 Bien, mesdames et messieurs, mes amis, nous sommes, je pense, très heureux de nous tous d'être ici. Je suis très heureux maintenant d'être avec le Dr Anwar Gargash, qui, après des décennies extrêmement distinguées, est un professeur de l'Université, de la loi internationale et des relations internationales, et plus de 10 ans, servant comme secretariat de l'Etat des Emirates. C'est très bien connu par le Président de l'Etat des Emirates, si je peux dire ça. C'est maintenant le Président de l'Etat de l'Etat de l'Etat des Emirates. Et l'Institut Diplomatique ici s'appelle, qui est un unique honneur. Je sais, Anwar, que c'est un peu intéressant pour vous, mais c'est l'Institut Diplomatique de l'Etat des Emirates. Et si vous me permettez, nous sommes amis. Et cette conférence n'aurait jamais été placée en Abu Dhabi, comme c'est le cas aujourd'hui. Si nous n'avons pas discuté sur cette possibilité, sur beaucoup, beaucoup d'autres sujets, tous les sujets de la géopolitique, mais aussi sur d'autres choses, si nous n'avons pas fait tout ça pendant les deux dernières années. C'est donc un grand privilège d'avoir vous avec nous aujourd'hui. Et je vais commencer immédiatement la discussion avec une simple question, dans les deux dernières années, depuis que nous avons commencé à parler de la possibilité d'avoir la conférence ici, le monde a changé dans plusieurs formes, évidemment, la pandémie, qui n'est pas encore terminée, nous avons eu des sessions intéressantes sur le sujet, mais aussi l'accélération de l'USR, le nouveau président de l'Université de l'Université, l'Afghané, plus recentement, la choc pour quelque chose de ce qui s'appelle l'Aukus, etc. Donc ma question est très simple. Comment vous assisez toutes ces conséquences de ces changements, sur la situation géopolitique régionale? Merci, merci, Terri, merci pour ces mots de la nature. Je suis très heureux et heureux d'être ici. Je vois beaucoup de amis, donc je dis bonjour à tous, et je vous souhaite une bonne conférence. Je dirais que, pour commencer la conversation, et par la perspective ici, et par le Gulf, nous sommes vraiment en train de voir plusieurs dimensions pour les changements dans le système international. Je pense que, d'une main, la pandémie fait très très clair que nos priorités géostrategiques doivent pas seulement être des priorités politiques, mais que nos priorités géostrategiques peuvent être d'autres issues. Ces autres issues sont, comme nous l'avons vu, la pandémie, avec tous les effets sur l'économie, sur la vie des gens, sur les habits de travail, etc. Et je pense que, pour l'OEE, comme je suis sûr, beaucoup d'autres pays, une réorientation de priorités. Surtout pour nous, dans les priorités de l'OEE, elles étaient importantes, mais peut-être pas aussi persistantes, comme, pour exemple, l'économie logistique, etc. Ça a été très important. Je pense que cette dimension de système international est quelque chose que nous devons concentrer sur et ne pas permettre les politiciens à l'inforter, parce qu'en concentrant, c'est pour ça que je dirais qu'il y a un changement positif plutôt que de retourner à l'old ways. Donc je dirais que, à un niveau, les priorités politiques, en taking precedence over the political priorities, something that is totally unprecedented and new, we might have had moments in the international system where this was the case, but certainly nothing in our current media, in our current way we live, how we travel, etc. has been affected by this. And I can tell you that the OEE, part to deal with COVID-19 has learned many lessons. Now I think the important thing is that our memory should be longer rather than shorter on this issue, whether here in the OEE or whether in other areas. So I think that is the first thing. I think the second important issue is the multipolar nature of the political system. I mean clearly this has been an ongoing fees in the international system. The international system has witnessed after the fall of the Soviet Union a very brief American moment. Although the United States remains predominant and most important, but clearly the international system is not unipolar. What we have very clearly today is the presence of China. And that presence of China, economic, technological, in many regions in the world, political, I think will stay with us. I think we are all worried very much by a looming cold war. And I think for countries like all of us here present really in this hall, that is bad news for all of us. Because the idea of choosing is problematic in the international system. And I think this is not going to be an easy ride, but clearly China will continue to become extremely important. Now it is sometimes easier to understand America's direction than China's direction because of the nature of the debate and the openness of the debate. So while America's direction is something that you can gleam from various readings and conferences and discussions, understanding China's direction I think is more opaque. But fundamentally I think this is going to be a big challenge for all of us. For us here in the UAE, the United States is our predominant strategic partner. But China is our number one or two with India economic partner. And I don't think the issue is only about America and China. I mean if you look at our country the UAE has what I would call core economic and strategic relations with India, with Korea, with Japan and all these three countries have their own rivalry and problems with China. So it's not only recalibrating Chinese-American relations or American-Chinese relations but I think it is also recalibrating many other relations. India for example is our closest large neighbor or largest neighbor and India is in competition with China and how much trade we are making. And India is on the ascendancy also at the same time and I think for a country like us our size we are very concerned about this looming cold war and I hope that we don't get to that although realistically all the signals are not very encouraging. I think on the third level which is the regional level. The regional level and this is directing a lot of our current forum policy and policy movement. The region is is not much better currently than it was two years ago. I think the areas of potential potential confrontation have not become less. So it will need actually from all of us an understanding number one that confrontation is not the way forward and communication is the way forward. It doesn't mean that we will be able to change Iran's perception of its role in the region or Turkey's perception of its role in the region or how we see the Arab world and how it should come back to a more lively regional system. But at the same time I think we need to also understand that it is extremely important that we avoid confrontations and even though the road towards communication is longer and frustrating we really have no other option. Well thank you very much. I think that this point of for most countries which are represented in this room the problem of avoiding to be forced to choose is really a fundamental concern and many of us including for instance the members of NATO consider as you said the US is more predictable than China because we know more about the US but the direction clearly to force us to choose for instance to transform the Atlantic alliance into an anti-Chinese alliance even if the worlds are not used so it is a very big challenge but for the Middle East in the Gulf in particular it seems to me that there are two apparently opposite trends because on the one hand they should logically try to push you to take sides but on the other hand the withdrawal or the partial withdrawal from the Middle East which paved the way for more active policies on the part of Russia and Turkey for instance so how would you balance these analytical terms these two trends one pushing you to take sides and the other one becoming more indifferent if I can use that word I think we have several problems here I think the first one is we really have no Arab discussion on all these things so really everyone is on his own except for bilateral discussions perhaps we will have with Egypt or with Saudi Arabia as two of our closest friends but in general I think the Arab political system has decayed really over the past decade or two that these important issues need to be discussed and I think they have not been discussed any of these issues that we have we've spoken about so that I think is a problem I would say that we have to also understand that the United Arab Emirates is a medium sized country and its political gravitas and its economic weight so we really have no option except explaining ourselves communicating making sure that you know for example using our time and UN Security Council in the next two years to ensure that a rules based political system is the one that governs this international system I don't think we can definitely change course of the big players here the United States or China but I think communication is extremely important if there are concerns and worries we need to address them as you understand also that at times this political cold wars or confrontations are done with very little thought they are done with very little thought positions are taken and it's only later that people start really rethinking their thought process on it so I would say that we need to communicate with our partners and friends we need to emphasize the rules based international system because it's in our interest as it is in the interest of everybody else yet you raise something extremely important and this is really about the presence and commitment in the Middle East and I think Afghanistan is a big test we will see in the coming period really what is going on with regards to America's footprint in the region I don't think we know yet but Afghanistan is definitely a test and to be honest it's a very worrying test I think Europe is different because the United States has more of an internationalist view and an Atlanticist view and a NATO view on Europe and the Far East is different because the United States also is seeing that tilt to the Far East so you have this gray area in the middle and I think part of what we need to do is manage our region better because as I said there is a vacuum and whenever there is a vacuum there is trouble so it is extremely essential for us that we avoid vacuums it is extremely essential for us to talk to communicate and to understand also that in talking and communicating it does not necessarily mean that we will change certain policies but that we do need this de escalation so I see that as a major issue but when you say us us is you say sometimes Arab world sometimes the Middle East sometimes the Gulf countries can you elaborate a little bit who is us well I think the us using it in these different things is an issue that we have here I hope that I think we start with the national state because to be honest I don't really see the level of collective openness and collective discussion beyond the nation state but we need to push that forward we need to come and say these levels of analysis are changing the international system and because they are changing the international system it is too big for any single country really to address where it's place in this international system should be I don't think it is seeking to challenge anybody I think it is about securing this area where a lot of people see half of the issues of the world emanating from and some people say we've wasted too much blood and treasure on it and let us move on because I think the Middle East will not let you go away I mean that is really the lesson from the Middle East you might want to go away from it but the Middle East will not let you away either through national issues or thematic issues so I think that is a major issue another easy question you stressed rule based international system but last time Sijing Ping went to Davos he appeared as the great defender of the rule based system the problem is who sets not the rules but the changes of the rule so today the great challenge is that the Chinese to take the example of the Chinese and the US do not share the same view about what the rule should be so how could you how do you think that through communication and all the moves are describing do you think that as we we that is in between can work cooperate to have a certain real weight on how the rules will be adapted the rules have to be adapted with the world changes I think this is a very good question I think to start on a conception level you have in the Biden administration an administration that actually comes and says I want a rule based international system the Chinese are saying the same the Europeans definitely are also arguing for that I think it's in the interest of countries like us in the Arab world and in other areas in Africa and Asia to call for that so I think conceptually there is an agreement on this religion this rule based international system now I think as you said is the problem and I think here we need to be a little bit we need to speak out we need to come and say the world is not ready for another cold war and I think if this message comes across to the Chinese to the Americans and to others I think this will in itself create what I would so call a moral collective and I think this moral collective will be something very very positive it's not easy it's not easy but I'm saying what is the other option is it to allow the international system to go into its current trajectory and end up where we're all afraid where it will end up without too much thought without too much control or is it something where we can all come collectively and say it is in our interest we understand that there is a big confrontation coming for international system dominance but let us at least try and control this trajectory I don't know if that answers the question You know Anwar because we have discussed that so many times that the real purpose of the World Policy Conference is precisely this kind of dialogue that is the in between world that is all the metal powers who are not the super powers of the day and therefore our challenge is precisely to elaborate on these sort of things so now after having spoken of us or we I would like to enlarge slightly the concept of us or we to include explicitly Europe so by Europe let us restrict ourselves in the first step to the European Union while I say that I am hesitating because I think of course also the UK makes it slightly more difficult but nevertheless what do you expect from us as being this time the Europeans Well again I would say two things here I would say number one the collective European policy should be more pragmatist and more realistic in my opinion Europe because it's so many countries has not always been able to produce what I would say cohesive collective policies but I think looking from here towards Europe I think the voices of pragmatism should be the main voices what is possible rather than what is a very high ceiling that's never reachable I think that is extremely important I think this will depend a lot on the Franco-German cooperation and synergy over the coming two three years is this going to produce a more realistic cohesive policy I mean again a policy here as the UAE on the bilateral level we're doing very well we're doing very well with France we're doing very well with the UK and many other European countries but the issue is collectively I think there is a huge gap between a policy that's propagated and a policy that is ready to apply on the ground I think reducing that gap will be very good not only for Europe but also for Europe's traditional partners such as ours I think that is extremely important for us we also look at the recent drift for example between Paris and Washington and we're not happy with these things because we would also like to see more cohesion among our traditional partners because we don't really want to play one partner against the other because our partnerships are extremely different but I think that is extremely important a more real politic pragmatist approach from Europe I think is required in the coming period