 So, this is the final session. I am sure that you all will regret it, but this is the final session. The good news is that there are much more participants still alive and there than I had expected. So, thank you very much for being so faithful to all of us. So, the final session, as usual in the WPC, it's not on a particular theme. We have six friends. When I say friends, that is, they have all been associated with the WPC for many years. The task of this final session is to ask all the members, the panelists, to say what they want to say, what they think has been missing, what they think should be brought further in the discussion, not tonight of course, but in the upcoming month, maybe next year. So, it is a very free discussion, very relaxed too. So, we will start with Asya Alaoui, the patron of Her Majesty the King of Morocco. Asya, I hope you will speak French because I would also like to encourage the work of the French language. And so, Asya, there you go. You see that there are nicknames that mean to speak a little French and always appreciate here. You have the floor. Excellent, Madame Monsieur, my dear Thierry. First of all, thank you to Simstafa for this hospitality and the quality of the interventions. Of course, thank you also for this serious exercise. First of all, you have to keep in mind, as they say, and then in a few minutes. So I will be extremely brief and I hope to count on your questions to eventually clarify the points that I would have overlapped. We have two seconds to find humanity in the eyes of the other, especially in the eyes of this rebellious humanity, our children, who interpell us on the deadly leg that we leave them to. Two minutes for a planetary tweet. Think, I hope, of this one to act. After a 20-year conscious take to repair the damage of more than 200 years of industrial air and of the overconsumption that lasts. This acceleration, this acceleration, sorry, you understood it well, is the greatest challenge that humanity has faced. The challenge of climate change, the environment, the survival of humanity itself. A challenge, we have said it, of course, is repeated, global, complex, existential, and of course urgent. And which has over-complicated the myriad of challenges and risks that we have to raise every day. So can we do it? There is the question. Certainly, we have technological promises, of the endless inventiveness of man, of science, of the immense potential of oceans and seas for a blue economy. But we obviously have to reconcile the technosphere and the biosphere. There are still all the actors, as it was underlined yesterday by Mr. Fabius, all, I say well all, to take their respective responsibilities. Global, of course, for the states, compared to their citizens, beyond their well-being, their survival, which is in game, of business, an ecological responsibility that they must exercise with affirmed responsibilities, as some, by the way, begin to do it for social responsibility. But it must go far beyond, because it is about putting down the mode of production, of distribution, and beyond these processes, of the naturalness and quality of goods and services that they offer us. I will not go into the debate between Mr. Pouyané and Mr. Fabius yesterday, who is responsible and what he is doing. But it is quite clear that it is what he offers to voracious consumers who come, obviously, sometimes fixed the rules of the game. We are over-consuming, because there is temptation and publicity, and there are products available far beyond our needs. Consumers who, for their part, of course, must change their way of life and must return to the right path. All this, of course, I do not want any ecology, any respect for the punitive environment, but it must be realized that if we continue to be launched, we will not be able to do it. I believe that everyone is convinced of it, but before we have the will to do it, this is the question. Can we start from these devastating ways of life for the planet? Without being naive and with a will to sign, I could say, and this, obviously, will be more shocking, because this is the paradox, because here and now, in the Mediterranean, the place may be where all the vulnerabilities are conjugated, where all the risks are conjugated, where we see the multiplication not only of conflicts, but also of threats and stress, etc. I will not list them, you all know them. Well, paradoxically, I think that we can, in the Mediterranean, raise this challenge thanks to more than 2,000 years to stay in the numbers, since I started with that, thanks to 2,000 years of adaptive wisdom, of resilience. We have overcome it, we have seen all the colors, but we have also seen the Romans towards the Akduks, for venerable stress, we have seen the prowesses that were made in the Mediterranean. So are we able to stop this adaptive wisdom to precisely raise this challenge, and perhaps even better, be the laboratory for the rest of the world? Because precisely, the challenges are quite pressing here. Well, it is this humanity here, demanding and rebellious, that the President Emmanuel Macron called on the rescue for the summit of the two rivers, to give a new impulse in the Western Mediterranean, which he commonly admits to calling the 5 plus 5, and of course, beyond this objective, I see several inputs. First of all, a way to re-launch this multilateralism, which is so misaligned, and by doing the same, which we created and imposed on the rest of the world, including ourselves, which we try to navigate with all the difficulties we know, well, through an unprecedented format, which presents partnerships between the states, the representatives of the civil society, and the background partners. This, to do what? Well, to put in place concrete projects, to exchange a little bit of this maleditarian logarithm, which unfortunately turns into a compensatory discourse. And it is through concrete projects that they are carried by the civil society. I rejoice that they are carried, mostly by women and by young people. The Thierry women don't talk much about it in this conference, and I'm crying. I thank Mr. Tanaka, who wants to give the leadership to women to decarbonize the planet. Good luck. And so, to do what? To give bodies, to give lives to this improbable couple that is looking for all the leaders, that is, majority, sorry, participative democracy and efficiency. Through this work together, it also allows citizens of the ten countries, between them, in the respective rivers, but also between the two rivers, to know each other better, to assess cooperation on confrontation and conflictivity, to promote a better life together when we know that the forces of disconnection are absolutely terrifying. Of course, by doing so, the Mediterranean could become a new laboratory for the renewal, for a new model of development. And you know how far in Morocco we are currently standing on a new model of development that can be both satisfying on the social and ecological and environmental level. So this youth is better educated, better trained, who runs freely and gives free course to creativity. Through the energetic wisdom and we know how to do it and it has been demonstrated, everything is very complex. But you have to have the will to do things. Through the rehabilitation of the past in historical and Mediterranean cities, to better project in the future, to recreate this intergenerational link, to infiltrate a digital breath, I hope less energetic, to precisely recreate this intergenerational link that is being deleted everywhere and which obviously carries a shadow to our collective memory. Through a circular economy, extremely interesting because we have a marriage between Italy and France. Yes, I'm coming. A circular economy with a food supply in cities, but also a maritime marriage we are lucky to have 70% of the coast to free the potential of this blue economy. Short circuits, a terrestrial aquaculture not fed by the wild fish and who destroys it. And also the culture, of course, it's the hardest, it's where the blockages are the most terrifying. But a sustainable tourism which also creates the embrace in our region, the media that are involved, because they often feel excluded, I'm happy to have a project on the re-mutualization of the editors that was married to that of Elisabeth Gigu of the Annaline Foundation for the translation and we will thus, through our multiple languages, create vectors of our common language in Mediterranean. So here is a Mediterranean told, not by the circles of migrants, but by these talents to create renewal, to create the manufacturing of this possible future as it is. Of course, we will remain for that to raise the oblivion of the non-true promises of history, as Paul Ricard invites us to do. We also remain to respond to the call of other tombs of Mohamed Arkun for a spiritual, intellectual, and ethical remembrance of the Mediterranean. If we can, of course, console the loss of the past, and again, as Amin Malou and our great Mediterranean advance, it is the disappearance of the future that we do not put forward. So I thank all those who work for the survival of humanity and also to help our children to become the actors of their own future in a Mediterranean reconciled with them, not just any of them, but full and complete so that they can radiate towards those beyond. Thank you. Thank you, Asya, and I would like to take the concept of adaptive wisdom, which of course goes very, very well with women. So now I'm going to pass the word to old accomplice, Carl Kaiser. Old accomplice, in fact, it's in English. A friend of long standing, it avoids talking about old accomplice. In short, he is still an old accomplice, a friend, since we have known each other since the middle ages, the 70s, and we have worked together for many years when he was the boss of the Deutsche Gesellschaft on political issues, in the good and then in Berlin, and who for a number of years lived in Brussels, in Brussels, in the United States, and the Kennedy School, the government, where it is still... No, it goes back, in fact, it's the Kennedy School. Yes, it's the same thing, it's part of Harvard. Well, thank you for understanding my confusion. In any case, my dear Carl, here is a good example of wisdom and I pass the word to you with joy. Thank you, Thierry, for this kind words and indeed it has been a long and wonderful relationship that we had and I can only congratulate you on what you have created because you remember you started out as a great ifri and then to create this conference and both have made a major contribution. I was inspired by the conference to share some thoughts on the long term, on the geopolitical long term, the world of tomorrow, which will be one of a new G2, two big powers dominating that structure, namely the United States and China in a relationship of rivalry comparable to the bipolar world that we had during the Cold War. Three points in good French tradition. Who is actually destroying the order that was created after World War II? We discussed one, the very country that bought it, that built it up and led the restructuring of the world after World War II, leaving the JCPOA, thereby really questioning the continuation of non-proliferation to a policy that was built up after the war. The same you could say about American policy on North Korea, leaving the Paris Accord, leaving the TPP, which was an attempt to organize the Pacific Asian world, so that China does not define the rules of the game, ending TTIP in Europe with Europe, destroying the World Trade Organization, imposing tariffs on friends and allies, withdrawing from the most successful part of American foreign policy, the support of European integration, questioning the alliances, and using the dollar, if not abusing the dollar to impose foreign policy goals on the rest of the world. Quite an attempt. With some success, we discussed it in a very good session that we had here. However, there is someone else. There is the great challenger, China, rising, which poses as the defender of multilateralism, of international law, of international institutions. But I would argue that's an intermediate position. If you look at the Belt and Road Initiative and we heard it from Ken Rod, it creates a wide system of bilateral dependencies of states that are friendly, if not compliant, and activities in Latin America and in Africa with the same purpose. And let me remind you that the country that professes that international organization and international law and multilateralism should guide the world of the future, decided to totally neglect the decision of the International Court in The Hague on the militarization of the islands in the South China Sea. I thought it was very well summed up in one remark in the Hong Kong debate that Eric Lee made. When he said, we have to, and it's almost verbatim, we have to replace the hegemonic universalism in defining the rules of globalization by one country, brackets, the United States. And we have to replace it by a system where everybody defines the rules of globalization by himself, brackets with China leading. So, the old system is challenged profoundly. Secondly, we have now to look at how some global trends affect this emerging G2 world. And I think all, and I would like to mention three which I think are underestimated in their impact. And all three have been discussed here, and I do hope that the World Policy Conference will continue to discuss them in the coming years. There's first cyber war. We have entered a new era. I think Jean-Louis Javerin was right to say this is, so to speak, a Klausawitzian innovation. It's the continuation of politics that remains cyber war, not war, not the old kind of war, cyber war. Indeed, one can now, through cyber activity, affect the politics of another country without having armies to march. You could argue, as I did in the debate, that Putin succeeded in getting his man into the White House by cyber activity at the cost of less than a fighter jet. Quite a success. That is the new era that we are entering. And some of you were there when I argued with John Sawyer who said this is a problem in particular for authoritarian countries because they're very shaky. Because the democracies have the checks and balances system. I would argue that's true. We have the checks and balances system. However, democracies have particular weaknesses because they're open. And media are open. We believe in freedom of speech. So the cyber war attack can be conducted much more easily in democracies. And as you know, those who follow American politics, it is the majority leader of the Senate who blocks the legislation to protect America in the next election, 2020, against further cyber activity to affect the erections of 2020. So that's the one part. The second part which you alluded to is the climate change. Have we really thought through what the climate change will do to international politics? Here is a task for the future. Imagine it goes up to 2% or to three as Monsieur Fabius was mentioning these alternatives. Already now the United States has lost an entire city, an entire town in California. There will be more towns. Coastal cities will have to be evacuated. In other words, the reallocation of means will be fundamental. What will it mean for the need to have land as the land disappears? And finally, let me mention migration. Migration completely affected and changed domestic politics in Europe, in the United States. And it will be very much a problem of Europe because America is surrounded by oceans. As Africa grows, you've heard the debate here. Two and a half million by 2050, four to five billion by the end of the century. There will be an enormous pressure from the south. And unless there is a fundamental change of policy to help the people stay where they are which means a complete change of European policy. This is going to be Europe's biggest problem in the future. Finally, third point, the US-European relationship in this kind of G2 world. Let's remember first that the US and Europe are the cores of the west, of western democracy, of human rights, of peaceful relations. That has been their function and will remain their function. Second, they have the highest degree of economic integration and 50% of all transatlantic trade are internal company trade. They're highly, highly integrated. This Europe has reacted to Trump with the strategy of sticking to the old rules, sticking to the old institutions, circumventing him wherever possible. Japan and the European Union having trade agreements or a trade agreement with Mercosur. Let us remember that the US public had listened to the debate here describing how America has changed and to what extent there is continuity in American thinking that Trump really continues the old policies. Keep in mind that this is not the opinion of the American public. There is another America besides Trump. 87% polls of the Chicago Council believe in the international trade. 70% believe in the NATO commitment. In fact, it has gone up since Trump was elected. 78% actually. So there is that plus the Congress who has a very different point of view. So let us not assume that what Trump is now pursuing is the policy of the America that rebuilt the American-European relationship. And the European Union is pulling together under this pressure. Yes, Europe is divided in many ways but it is also becoming much more aware of the necessity to act on its own. And whether there are principle nations, a concept that we developed jointly quite a few years ago, principle nations, like yesterday France and Germany made a statement on Turkey. There will be other principle nations in the European Union and even after Brexit Britain will still be in the European group. So let's talk now of majority voting in foreign policy. It will probably come one day. Let me conclude in the G2 world, the U.S.-China rivalry world, I think one can argue this. The U.S. will continue to need Europe in this competition. The U.S. cannot allow China to dominate the western rim of the European of Eurasia. And Europe needs the United States in order to survive in this kind of rivalry. And finally, Europe will for the same reason not will not fail to engage Russia anew because in this world of the future a Russia that becomes a permanent satellite of China is not acceptable neither to Europe nor to the United States. Thank you very much, Carl. Carl Kaiser alluded to this concept of principle nations that we indeed elaborated together with the American Council on Foreign Relations and Chatham House. And that was in 1979 the year of the creation of IFRI and that was a common report named Sharing International Responsibility. So I think that if we re-read that report 40 years old we will probably find all the major concepts that could be useful today. Thank you very much. I found you a little bit wasp nevertheless because you're Harvard life I'm not so sure that everyone would agree with your optimism about the U.S. and NATO but we will perhaps discuss that later if we have time. Now I give the floor to Mona I switch back to French because I would like Mona I would like you to speak French or half French, half English. Why not? So we will fix it all Okay So Mona you all know a friend of WPC since the beginning maybe almost and we are very eager to listen to you and I say that in English since it was shows by the way the power of women Right? Good evening everyone I'm happy to be here as you can see because really these meetings that we have each year it brings us together not only as a friend in a club but also to hear analysis that we don't have the opportunity to hear So I would really like to thank Terri for inviting me to the WPF which to me has become the best thing in the world and particularly when it is held in my favorite country which is Morocco Now what I propose by the way I spent my honeymoon in Morocco I don't know if this is a good good memory or not but it is What I propose to do today is to offer you three alternative scenarios on the future of the Arab world bearing in mind that our current Arab world is suffering from a future deficit nobody speaks about the future because they don't know where to go so meaning that also that ambitious dreams for an alternative and better future as it was envisaged in 2011 in what was ridiculously called the Arab Spring these ambitions and these dreams have been shoved aside in favor of the short term goals of maintaining stability and security this is all what the Arab world wants today stability and security and avoiding civil war or state collapse no talk about democracy or human rights Trump has given us the lead these are taboo words today one thing is almost sure is that the Arab Middle East will remain a region of high stress for the foreseeable future I'm thinking here within the horizons of roughly 2025 to 2035 not too long not too short either we are living through an age of technological revolution as we have heard for the past three days changes in communication technology has ended in the Arab States monopoly on information created webs of informed and mobilized citizens and greatly contributed to the upheavals of 2011 and beyond Arab governments are trying today to learn from the Chinese the only thing that they tried to learn is how to control this new dragon and to regain their dominance but it is too late the top down monopoly has already been broken and people have not only gone beyond their fear but almost breakthroughs in artificial intelligence could strengthen the control capacities of governments but they could also be used by terrorist groups as a form of cyber weapon as we heard in a completely different direction so therefore technology will be one of the key wild cards in the near future now let's go to some of the most important countries in the region let's start with Egypt no bless or bleach it is no secret that Egypt faces a staggering array of demographic economic political environmental and security challenges however the current administration of president cc has taken a number of important steps to grapple with these including economic growth job creation energy needs etc therefore it is in the realm of possibility and with a lot of imagination that the current trajectory could produce enough economic development and job growth to keep the country relatively stable perhaps an Egyptian failure is too big to contemplate and just impresses upon us to focus on avoiding it yet it remains the biggest challenge in the region and one that if we continue to ignore is that our own peril now what is the geopolitical context we are talking about these include conditions of fragile states a broken regional order and a changing set of global dynamics impacting the region on the other hand what are the effects of the global powers on all these changes the new US national security strategy unveiled under the trump administration recognizes that great power competition particularly with russia and china has returned as the main driver of security and foreign policy concerns in this case the middle east will be an arena for great power competition finally what are the three scenarios envisage one is a muddling through a scenario meaning a form of continuity plus a change plus the same meaning the Arab world will remain a region of strained economies high youth unemployment and fragile states two second scenario things fall apart completely if we look at the development of the past decade the situation has gone from bad to worse there are more failed states more armed non-state actors and terrorist groups the socio-economic conditions that drove revolt a decade ago are generally worse also the absence of inclusive and responsible political institutions are worse today there are a number of ways terrorism could get considerably worse for instance tensions between Iran and Israel or Iran and Saudi Arabia could escalate into all out war Egypt and Saudi Arabia could for example stumble and fall as other large states have in the recent past terrorist groups could regroup a new cyber warfare all weapons of mass destruction this is the second scenario our third scenario is where things dramatically improve and this is the one that I support if Egypt and Saudi Arabia succeed in their ambitious economic and social plans and break through to high levels of growth and employment that would raise living standards and relieve domestic pressure if the three civil wars in Libya, Yemen and Syria reach a suitable negotiated settlement this will have positive effect on the region on another level and this is the one I encourage it is not out of the question to imagine resurgent civic and political demands leading to a stepping back from authoritarianism and the re-appreciation of the wisdom of inclusive and responsive political systems these could appear either in the form of democratizing republics or constitutional monarchies in conclusion what I've tried to do is not to predict because you can't predict in the Arab world but to identify trends that policy makers should be aware of and also identifying political opportunities and positive outcomes thank you for your attention thank you very much Mona for this excellent presentation which also was concise I think you were the shortest so far you respected perfectly timing thank you very much let me just ask you a short question I was a bit surprised that you put Saudi Arabia and Egypt in the same basket so to speak in the success hopefully successful hopefully successful development plans but do you establish any correlation between the two? no correlation at all except that there are two big states in the Arab region and they're both undergoing reform on their own do they have a real chance in your judgment to be successful? which one of them? both of them I mean Saudi Arabia has a lot of opportunities to spend money including hundreds of billions of dollars to appear weak as they did recently but do you think they have a chance to be successful with the MBS plan and in Egypt too? no comment thank you that's a very concise but precise answer okay now Manuel Muniz who is a young less than a year after but nevertheless a young star in the world of international relations experts I think my dear Manuel that you did an internship more than that at IFRI some years ago and you have been very successful at the Kennedy School at Harvard anyway working with Carl for a number of years and now you are back home that is to Spain and we are very eager also to listen to your remarks thank you I'll remain seated if that's okay so I thought that the past couple of days were very very interesting and it sort of reaffirmed something that I was seeing in most of the debates on global issues that I attend with some very particular features that I saw here and it's this I think this is the backdrop to most of our discussions which is what Carl mentioned it's sort of the weakening of the international liberal order produced by two forces fundamentally one that is external or the siege of the order by the rise of the liberal powers and China is there and I'll focus on China but also I would add Russia and I would probably add the failures of the Arab Spring and the democratic regression that we've seen in the Arab world the only country that has undergone a revolution in the Arab world in the past few years and has come out of that event with more rights and stronger democratic institutions in fact Tunisia but I'm not going to go into these cases but it's an interesting external landscape to this order that looks far less liberal of the order and I'm going to focus on China and the second force is internal and it's a real implosion of the liberal order from within and I think Trump and Brexit and developments in Spain and in France and in other places are a manifestation of this and this is just a growing number of citizens within liberal democratic countries that are beginning to question fundamental features of that order whether it's porous borders and cosmopolitanism or free trade or free markets or in some instances democracy itself and the external dimension and on China because I thought it came up during our discussions particularly there were a couple of sessions on the first day that I thought were fascinating and as you know people in this field are sort of wondering whether the US and China are headed for a collision what our colleague at the Kennedy School Graham Allison caused a facility strap and I used not to I didn't buy this thesis because I bought the interdependence thesis these countries are too interdependent both in terms of their supply chains in terms of their financial markets in terms of their public debt markets but there are a number of features in the relationship between these two that actually lead me to think that this outcome growing tension and possibly conflict is far more likely than we think and I divide them in two categories one is developments in the realm of economics and the other is in politics and I'll focus on the economy for a second but in both instances you'll see technology and innovation into woven into the argument because actually tech is in my mind completely changing features of the economy and of political dynamics that are affecting geopolitics so I'll start on the economics and on the economics there are three issues that I think are essential one is and they're odd and unexpected one is that the digital economy is producing the clustering of knowledge and this is something that we thought wouldn't happen we thought that the world was going to be flat and the digital revolution was going to make photography redundant or unimportant when it came to the distribution of economic opportunities so people would connect to productive processes and they would unplug and they could almost be anywhere geographically now counter-intuitively the data from the last decade or so points exactly to the opposite so the digital economy is producing these very tight clusters of know-how and knowledge the reasons that we think this is occurring is that there's a particular type of knowledge called tacit knowledge which is knowledge about particular industry practices or technical knowledge that is so specific that is only valuable when exchanged in very interdisciplinary tight settings you know in cafeterias and corridors of research centers and innovative corporations in Spain by the way we've been having a big debate this year about something called the emptied Spain which is this notion of the provinces being sucked of people that are being drawn into the larger cities Madrid and Barcelona sort of the periphery being left behind if I could show you the map of the US right now of economic growth over the last few decades that map would show you a topographic map will show these huge valleys and suddenly these spikes in very particular places in Cambridge, Massachusetts, in Silicon Valley in the large cities and in particular places in Shenzhen this is relevant for many reasons for the China US collision I think it's relevant because we're seeing these two countries beginning to compete ever more radically for these clusters and they turn the global economy into a more zero sum game so that's one trend. The second is the clustering of the concentration of productivity growth and this in my mind is extremely relevant and we tend to not read into the geopolitics of this but as you know economists have been engaged in this very long debate about why productivity growth seems to be stalling or slowing despite technological advancement so the OECD went back and what they did is to try to understand this process they aggregated the corporate sector in advanced economies into two groups of firms ones which they called frontier companies these are less than 5% of the total corporations in advanced economies and the rest they called laggard companies so frontier firms were the ones where productivity had grown the most now what they found and I think this is really fascinating is that that small group of corporations saw productivity growth in excess of 30% in the last 10 years the rest saw no productivity growth. Why is this relevant because it reveals oligopolistic if not outright monopolistic tendency in digital markets productivity to concentrate in platforms and in companies that collect, process and use data and most of these firms most of these frontier companies are in the US and China so again if I could show you a list of the 20 largest technology companies in the world they would all be Chinese and American so European company in that list by the way this is very significant for Europe but it's also very significant for global geopolitics because it means again a much more zero sum economy where you're competing for the frontier of the tech space and China and the US are competing for that space head on particularly after China approved its made in China 2025 strategy and made that explicit in a document where it states that it wants to dominate the cyberspace, robotics, AI etc right so by the way I know for a fact that that particular strategy created huge concerns in the US and not only in the Treasury in the Commerce Department but also in the State Department in the National Security Council it's a geostrategic issue for the US so these two countries are going head on for the dominance of that space the third trend is that we're also seeing a concentration of transfer so if I could show you a map of the world with the most successful startups the unicorns and their geographic location almost all of them will be in China and in the United States so the centers of transfer and innovation at the sort of startup level has also been segregated geographically now why are all these things significant because it basically draws a highly competitive world particularly for the dominance in the tech and innovation space but the collision between the US and China doesn't stop there because there's a whole set of issues around the politics of this so there have been a number of articles of people saying oh this fear mongering about China in the West it's like what happened with Japan in the 70s and the 80s and then everybody will relax when they see that actually Chinese growth it actually has nothing to do with the Japanese case to a large extent because of the politics of China and here I also want to mention three things China seems to be defying the thesis this is a very widely held thesis among political scientists that when countries reach a certain level of wealth particularly measured in income per capita that produces a middle class a complex middle class too complex to manage by a centralized authoritarian regime and hence you have a democratic transition China is approaching the levels of GDP per capita where we should see that and that's not occurring so the strategy in the West I think has been convergence, we would open our markets and the WTO to China because eventually that would produce political convergence but we're not seeing that and I think that's what's leading to this major shift and the second two points and I'm going to be very brief on this are the use of technology in China for repression the famous Chinese surveillance state as you know that they're registering the entire Ugyur minority in Xinjiang is now registered through facial and iris recognition tools the New York Times actually just revealed that their DNA has been sequenced and the level of aggregation of this data is fairly high up so it's the Interior Ministry, the police and this is not the most interesting thing it's the third issue and this came up in a bear with me for a second if you think of political systems as systems of information and that's to some extent what they are they're meant to procure information about how people feel and their concerns and feed it into the decision-making bodies that's what free press is and free association democracy is a particular system of information what some Chinese colleagues are beginning to claim and we saw a little bit of that here is that through big data and AI China has unlocked a system of information that is superior to democracy so some Chinese colleagues of mine would say to me we know what our citizens want without the messiness of democracy and elections we're going to do that through data and AI and this is what transpires in some conversations it's an alternative model infused of technology and making heavy use of that so I'll end on this note that I think that the collision with China and some people in the US I think see this far more clearly is very structural and is connected to very deep trends in how economics works in the digital era and in the capacity of technology to change the sustainability of an authoritarian regime and I think that means that the collision is going to be fairly structural and sustained over time and I think that's one of the backdrops to this conference thank you thank you Manuel so now you will all understand the name actually of his university chair I didn't say beforehand because it is easier to understand afterwards so he is Professor Raphael Del Pino that's a of practice of global transformation so that was a good presentation I don't know if there are so many university chairs of global transformation thank you Manuel and now I'll pass the floor to a friend of Longdat of the World Policy Conference in particular who was a minister of finance who was mayor of Rabah and also a university and a prolific author in particular an excellent book about China my dear Fatala, you have the floor thank you good evening everyone during your dance introduction Thierry you said that Europe must gather these efforts to stay in the game of globalization saying to stay in I first take the opportunity to congratulate you for the success of this session of Marrakech this interpretation is a challenge for Europe but it also surpasses Europe it's a challenge that concerns the future of globalization for more sharing more balance and more multi polarity and it concerns our region the region of Marrakech that is the Afro region Euro Mediterranean and it is my center of interest and it is from this center of interest that I propose you a reading from the short term of a step and from the long term to the second day the short term reading we are currently finishing the second decade of the 21st century a difficult decade in the worst in the north during these last 10 years Europe has experienced a crisis that has settled in Europe from the west since 2008 it forced the states to relaunch politics so to surrender and and then this crisis is deep especially in the south in Europe it even brought the problem through to the Greek question of the existence even of the euro and despite a small reprise of the ambiguity in 2016 the inertia continued this is what it is and Europe as it starts to doubt its proximity it doubts its democracy as it is the mother of democracy with Brexit and the rise of populism yet it has so much in terms of values in terms of history and in terms of geographical positions in the Middle East a decade even more difficult after foreign interventions civil wars risk of dislocation of your nation to rise of conservatism of radicalism of destabilization and during these 10 years we even risked to forget the Palestinian question of living the consciousness and the mind in short a decade of great return for the military but a decade in which the world has changed has moved Asia confirms its obsession China has become the second world power India has become China has launched its initiative on the road and the belt and then at the end of this decade it is clear it is the birth of a new bipolarization where we find the United States and China with all this on the economic plan the decade ends in uncertainty the decline of global growth commercial wars the decline of multilateralism and of course the rise of risks of geopolitical instability in the Middle East and in Africa I would like to come back to the economic aspects three observations in Europe I notice that the internal political fragility is not in a country like Germany double in terms of budgetary and in terms of foreign-economic relations to take the initiative of a necessary return I take from the other side in Asia the decline of the Chinese growth which is still called to accent and I think around 6% maybe less than 6% because the domestic demand internal in China does not completely replace the decline of the external demand and then I raise the trade war United States China United States Europe more and more essentially technology and in this war the West interprets the China for which it will evolve its economic model and especially politics I think it is not ready it will continue to promote its market economy I would even say its capitalism by reinforcing the political centrality which allowed to master the long term but maybe it is to the West in the democratic countries to act internally to make their own political system their own democracy to integrate the long term and this leads me to the long term it is the evolution of the new globalization 2030, 2050 and later how our region this is what interests me the most Afro-Europe Mediterranean must respond to this new globalization and especially to these four essential challenges the first challenge is from Africa it is the demographic growth a basic essential risk bearer but also a bearer of opportunity the second challenge it was well said earlier by the ambassador it is the climate deregulation which affects everyone the North and the South the East and the West must all impose a sharing approach in the world in their relationship I will come back very quickly to the military to review a study that was published only two days ago and which concludes that the military will increase 20% more than the rest of the world the third challenge is the increase in inequality in the world and on the inside very well so the question of inequality must lead us to promote a sharing approach and even to work to renew the political economy to integrate the question of the environment and the question of inequality that is to say also the way of development the way of life it was well said by Prime Minister Fabius yesterday finally the fourth challenge is the one of the new geopolitical antagonism from the question of water essential everywhere in Africa and elsewhere but in Africa challenges of poverty but more and more from cultural and religious elements we also need to share that is to say more tolerance more recognition of all essential civilizations and then next to these four dynamics there are two dynamics or two issues the first one is the dynamic of the technological revolution around digital of course and artificial intelligence and the second dynamic is this new bipolarization of the United States China in our region to find a response for all of this especially Europe which has to take its coherence reconcile recognize its proximity and there too I agree with you it's the proximity with Russia in the east and the proximity especially with Africa and the Mediterranean in the south Africa and the southern countries must gather I think of course and credibilize their political system and their economic strategy to make the Mediterranean its serenity its dynamism its essential centrality for a world more balanced more multipolar and make sure that this Mediterranean becomes a field of experimentation advanced of this strategy of sharing and balance I thank you thank you I would like to say again your remark concerning the economy the economic science I think you have all seen that Esther Duflo was crowned with the Nobel prize of economy a few days ago she represents very original research in the field of inequality, poverty and what is very interesting I don't have time to comment more is to see the evolution of the Nobel prize through time a few years ago not so long ago it was just before the big crisis of 2007-2011 the Nobel prize was unleashed I don't quote for works on which it was founded to say that economic crises of the type of war were absolutely exclusive to everything so it is very interesting to see the intellectual evolution of the approach of economic issues in any case, thank you I don't know in what language you are going to speak at the moment that it is not Japanese we will feel Yoichi Suzuki is one of the great diplomats of Gaimocho with a wonderful career and he was our last ambassador in Paris and he finished his career negotiating the trade deal as we mentioned earlier between Japan and he is, I think, a friend of many of us here so dear Yoichi the flower is yours thank you I will say the flower is yours I will at least try to start in French a lot has been said first of all I will join the others to congratulate you as a collaborator and to everyone for an excellent conference with a lot of information a lot of food and a lot of food for thought a lot has been said by the orators who preceded me on this state of things either G2 or a bipolar world or a binary state of the Kevin Brad so I don't have to develop the current situation on the one hand the United States on the other the China which dominates everyone but I noticed that there were three objectives that were shared during the three days of debate shared at least by the American and the Chinese names that is to say that we didn't want we wanted to avoid at all costs being put in a position where they had to choose one or the other secondly how to protect our own interests facing the pressure either American or Chinese and thirdly to minimize to the maximum the damage of the international system and also through the discussions I think we have identified at least two tracks excuse me for being simple one track is a collaboration coordination cooperation between the non-American non-Chinese actors to start with Japan Europe, India Africa and others the other is to develop as John Sowers said a way to rebuild a new global system I don't know how to say it in French but it's common very common so I will come back to a bright note I will try to see if we can follow these two tracks in a concrete way my observation for example in the field of foreign trade we have already started to note in the beginning the cooperation collaboration between certain partners that we have in Japan the possibility to find a ground on which we can't force Trump to join the bilateral bilateral agreement but there is the possibility to build a base and also to conclude what we call comprehensive and progressive trans-pacific partnership CPTPP or less TPP in the United States it's between a vigor we also have to conclude the agreement with the European Union which is also between a vigor Trump has seen this and Trump has just seen that the Americans were disfavored to leave the TPP due to the pressure to negotiate a bilateral agreement but if you see well it's a bilateral agreement that we signed and unfortunately let's say of a short-term nature because it's defensive we wanted to avoid controlling the American pressure but unfortunately we sent a sign and it put a lot of questions about the effect that this agreement will have on the bilateral system but Trump has seen that it wasn't in the interest of the Americans to stay outside same thing for the USMCA the new NAFTA there are a lot of TPP elements there he negotiated something on the bilateral or regional level so there is a possibility even if Trump doesn't admit that we can gradually force to accept elements that will be negotiated on the outside in a bilateral or multilateral way second thing we talked a lot about connectivity it's good connectivity as you said the Chinese initiative it's not bad but the notion of China that everyone has their own model of development can be problematic because if you choose your model and and bring you to fall into the trap you will have a problem you have a structure with the latest technology but you are in summer it's a problem so you have to find a common policy that isn't shared many people avoid you to fall into this trap and to be able to build infrastructure not only for the debt management but also for the climate you don't have to add new infrastructure that emit gas I can maybe with the time left I can stop here but if the time allowed I would have also wanted to address the question to build or reinforce the global commons how do you have the answers and on the other hand you have less time than others you can give two minutes one thing on one side the trade war between China and the United States there are two or three elements that can't be resolved on the bilateral the question of intellectual property the subvention and the transfer of forced technology these are the questions that our Chinese friends don't move under the bilateral pressure of the Americans because they don't want to do it the only way to convince the Chinese our Chinese friends the multilateralism is to find a way through the IMC or maybe elsewhere the rules that are not there to resolve this question the transfer of forced technology you have to develop the new rules for the subvention of the state enterprise it's rather a question to find a way to execute the rules of the IMC anyway try and third question you have to find the digital economy the digital economy the economy is dominated by the Americans, the Chinese and for the rest of the world you have to find a multilateral rule there are three schools currently for the management of the digital economy the Americans are a liberator system they want a zero regulation principle the European model is the regulation model necessary for example to protect personal data and others and third model is the Chinese model which is mercantilist that is to say for the digital space but to benefit from the digital space of others there are three models for the American names and Japanese names there will be a benefit for the Chinese names there will be a lot of benefits to consult and choose which of the three models and I know the answer which will be the most beneficial for the European model thank you thank you very much and one of the first or the first remark in your conclusion before the addition that is to say the idea that countries outside the United States and China do not have to be against the United States but discuss together to try to see their own interests this idea is exactly the starting point of the World Policy Conference 12 years ago that is to say we call it the average power and so it is one of the fundamental vocations of this conference where the American and Chinese are present and we would like to see a little more but the agenda the way we are discussing is different we try to see the average power and I even noticed that the American and Chinese who come here are interested in this because they see another point of view than the one they are used to otherwise we still have a few minutes for the discussion but you will allow me not to take 10 minutes but to give you an observation on the question that has been asked to me what struck me the most these last three days and I will tell you in a very simple way it is the contrast with the abyssal perspective of technology which opens fantastic possibilities diabolical to some extent but also extraordinarily positive and the other the power the power typically facing the great climate problem and from that point of view with Laurent Fabius and Patrick Pouillonet were quite revelatory it was a bit of a dialogue but in a certain way even if you understand in a certain sense and because it is very easy to say there is only one way to do this the problem is that we do not know how to do it the problem is that humanity does not have the experience called multilateralism and we do not have the knowledge the method to deal with the problems of this size and especially when it implies very long-term consequences that we do not evaluate in a precise way because to say that the planet will be heated at 3°C for example in the next 20 years and maybe even more it does not say much because what is important is how these 3°C are distributed there are countries that will benefit others that will not benefit for which it will be catastrophic the rise of the waters the rise of the seas there will be multiplications of tornadoes and singular phenomena but as we do not know exactly how to distribute the precise consequences of this climate rise the perception of the different countries of the different states of their interests is terrible and as politics is when we want it or not the main consequences are the short term especially in liberal democracies and that is why they are so criticized today we find ourselves in a situation of impuissance and so I think that one of the major works that we should all settle that is to say the intellectuals but also the practitioners of diplomacy in an experience to leverage diplomacy is to see how we can develop new methods also of negotiations and so that the results of these negotiations are respected that is to say that we do not have a right which we have a beautiful right the COP21 was a great success in a certain sense but what do you agree which is so vague in the end that it does not prevent any kind of sanction for those who do not respect it so what I am trying to say is that pulling the leaves of the tree we all do it but having said that, we have not said anything the question is how do we take it because what I am trying to tell you is that we do not know how to take it and therefore we have to learn of new methods all in benefit of course of multi secular of diplomacy and to respond to the expression of Asia of the wisdom of nations now we have a few minutes and I will pass the word to Jean-Claude Gruffat I should say Jean-Claude Gruffat because you understood that he is American but originally French I would first like to thank Thierry thank all the team it was I attended about half of the WPC and I was in Evian it is an extraordinary moment and when I see the progress that has been accomplished all of this is obviously the work done by the organizers but also the quality of the people who have been associated so it is very good to recognize the old people but I think you also have to congratulate to have now more young elements a greater geographical diversity a greater diversity of men and women I find that all this is remarkable and I want to thank you for your congratulations first point the second point I would like to come back on what you just said about the debate on the environment that I found really fascinating two dates one talks about 2050 and the other talks about 2025 or 2030 I don't know exactly and we can see the difference between politics and I was going to say the practitioner the practitioner is ready to engage in the objectives he said I am practically verbatim I am ready to engage in the objectives that I know are realistic and attainable but when we are a leader responsible of a big company and the great weakness of the Paris Agreement is that we are in the Greek calendar and we have no concrete means to get there we say to ourselves that in 2050 we are going to be virtuous in 2050 we will be compatible we will be conformed and in fact we have strictly no idea and it's so far you know when I was when I started my banking career we said we have to make long-term loans we will never be there to know about the rembourses I was a little frustrated but we have to be lucid so if there is still between 2025 and 2050 there is 2049 and 2049 is a very important date because it will be the 100th anniversary of the popular republic of China and it is there it is there that the Chinese have this date in mind extremely precise it's not even 50 it's minus one so Joseph thank you very much Thierry I would like to say the word but everyone will congratulate you for this excellent conference which has allowed two things the first is to globally the problem of globalisation that is to say globalisation of the world we are on three questions that have been addressed the technological and cybernetics and then the question of the strategic and the antagonism it's a first point it seems extremely important we have taken the weight of the world of the problems that are posed the second remark I would like to make which joins everything that you have done but I would not speak of impuissance I would say that we are now in the age of decoupling between utilitarianism and politics we have always learned and understood that it was the art of the resolution of the questions that are posed so I am a technological landmark that comes back to my mind when he said that humanity never poses the questions that the questions that it can solve and indeed we are now at the foot of the wall so impuissance yes but momentary but this decoupling between this deshumanisation of the problems where the human is no longer there even if we were observed as an entomologist and observe the faults under his microscope but you gave us the clue because the idea is in the end to devote the next word policy conference to the age of the answers we are in the age of problems or questions we have to go to the age of the answers so three remarks three remarks and no questions prior to the consequences that can be taken from a conference like this in particular in question what are the answers that we could bring the first is that by listening to Mr Moniz I will take your name as needed it is to tell me that the problems of globalization are becoming the problems of the small localization all the big problems today that are climatic of the differences of inequalities that have been signed by the old Marrakech Rabah we live them it is the problem of the yellow gills Bonamakram Abed to talk about the question of Egypt it is also the question of Egypt what is happening we can come back to a configuration of the average age that is to say where cities were creating there was desert it is the problem of Johannesburg it is the problem of the heart it is the problem of Paris in a certain way and that everyone lives in the city and that in this city this city world deletes the link of politics because everyone goes where there are hospitals schools etc and we make the city around but we do not see that it is the nation in the geopolitical space or the national geonational space of the questions that are asked the second in terms of geopolitical of course there are tensions they will remain but are we not coming out of the age of the collective solidarity system to enter again in the era of relations or bilateral alliances when the international system is dedicating itself it is to say I am going to do it with the first who is next to me and so the English will do it with I do not know with the Americans we will do it with the Germans so the return of alliances and the third point why don't we pass the age of the answers but it is you who makes us lose we would not pass the idea how to negotiate what a mediation that we did not do unfortunately it is the problem of the human thank you we have to conclude and what I am going to do is invite those who have seen or wanted to express to send us do not hesitate to send us by writing remarks, suggestions propositions we can do a bit of bottom-up yes I speak English and it will be very useful so the time has come thanks the first thing I want to say is that the success of this 12th edition of the world policy conference is also the result of a partnership let's say Franco-Marocca exemplary and so I would like first I will do it quickly also yesterday thank you I said the Marocca because I think it is the Marocca and the Marocca here is embodied by Mostafa Terab I asked you to do a second effort to raise you so Mostafa Terab works a lot and he does not work alone either so he has a certain number of quite remarkable collaborators I do not it is impossible to quote everyone but there is even one person that I would like to quote it's Siam I do not know where she is she is there there are many others I do not want to quote them but Siam everyone has noticed these women who are walking like Sangnim this evening with black glasses because it it is doing well but she did not she did not have these black glasses here I would also like to salute my friend Karim Elinaoui who runs brilliantly the office the the OCP which was rebuilt from a very nice name from the new south there is work as we saw so all our Moroccan friends I thank them I also thank the interpreters the interpreters are often victims of surprising thanks but as I feel what we said the others were understood it's a good sign and God knows this role of translator is important and difficult so be warmly thank you and of course I would like to thank the team of Chiva but it's not really Chiva because this person with whom you have been in touch all the time and this person do I call her? Sangnim Kwon here you have to get up here if I had as much applause I would start to be jealous here and she did an extraordinary job these teams and obviously you have to see a work like this these days and nights during a certain time so it's important to find people who can not sleep too much and who can be mobilized at any time day and night and then there are also all the teams who work with us the first one in October 2008 and I would like to ask Florent Chantérac to get up always loyal to the post with all the teams who surround him but here again I would try to quote everyone but there is still someone that I can't not quote because she always suffers with elegance it's Marie Lopez where is she because she is Marie Lopez because taking care of the rooms distribution of the rooms all of this is the problem of when and etc in the whole she remains calm it's even quite extraordinary I also see who welcomes a lot of you I forgot someone else there are a lot of others get up listen I will necessarily forget but it's impossible to quote everyone but I think we also have to thank the participants the members we don't talk so much about the participants we call them the members because I think it was really the spirit of club that developed during the time that absolutely needs to grow Jean-Claude was talking earlier people need to diversify more in terms of origin what what? and then maybe more women to have an age advantage more representative I think we need young people and young people and seniors but all of this is a work that is done over the years and if you allow me a last word I think that if we want to evolve the WPC in a positive way we don't have to make a revolution we have to make an evolution for example I don't know 100 people more brutally it would completely change the atmosphere so we need to make a revolution I think that Massa Fathérab also and Morocco gave us an example with the University of Mohammed VI who was open who is admirable with installations who think you are remarkable but also a great caution to rise in power because if we go too fast and without having mastered the process we risk then finding ourselves in impasse so the WPC is able to follow its work I think all those who are attached realize that it is designed to last and we will make it evolve and improve and we really rely on you all to help us I will take one more because my dear Asya I like this concept of adaptive wisdom and so I hold it and I will do my best so I have already talked too much if I would like to mention someone who is not here there is nothing serious but he is not allowed to travel for the moment following a little health concern which is Nicolas Germais who you also know and who presides the WPC foundation so thank you to all and to all