country has been heading in the right direction since Vladimir Putin became President in 2000. Almost fifty per cent of Russians believe that ensuring stability is now more important than introducing radical reforms. The stability which Putin’s Presidency achieved is used as the main argument for technological modernization without political change. The Russian public strongly fear the “bad democracy” experienced in the early nineties, when the country, ruled by the oligarchs, sank into chaos and instability. For the political elite, preserving the status quo means maintaining its own power. Everyone knows that if Prime Minister Vladimir Putin, who favors authoritar-ian modernization, rules out running for President in the 2012 election this would signal the beginning of the end for all those brought into the political apparatus since his takeover of the Kremlin in 2000.

Is Medvedev’s modernization program a big scam if it is not accompanied by true democratization?

G8 Summit 2011

94

Several members of the Russian democratic opposition believe that modernization without democratization is not possible. They generally argue that the “managed democracy” built in Putin’s Russia lacks a genuine program of modernization. The siloviki, the former security agents who have flooded the Russian political class, are interested in preserving the status quo which has allowed them to build political and economic power. United Russia, the dominant party in the Duma–Putin’s party–serves mainly as a political facade for Putin’s per-sonalized power.

Authoritarian modernization has proven successful only in societies which have made the transition from a poor, capital-scarce, low-income agrarian economy to a non-diversified, primary sector-based economy. To carry out post-industrial modernization, creative energy and citizens’ initiatives are prerequisites. Russia needs a new social group ready to fulfill the task of ushering in the necessary parameters for a bona fide post-modern and globalised state. However, there is nowhere to go to find this “enlightened” group, for the current political class feels comfortable with “managed democracy” and liberals long ago lost people’s support. Medvedev’s team of “modernizers” exists mostly in the

imagination of some scholars. Without economic and political changes being made the President’s plan is as utopian as The City of the Sun (an important early utopian work written in 1602 by the Italian Dominican philosopher Tommaso Campanella).The “innograd” in Skolkovo has all the hallmarks of a science fiction story, another Potemkin village.

Following a bilateral summit in Rostov at the end of May 2010, the EU and Russia sent certain signals that they may be willing to work together on the platform known as “Partnership for Modernization.” However, nothing serious will happen before the Russian Presi-dential election of 2012. If Medvedev stays in power, he might be given the chance to bring about his modern-ization program. If Putin returns to the Kremlin he will most likely stay there for the next 6-12 years. With that scenario, real democratization in Russia will not be on the agenda for a long time to come.

Richard Rousseau, Ph.D. is a professor of inter-national relations at the Azerbaijan Diplomatic Academy in Baku and a Contributor to The Diplomatic Courier magazine in Washington, DC.

G8 Summit 2011

95

Middle East

G8 Summit 2011

96

Canada

Leader:

Prime Minister Stephen Harper

Geographical information:

Area: 9,970,610 km2Population: 32.6 million (2006)Annual population growth rate: 1.0% (2006)Capital: OttawaOfficial languages: English and French

Economic data:

GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] - Total $1,436 billion - Pro capita $43,674 - % World GDP 2.6% [4]

GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] - Total $ 1,270 billion - Pro capita $38,617 - % World GDP 2%[4]

Form of government:

Federal parliamentary monarchy

G-8s held to date:

Kananaskis Summit (2002)Halifax Summit (1995)Toronto Summit (1988)Ottawa Summit (1981)

France

Leader:

President Nicolas Sarkozy

Geographical information:

Area: 550,000 km2Population: 63.0 million (2006) Annual population growth rate: 0.5% (2006)Capital: ParisOfficial language: French

Economic data:

GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] - Total $2,593 billion - Pro capita $ 42,033 - % World GDP 4.8 [4]

GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] - Total $ 2,068 billion - Pro capita $ 33,508 - % World GDP 3.2 [4]

Form of government:

Presidential republic

G-8s held to date:

Evian Summit (2003)Lyon Summit (1996)Summit of the Arch (1989)Versailles Summit (1982)Rambouillet Summit (1975)

Germany

Leader:

Chancellor Angela Merkel

Geographical information:

Area: 357,021 km2Population: 82.3 million (2006) Annual population growth rate: -0.2% (2006)Capital: BerlinOfficial language: German

Economic data:

GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] - Total $ 3,321 billion - Pro capita $ 40,400 - % World GDP 6.2 [4]

GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] - Total $ 2,812 billion - Pro capita $ 34.212 - % World GDP 4.3 [4]

Form of government:

Parliamentary federal republic

G-8s held to date:

Heiligendamm Summit (2007)Cologne Summit (1999)Munich Summit (1992)Bonn Summit (1985)Bonn Summit (1978)

Japan

Leader:

Prime Minister Naoto Kan

Geographical information:

Area: 377,864 km2Population: 127.7 million (2006) Annual population growth rate: -0.003% (2006)Capital: TokyoLanguage: Japanese

Economic data:

GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] - Total $ 4,382 billion - Pro capita $ 34,296 - % World GDP 8.0 [4]

GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] - Total $ 4,292 billion - Pro capita $ 33,596 - % World GDP 6.6 [4]

Form of government:

Parliamentary constitutional monarchy

G-8s held to date:

Hokkaido Toyako Summit (2008)Kyushu-Okinawa Summit (2000)Tokyo Summit (1993)Tokyo Summit (1986)Tokyo Summit (1979)

G-8 profiles

G8 Summit 2011

97

Italy

Leader:

Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi

Geographical information:

Area: 301,255 km2Population: 58.3 million (2006) Annual population growth rate: 0.3% (2006)Capital: RomeOfficial language: Italian

Economic data:

GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] - Total $ 2,105 billion - Pro capita $ 35,745 - % World GDP 3.9 [4]

GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] - Total $ 1,787 billion - Pro capita $ 30,365 - % World GDP 2.8 [4]

Form of government:

Parliamentary republic

G-8s held to date:

Genoa Summit (2001)Naples Summit (1994)Venice Summit (1987)Venice Summit (1980)

United Kingdom

Leader:

Prime Minister David Cameron

Geographical information:

Area: 244,820 km2Population: 60.5 million (2006) Annual population growth rate: 0.5% (2006)Capital: LondonOfficial language: English

Economic data:

GDP (nominal) 2007 [3] - Total $ 2,804 billion - Pro capita $ 46,098 - % World GDP 5.1 [4]

GDP (PPP) 2007 [2] - Total $ 2,168 billion - Pro capita $ 35,634 - % World GDP 3.3 [4]

Form of government:

Parliamentary constitu-tional monarchy

G-8s held to date:

Gleneagles Summit (2005)Birmingham Summit (1998)London Summit (1991)London Summit (1984)London Summit (1977)

United States of Ameica

Leader:

President Barack Obama

Geographical information:

Area: 9,629,091 km2Population: 299.4 million (2006)Annual population growth rate: 0.9% (2006)Capital: Washington D.C.Official language: English

Economic data:

GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] - Total $ 13,808 billion - Pro capita $ 45,725 - % World GDP 25.3 [4]

GDP (PPP) 2007[3] - Total $ 13,808 billion - Pro capita $ 45,725 - % World GDP 21.3 [4]

Form of government:

Presidential federal republic

G-8s held to date:

Sea Island, Georgia (2004)Denver, Colorado (1997)Houston, Texas (1990)Williamsburg, Virginia (1983)

Russia

Leader:

President Dmitriy Medvedev

Geographical information:

Area: 17,075,200 km2Population: 142.8 million (2006) Annual population growth rate: -0.5% (2006)Capital: MoscowOfficial language: Russian

Economic data:

GDP (nominal) 2007 [2] - Total $ 1,290 billion - Pro capita $ 9,074 - % World GDP 2.4 [4]

GDP (PPP) 2007 [3] - Total $ 2,090 billion - Pro capita $ 14,705 - % World GDP 3.2 [4]

Form of government:

Federal Republic

G-8s held to date:

Saint Petersburg Summit (2006)

G8 Summit 2011

98

Drug-Resistant Tuberculosis A Global Emergency Requires an Innovative Response TB: A Global Overview Tuberculosis (TB), often thought of as a disease of the past, continues to plague the world’s most vulnerable people. The World Health Organiza-tion (WHO) estimates there were 9.4 million new cases of TB globally in 2009; in the same year, 1.7 million people died of TB – equal to about 4,700 deaths each day.

The WHO estimates that of all new TB cases in 2009, about 3.3 percent of these were the drug-re-sistant form of TB, called multidrug-resistant tuberculosis, or MDR-TB. These findings by the WHO mark the highest rates ever of MDR-TB. In some settings in the former Soviet Union, these rates peaked at about 28% of new TB cases.

These dire statistics are even more dismal considering that TB and MDR-TB are treatable and curable. The real problem lies in the fact that TB – in all its forms – is a complex disease, one which is not only a medical problem; it is also a social and economic problem.

A Multi-Pronged Approach to MDR-TB

The Lilly MDR-TB Partnership is a public-private initiative that encompasses global health and relief organizations, academic insti-tutions and private companies, and is led by Eli Lilly and Company. Its mission is to address the expanding crisis of MDR-TB. Created in 2003 to address the growing challenge of MDR-TB, the Partnership has adopted a 360-degree approach, and mobilizes over 25 global healthcare partners on five continents to share resources and knowledge to confront TB and MDR-TB.

To drive the Partnership, Lilly is contributing US$ 120 million in cash, medicines, advocacy tools and technology to focus global resources on prevention, diagnosis

and treatment of patients with MDR-TB; and an additional US$ 15 million to the Lilly TB Drug Discovery Initiative to accelerate the discovery of new drugs to treat TB.

Empowering Local CommunitiesIn order to prevent the spread

of the disease and effectively care for those infected, the Lilly MDR-TB Partnership has implemented com-munity-level programmes to raise awareness about MDR-TB, increase access to treatment, ensure correct completion of treatment and empower patients by eliminating the stigma of the disease in communities and workplaces.

The Partnership also trains healthcare workers to recognize, treat, monitor and prevent the further spread of MDR-TB. These training materials and courses have been designed to ensure that the knowledge learned is passed on to peers, furthering the quality of patient care.

A Global Approach for Global Results

While community and country-based activities empower local populations to fight MDR-TB, global change requires a global view. With this in mind, the Partnership works with policymakers to raise awareness about the toll that TB takes on the global population and encourages new initiatives that curb the spread of MDR-TB. Additionally, the Partnership promotes adherence to the World Health Organization’s standards on TB treatment and supports national TB programs that have been developed using these standards.

Sustainable Access to Medicines

One of Lilly’s many goals is to increase the supply of high-quality, affordable medicines to the people who need them most. To do this, Lilly has partnered with manufacturers in countries hardest hit by MDR-TB, providing both

knowledge and financial assistance to create sustainable, local sources for MDR-TB drugs. These locally produced drugs enable access to medicines at affordable prices for MDR-TB patients, while supporting local economies and ensuring high-quality manufacturing.

New Drug Discovery InitiativeWhile access to medicine and

care help patients significantly, MDR-TB treatment remains a long, isolated process. To encourage patients to complete treatment and avoid even more drug-resis-tant strains of TB, research and development are necessary to discover faster-acting medicines. To address this need, Lilly has created the Lilly TB Drug Discovery Initiative, which is a not-for-profit public-pri-vate partnership that will draw on the global resources of its partners, including medicinal libraries donated by Lilly, to pioneer research.

A Public-Private Partnership for Those in Need

Lilly and its Partners work together closely, sharing knowledge, expertise and research in the quest to contain and conquer MDR-TB, a disease that disproportionately affects impoverished populations. The initiatives of the Lilly MDR-TB Partnership all have one thing in common: improved care for some of the world’s most vulnerable people, delivered in a manner that is sustainable and builds capacity within the communities where it is needed most.

www.lillymdr-tb.comEmail: mdrtb@lilly.com

Phone: +41 22 306 0333

Advertisement

G8 Summit 2011

101

G8COVER - see page 1

The authoritative magazine for VIP’s, delegates and diplomats

G-8

SU

MM

IT M

AG

AZ

INE

FO

R V

IPS

DE

LE

GA

TE

S A

ND

DIP

LO

MA

TS

Please insert spine info