 Welcome to our session today, Leading in Divided Times. My name is Dan Shapiro. I'm director of the Harvard International Negotiation Program, and it's an honor to be here, certainly with our distinguished panel and our distinguished audience here today as well. Our agenda today is threefold. First, I'm going to frame the session for about five or so minutes to give some further context. And then the primary portion of our time will be hearing from our distinguished panelists. And then thirdly, Q&A, and time to hear your perspectives as well. And I am totally excited to be here today to hear your perspectives and certainly on behalf of all of us. And your role as an audience is extremely important. And I encourage you, as you listen to our conversation today, what resonates with you? What doesn't resonate? Where's the divide? And what's going on inside of you? How are you dealing with potential differences that you feel with what we're talking about as well? Before we begin, one other important point. Please note that today's session is webcast live, and it is on the record, so let's get started. And let me begin with just a brief overview. Our session today is focused on one of the most important topics of our time, how to bridge the growing divides in our world. Let me ask just a show of hands. How many of you feel that there are significant divides right now in your own home community and your own home region or nation? How many of you? Show of hands. I should do it the other way. Who doesn't believe there are any divides right now? Couple of you. We'll have to talk later. Yes. And second question, show of hands, how many of you feel that more could be done to deal with these growing divides that we're seeing in our world right now? How many of you feel more could be done? And that's really the issue we're grappling with today, what's causing the divides, what else can be done? And despite all the technologies that are out there, despite all the economic ties that are binding us together, it seems that our world is becoming more and more fractured. We have the rich versus the poor. We have the nationalists versus the globalists, which has already been a big topic here at Davos. We have the liberals versus the conservatives. We have the believers versus the non-believers. And the stakes have never been higher given nuclear weapons, given globalization itself and on and on. And ultimately, the problem, as I see it at least, it's not with one side or the other side. It's with the divide itself. How can we better understand one another and the differences between us when our tribal impulses start to pull us toward adversarialism in some sort of way? How can we bridge those divides? And today, we have an incredible panel of experts from a variety of different contexts to help us mine unearth that question. Let me introduce our distinguished panel now. We have Dr. Vitaly Klitschko, who is mayor of Kiev, Ukraine. And I'm going to go in the order of my sheet. We'll skip around here. Second, we have Dr. Peter Marr, who is president of the International Committee of the Red Cross and a longtime leader in diplomacy and peacemaking. And just as a quick note, unfortunately, Dr. Marr is going to have to leave at about 125 for a meeting with the Chinese president. We'll excuse you for that one. Yes. It's the challenge of running the largest humanitarian organization in the world. Next, we have right next to him is Excellency Amr Moussa, who has served in such important roles as Secretary General of the League of Arab States, Minister of Foreign Affairs of Egypt, and has been an active contributor to peace processes in the Middle East and beyond. We have his Excellency, Pierre Carlo Padone, who's Minister of Economy and Finance in Italy and a longstanding economic scholar and leading advisor. And finally, last but certainly not least, we have Mikayla Ruggwizongoga, who is a managing partner of Future 54 in Rwanda. And I might add a global shaper of the World Economic Forum. And for good reason, we've already had conversation and incredible work being done. So with that, let's dive into the actual questions. And the big question, the first big question, going through for each of you, I would love to hear your perspectives. Could you help us understand the types of divides that most concern you personally? And what do you see as fueling those divides? And why don't I start to my left here with Mikayla? Thank you very much, Danielle. Good morning. And thank you for joining us for this conversation. It's an honor to be with you and share our opinion. I think this is an open conversation. And as much as we share our experience, we'll also love to hear from you. So before we go into the heart of the conversation, the global shapers here in Davos are leading a campaign called the World We Shape. And we were asked to summarize in a few sentences what is the world that we want to shape currently and for the years to come. And on my side, I had to say that I believe that the world we shape is within each and every one of you and each and every one of us as we act with respect, compassion, and courage. And I think the greatest crisis that we have today is the value that we share. We all know what needs to be done. We know the crisis that we are facing today. But do we act accordingly? Do we do the right thing? So those are the questions that are open. And from your perspective, what are some of the divides that you personally are focused on, for example, through your work with your organization? Well, I guess one of the greatest divide we have currently is poverty and then the consequences of poverty. I cannot solve every issue. But while we do on the African continent currently, Future 54 is an initiative that we started three years ago with two friends of mine from Mali and Senegal. And we try to export best practices across African countries. So one of our main project is called Umoganda Africa. Umoganda in my country, Rwanda, is a program that takes place every last Saturday of the month. People go out in the neighborhood and they clean. They make sure that it's safe and it's clean for everybody. And they also use that time to discuss current issues. And it has truly helped to rebuild the fabric of our society, especially after the events we had in Rwanda in 1994. And so we focus on exchanging those best practices. Our project is on cleanliness and hygiene. And we basically frame Umoganda and export it in Mali, in Senegal, in Guinea-Bissau, and also in Benin. We believe that those are simple model that can be replicated. It did not only help to move a bit forward, but it also helped us to know each other better. Because it's by knowing each other, by creating those conversations, that tomorrow we can build a world that is more peaceful and more understanding. Dr. Mar, your work stretches around the world. What do you see as some of the big divides? What's causing them? Well, from my side, thanks a lot as well for having me despite my voice, which sounds terrible because of the cold, and despite the fact that I have to leave early. When I visit contexts in which we are active, these are violent torn society. It's war and violence, which at the forefront is, I see as the major dividers in society. If I look a little bit, what Amartya Sen has said is in his famous book on identity and violence is the dynamic of identity and violence, which is preoccupying us today. I'm just back from Iraq. A week ago, I was in a village at the outskirts of Mosul. And in this village at the outskirts of Mosul, you have returnees from displacements of violent activities over the last two years. The Sunni have been displaced by the one side, the Shia by the other. They are returning home, and it's very difficult to live again together once the dynamics of violence have torn apart societies. If I ask for the drivers of violence, then I'm hesitating between what you said before, focusing on poverty, and a second sort of driver which we encounter increasingly, and which is injustice and exclusion. I have increasingly the opinion that it is not poverty that drives violence, but injustice and exclusion is driving violence in societies. And I think this is maybe new in some of the conflicts and the dynamics that we are experiencing today. Everybody is talking about this huge impact of war and violence that we are witnessing in the world. I think it's inclusion, exclusion, injustice in societies, driving violence which is a divider in societies, and then to make a final point, violence drives violence. Once you are in the dynamics of using and in the dynamics of almost the anonymity of norms and behaviors, when norms and behaviors are pushed aside and the basic norms of international humanitarian laws and principles are not respected, then you are in a very bad shape. Because then you are in the collimateur, as you say in French, in the spiral of violence-feeding violence. Mr. Rousseau. Well, thank you very much. I wish to join the two previous speakers in thanking you, thanking the forum, and welcoming this opportunity to meet with the shapers of the new world. Although I have difficulty in accepting that notion, because those who shape the world are not here, not in this room, and not in this age, and not in the way of thanking that many of us, the majority of us, do think. That's number one. Number two, there are all sorts of divides. You mentioned some of them, believers, non-believers, liberals, illiberals, et cetera. Globalists and isolationists and so on. In my opinion, the most important divide is the divide between rich and poor. Poverty is the real plague that is determining the future that would determine the future of this world, future of continents, billions of people. So this is the most important divide. The second divide is the generational, the divide between those with hopes for the future and those who have interests and calculated positions and situations and how to collect the wealth at the expense of others. So, in fact, this divide, the generation, is very important. And the third one I must say is those who know and those who don't, the ignorance, the lack of education in so many countries, in so many continents, that is making it very difficult for so many countries to move on because of this. Link to that is the fourth industrial revolution that will produce and depend on by necessity on the, what can I say? The progress in science and the strides that many countries, many societies will be able to do to achieve and the rest of the world. This divide is so serious that it would affect the future of the world. There is a fourth divide, perhaps, we are not aware of. Many of us are not so far. This divide between East and West. There are some who think that this is finished. This is something of the past. We don't have to give it that importance. But it is there. But the divide between East and West, there is a different definition of the East for the 20th century, it was Moscow. Now it is Beijing. So this is the East. And the East geographically determined and correctly called East. So this East-West divide is moving and we don't know where would this take us. It depends on what the new president of the United States is going to do. How does he think about that? Is it a already predetermined policy that pivot Asia should be done in a different way? That is how I think Mr. Trump is thinking. And he's not convinced with the Obama way. Part of this is the determination of the, I would say, competitiveness, rivalry. But it would lead to confrontation. That is this thing, this thinking, and policy and expectation about the new American president will shape the world. So we'll have to enter this into shaping the new world, shaping the future world. Thank you. Good afternoon, everybody. And first of all, let me thank the organizer for this invitation. It's an honor and pleasure to be part of such a distinguished panel on such a very important topic. Let me offer a few thoughts from my current perspective, which is being a policymaker in a European economy and having some thoughts, first of all, about where the vision comes from. Now, let me just start by noting that this topic would not have been relevant maybe 10 years ago. 10 years ago, speaking about divisions within members of the European Union, within the United States, would have been a mostly an academic exercise, not becoming a policy priority. So things have changed and have probably gone in the wrong direction. Where does division comes from? Well, it's easily said. It comes from citizens' dissatisfaction with their prospects, with their current state of life and with what they expect to have from the future in terms of job opportunities for themselves and their children, welfare protection, security. All of these things are open question marks. So the division, which translates into policy reaction, I'll come to that in a second, and political reaction, is grounded in something which is a fact. And so in dealing with division, since the title of this panel is leading in a divided society, then all of those who have responsibility about policymaking would make a big mistake by ignoring the fact that whatever is seen as antagonism, as division, has very objective roots in declining perspective about the future. So this is my first point. The second point is, how does this lead to division? Well, one almost automatic implication is what Dr. Moussa was mentioning. It leads to highlighting the distinction between the rich and the poor. If you are rich, you may be facing threats similar to those of your neighbor with support, but you have more resources to deal with, the unknown, in dealing with, you can deal with private resources if you lose a job, while if you're poor and you lose a job and there's no welfare mechanism to support you, then you're really in trouble. So obviously there is a distributional element in division and the data now are documenting that extremely well. There is a huge concentration of wealth on the one hand, and there is a large number of poor, even middle-class people who are not being able to deal with future and current threats with their resources. So there is an objective division, and this is the second point that political leadership should take into account. This is a fact, which was not as dramatic as 10 years ago. But the third divide is even more worrying. It's about the political response. In many European cases, but also in the US, you may see that there are results about elections, about polls, about referendum, about issues that may be far away from your state of behavior, which, however, reflect the division. And they also often generate, which is what is sometimes referred to as a populist response. Now, what do I mean by populist response? The fact that the policy divide is something I would describe as follows. On the one hand, there is an attempt of policymaking. Now, allow me humbly to say that policymaking is a difficult job. It has to deal with a huge number of variables. I'm an economist by training, and when I was asked to do the job of a minister, I said, okay, I know a bit of economics that will help. That helps, but it's only a tiny part of the job. You need to know about law. You need to know about administration. You need to know about politics before you come to the definition of what you think is the right policy response. And it always ends up being complicated. There is no shortcut, no silver bullet. So on the one hand, there is a policy proposal, which is by definition complicated, not only in terms of implementation, but especially in terms of the impact that your policy, if implemented, will generate on the behavior and state of life of people so that people can associate the policy response to how they live. And often they come to the conclusion that the policy response is useless at best. You've done that, you've cut those taxes, who cares? I don't feel better with respect to your policy. So, and this is where the division comes in, what I said is not yes to your policy proposal, is no, no to what? It's no period. And so this is a problem. It's not that I disrespect those people that vote no. It's in their right and they have good reasons for voting no. The problem is an objective problem. If there is a growing part of the population that says no, then we are in trouble because we need solutions. We may be needing different solutions in the past. Fine, that's the usual democratic game. But if the answer is no, then we're really in trouble. And this is what worries me most because if this what I call a populist attitude takes hold, then you cannot govern democratic society anymore. I'm making an extreme point. So this is what worries me. The fact that policy leadership and political leadership is showing to be less and less effective in producing answers that deal with real problems. Not with imaginative problems, with real problems. One final thought. So the answer would be try to design more efficient policy. Yes, but that's not enough. What you need today is not only good policies, but also a vision. What do you expect society to be over the next 10 to 20 years? So policy leaders have to have the courage, number one, to design effective policies which sometimes can be painful, at least in the short run, but also declare their vision. Without a vision, you will not convince those no voters who have good reason to vote no. Thank you. And let's get the perspective of another policy maker, mayor. Good morning, everybody. Happy to be here. And yes, of course, the topic of today's discussion is very philosophic. We can talk about that hours, but the issue of effective government has to be always been a challenge for the world. There are different problems, different times. I am responsible for one of the largest city of East Europe. Kiev, four million people. Ukraine have also many problems, exactly the same as modern world. We just saw in couple of minutes ago the short movie in the screen. World will be complicated, millions of refugees, thousands of people killed in different countries world. It's so many conflicts. And yes, the life will be complicated. And yes, of course, a lot of things depend from leaders. A lot of things depend from every one of us. It's very important of vision, which vision we have. I am very happy here in this whole, I see so many young people. It's very important. Life is fight. You have to fight for you values, for your vision, for your goal, for your dreams. It's very important which vision you have and it's very important which values you have. It's also very important to develop the developed vision of city, country, region. We, everybody discuss about the future. Of future of the world, of our countries. And we have, we hope to change the future for better things for everyone. And for that, we have to fight. For that, we discuss about better future. I'm from Ukraine, the country which double bigger than, almost double bigger than France. It's biggest countries in Europe. We have also exactly the same problem what I talk about the future. The vision of people, of majority of the people, democracy, peace, freedom, economical and political success and yes, of course, good life standards for everyone. Let's talk about that, about these points, about these topics and I'm more than sure this discussion will be very interesting but the main points, I have a lot of speech between, in different auditorium, in different people. It's the main point, it's nothing happens. It's nothing happens in life if you never try to change the world around you. It's good to see so many young people who actually from these people depend the future of our countries and from your vision, from you values depend the future, not just you cities and countries, the future of the world. Thank you. Let's take that on, you know, I think that's very, let's get practical. So we've heard now a variety of different theoretical reasons why these divides might be happening, why people around the world are feeling frustrated and so on. What do you do about it? What can we do? And let's start with you, Dr. Morrison, since you're gonna have to head out soon. Could you share with us maybe a story of how you have seen a substantial divide in the work that you're doing on the ground? How do you deal with it practically? And what advice might you have for others on how to deal with these kinds of situations? That's it. When I listened to Minister Padawan and I thought we really share the same problem that whether you are active at the frontline of war or whether you are active in European policy waking and confronted with naysayers. At the end of the day, it's about trust building and trust building in society is about negotiation and negotiation is about finding practical, agreeable solution to which both or all sides in a process can join in while not giving up but putting second some of the fundamental differences they have. So this is basically the mechanics of what we do in the field. When we evacuate 40,000 people of Eastern Aleppo, that's a three, four weeks long negotiating process in which we try to bring together the belligerents. We try to convince them that in terms of the principle of humanity, you have to have evacuated those 40,000 civilian of Eastern Aleppo. And then you go into a negotiation on modality. Who exactly, when exactly, how exactly, what is the timing and sequencing? And you decompose ideologically charged issues into manageable steps which are agreeable to all sides. That's basically what we try to do in each and every context in which we are. It's not always as dramatic as evacuating 40,000 out of Eastern Aleppo. Sometimes it's just about bringing 10 trucks of aid into a besieged area. So what is exactly the modalities which are acceptable to all sides that bring relief to people? And at the same time satisfy other interests, for instance, security interests of those around. And I think that's the essence of trust-building from the bottom and on the bottom of society. And because I have to leave, I just a quick glimpse because I know Dan will ask you on what you can do in your own communities. And I think what you can do in your own communities is exactly that. De-prioritizing your fundamental beliefs compared to finding practical solutions to problems. Thank you. And at this point, I open it to the panel more generally. I just wanted to make sure that Dr. Maher, your voice got in before you had to go. But thank you again. Thanks again. No, thank you. And our greetings to the Chinese president, yes. Just to open it to the four of you. As more of a discussion now, what do you see strategically and practically that can be done to help bridge the divides that are there within societies between the various different gaps that we've talked about? And I open it to all of you. Thank you, Danielle. It's a broad question. And I would like to maybe break it down into three components at community, nation level, at the continental level, and then at the global level. Coming from Rwanda, we've had a very complicated past. And after the event of 1994, our leaders have to, they had to unite us again. They had to rebuild a sense of identity, a nation for all Rwandans. And they've done that by being firm, but by also having a lot of empathy. And it has worked. Today, I was not born in Rwanda. I was born, my parents were refugees. I was born abroad, but I can sit here and speak on behalf of Rwandan youth. I have a country, I have a passport. And those are things that have, it has no price. And I'm very thankful for the leadership of our country. And they've not only done that, they've also invested a lot of resources in breeding the poverty gap, in allowing young people to go to school. Today in our country, you have a 12 years basic education program. You have a one laptop per child program. All those are programs that make sure that tomorrow we have an educated society. And so when we sit in a room like this today, or when you come to our country, we can have a conversation and we can exchange and we can build together. At the continental level in Africa, there's still a lot of work to be done. We don't know each other so well. Well, we know each other as African, but given our history again, sometimes we look more toward the West than toward, than within. And but today the young people are more and more conscious of that. We, there's different activities going on to being done to bring us back to, can I say, unite us more. One of which is a campaign led by the Global Shapers in Africa, which is called the Visa Free Africa Campaign. Just to allow us to be able to travel more freely across the continent. If I wanna go to Ethiopia or Lagos, an American citizen or a French citizen will go there faster than I can. It doesn't make sense. Our leaders understand the urgency, but I think it's also very important that you stand and speak about it each and every day until we are, we have model, maybe inspired by the Schengen model, because we talk about populism in Europe, but there's also good model. You've achieved many things among with the Schengen Visa, and we can be inspired by that and have also such structure on our continent. So that's what I would say at community level, nation and continental level. At the global level, I think we have to create greater conversation about our values. What do we believe in? How do we act? How do we interact with each other? And Joe Biden earlier on today morning was actually emphasizing that point again in his address. And I think as we discuss, as we reflect on those issues, just take some time and think and reflect from within. How do you exchange with your neighbor? How do you respect the people who are maybe don't look like you, but who are also just as equal as you? Thanks. Other perspectives? Yeah, okay. We haven't reached that point yet. Okay, very much. So you raise the issue of vision as opposed to fact of life, facts of life that we live with. Of course we need the vision. The United Nations in its dealing with the present and future devised this 2030 plan and perhaps we'll need 2050, et cetera. That is how to promote the vision. But we have problems that we are living with today. We refer to some of them like poverty, et cetera. But as a result of this scientific revolution, we will be faced, this generation will be faced with the newcomer, the robot. Robot will be dependent on doing everything in the field, in the factory, and perhaps in the hospitals, et cetera, et cetera. So what about the jobs for those people? Okay, the question is should we consider scientific advances as the enemy of the hopes and the rights of this generation? This is a question that has to be asked. Another one is about the trust which our colleague stressed before leaving. That we have to promote trust within the society and among societies. Now I believe all of you feel, or at least some of you do feel that the issue of trust in international relations is eroding. We are not sure who will do what. So the question of trust in international relations after the end of the Cold War and the hopes that were entertained that this is a new era and no wars, et cetera, we ended up by selecting enemies like the books and essays that talked about the new enemies after the end of the Cold War, including religion, including Islam, and so on. This has to be dealt with seriously. As for the world, the world trust in site countries, sometimes it means acquiescence. We should differentiate between acquiescence and trust in the governments. Because if you trust, then you cannot oppose. You said, okay, do whatever you want. No, we have to stress the element of doubt that we want to follow. What do you mean by this point or this policy or this procedure? Those are things that I believe a young generation should bear in mind and start to ask. Dr. Padon, you had raised both some of the psychological challenges and gaps, as well as some of the objective challenges and gaps. From your perspective, how do we bridge these divides? What needs to happen? Well, I can again speak from my current perspective and try to remind ourselves that the policy community is trying to react. It's not just standing there not seeing the problem. And it's trying to react by changing the policy paradigm. This is visible in what the G20 have been doing, what the G7 are doing, what European countries are doing, each one with their different perspective. In a nutshell, I would argue that now the policy paradigm is changed towards what is referred to as inclusive growth. What does that mean? It means that it's not only growth that has to be stable, balanced, fiscally sustainable, and all those things that finance ministers used to try to sell to the public, including myself. It has to be something that it's good for the population, and especially for those who feel frustrated for good reasons. Now, of course, once you have moved to, you have to do some new concept, the game starts, because you have to translate that into specific measures. Specific measures are specific, often specific to different countries and different regions. But I would suggest that they are based on four key pillars or four key ingredients that are essential to dealing with the inclusion issue. One is jobs. There is very broad evidence that says that the most powerful way to include people in the progress of society is by offering job opportunities, decent jobs, not just any job. And creating job is more complicated, although then one usually thinks, and although this is certainly the most important challenge that policymaking has in my experience. Second, related to job creation is education. You want decent jobs. You want to understand what kind of jobs are needed. You need to plan ahead. This, again, is very difficult. It's also very expensive. So countries and governments have to make choices about where they put their money. And also, it's very difficult to think about what kind of jobs and education, therefore, will be needed 10 to 20 years from now. This is one of the most difficult policy challenges that I've come across. And this, of course, requires the contribution of all stakeholders who will be hiring what kind of skills 20 years from now at what price. Third, the ingredient related to the second and the first one and Dr. Mussol was also alluding it is technology or innovation. Yes, there is evidence that says that technology and innovation may destroy jobs. And therefore, should we shy away from innovation? By all means, no. Let's not forget that in many instances in history, during industrial revolutions, this was already a phenomenon that had to be dealt with, that if you introduce a new technology, especially if it's a general purpose technology, you may end up seeing that you need many jobs less to generate a given outcome. But this also creates indirectly many more jobs. So technology is good and should not be abandoned because of that. Fourth and final ingredient, redistribution. Markets tend to generate malfunctional distribution in terms of wealth distribution. So that's why public policy is useful also for that reason. Redistribute resources so that there is more investment in education, more capability to address the consequences of innovation, and ultimately more jobs. This is the new paradigm that's being shaping up. Another thing is where this is being implemented correctly, but that's a question you should ask to individual finance ministers. And Mayor, what's your perspective? Practically, yeah. So, a philosophical question we can discuss about long time. How much time we have? How much time I have? Give us the core of it. Yes. OK. How much time do you need? We'll negotiate. We'll bridge the divide. From a totally different perspective, from a totally different angle. Success. We're talking about success because we, everybody, are hungry for success. Success of people, success of cities, the success of countries, success of region. Everybody wants to be successful. It's very important to have a dream. It's very important to have a vision. A couple of minutes for some story. And this story will be a good example. And exactly some part of answer for this question. I born in Soviet Union, grown up in Soviet Union. Maybe somebody knows, somebody don't know about it. Professional boxing was repeated in Soviet Union. We everybody listen about name of Muhammad Ali, but nobody have a chance to see his fight. It's interesting. It's many children grown up. It's listen the name, but doesn't have a chance to see the fights. A pre-stroyer came in 1986. Pre-stroyer came in some group of boys. Actually, we have a chance to see broadcasting from United States. And we actually see professional fight. It's one of the very talented guy fighting for world title and knocked out his opponent who was first and youngest heavyweight champion in the world. This was Mike Tyson. Everybody is so impressed. And I'm also one of the boy told, you know what? In one day I beat Tyson and beat the world champion. This was me. It's everybody look at me. Skinny guy and looking this killer machine and told, you want to beat Mike Tyson? Never, ever. They started to smile, to kidding. OK, time goes very fast. It's very important to have a dream. It's very important to fight for your dream, to have a vision. 15 years later, and white older friends come all together. I bring the bag, take it from the bag. The same title what have above his head 15 years ago, Mike Tyson put on the table and told, no, it's work. The same title what have Muhammad Ali, Mike Tyson, Lennox Lewis, it's work. It's very important to have a challenge in life. And very important, never give up. And fight for your vision, for your dream. OK, 1991, Soviet Union doesn't exist anymore. Many different countries. Everyone have a dream of success, to have successful country. And we tried to build democracy 25 years later than nothing happens. I have a dream to live in a modern European country. But it's difficult. If you want to do it well, do it by yourself. Three times. I take a part for election, for my election. It's the last time. Third time I won. It's difficult situation after revolution of dignitaries. Economy is broke. This country is corrupt. This economy doesn't work. The annexation of Kremlin is war of east of Ukraine. Thousands, millions of refugees, thousands of people killed. And difficult situation in country economically and politically. It's very important to have a dream, to change. Very important to have a vision. Three years later, I'm ready to talk. To present, Kiev doesn't have almost doesn't have jobless. 50% more we became in budget. We have some good dynamic of development and success of people to success to the country. It's very important to bring success. It's very important to be everyone successful and very important to fight, not to wait. And change the country, change the region. I come from Ukraine, one of the largest country in Europe. And yes, of course, of stability in Ukraine depends stability in whole region. And the fight continue. It's not easy, a lot of changes. Sometimes in your life, if you have a dream, to implement this dream, you need days, weeks, sometimes years, but very important. Never give up and continue to fight for your dream. It's be successful. If you trust yourself, trust your vision, it's very important if people around you have exactly the same values, exactly the same vision. And I'm more than sure you will be successful. We're talking about the many problems what we have in modern world. It's difficult to fix the problems. But success of the people can change the world, change the countries, and change the life of the people. And that's why I'm so sorry for that, why I ask about how much time I have. It's maybe total different view angle of your question. But anyway, it's also answer for generally answer for topic of our discussion. And we have just about two more minutes, three more minutes before we go and hear your voice, your perspectives on these issues. We've heard similarities. We've already heard differences on this panel. Just want to open it up to the others. Any reflections on what we've heard so far before we hear from the audience? Well, I like very much what you have said about dream and success. I remember myself when I was about 24 years old as a young diplomat, Egyptian diplomat. I dreamt, and I said it loudly, I want to be the foreign minister of Egypt. 26 years, 27 years later, I became the foreign minister. So I remember very well, remember vividly the moment I sat on the chair of the foreign minister. So I just remembered how I dreamt. And this is the realization of the dream. And then I dreamt at that moment to be a successful foreign minister. I stayed 10 years as foreign minister. And I believe I have achieved many of what I wanted to achieve. But I have a question to you. Have you pursued any career in boxing after you, rather than in politics? I never use my boxing skills outside of the ring. I hope it never happens. But I told you. But you are ready to use. But you know what has worked well. We became almost 10 times more investment in our country because I came on the stage between big investment forum and told I am ready to fighting and work as bodyguards for any investors. Everybody believe me? If we have so good bodyguard for investments, they trust. I want to draw the attention of the audience. To I want to draw the attention on this occasion to the famous cry of Martin Luther King when he said, I have a dream. And the dream was to have equal status, equal citizenship to the black people of America, African-Americans. And I believe he succeeded. Of course he didn't live to see that his cry was that effective, but this is the most famous cry in the world, say, recent history that included the words you said. I have a dream. Yes indeed, you should dream. And you should achieve success in dreaming. And it happened to so many people. So why doesn't it happen to you or to you or to you? I mean, it's on one level if I could summarize on some particular level some of the ideas that have emerged so far. It's dream big, get that vision, think carefully about the mechanisms for getting there to the point of the minister as well. Fight, and if I'm hearing you correctly, fighting isn't necessarily aggressive in a negative sense. It's moving forward with full commitment toward what you believe in and trying to execute that plan. And as you shared, you can make a difference. You ultimately can make a difference and change the social fabric of your environment. With that, our strongest interest is hearing from you. And we're interested both in questions and in comments and critiques of what you've heard here. My only request is that you keep your comments short so that we can hear from a number of you. And I apologize in advance if I cut you off at a certain point in time. It's only with the desire to hear from more of you. So and do we have a microphone? Do we need one? Okay, great, so we have two microphones. And why don't we start, sir, here's the first hand at the hardest spot for the microphone to make it to right in the middle there. Yes. Hi, my name is Thomas Yuli. I'm working for Motivate2B. You talk about vision, you talk about leadership. And yet the visions you cited were visions of the past, Martin Luther King. So fast forward to the year 2037, 20 years from now. What's your vision? What will be the topic of the open forum, this panel, 20 years from now? And what commitment can give us today going home that you start building this vision in a language that people can connect to, that they get from getting to know, which is populism, back to getting to yes. Thank you. What's your vision? Each of you have talked about vision on some implicit level, but to make it explicit and practical, what's your vision for 20, what'd you say, 2037? Well, it's a really good question. You've mentioned vision of the past. Well, I think the point made by Martin Luther King is still very valid. In the case of Rwanda, and I think in the case of Africa, our vision are very current because maybe we are in a different time in our development. We have what we call in Rwanda the vision 2020. And this is what has carried the country so far till today. People are, every day when we wake up, we know that we are joining forces with our government, joining forces with our leaders, His Excellency Paul Kagame, to build the vision 2020. And we are constantly reminded of what it is and how we should contribute to that. And I think maybe in society where there is a lack of direction and there's a lack of vision, it might be the right time for you to ask yourself, what is the vision maybe for the European Union in the face of the Brexit? What is the vision of the United States when we have leaders as we are going to have in the next two or three days? So that's my contribution. And in terms of that vision, what speaks to you most personally? Oh, what's your personal vision 2037? To get to the practical point that the gentleman right. 2037 is a bit far from now, but as he said, time goes fast. I hope that we, if we come back here in this room, we have a greater understanding that people, when people, when I say to someone, I'm from Rwanda, they know where it is on the map. They know where my country is today. And I also know where they stand today. I think there's a lot of, we live in cluster and we don't really open up to others. If we can grow that sense of belonging, of openness. And I don't want to wait till 2037. Can we do it now or today? Can you go on your, as you WhatsApp or as you go on Facebook, Google where other country are, try to understand what other young people are doing around you. Try to understand how you can connect with them, how you can create collaboration. And I think we may not have to have such a panel leading in divided time. Maybe we'll just have leading in united time. That's good. 2037, you're invited back for that panel. Yes, in 2020. Other, does anybody else want to take on that question? What's your, yes sir, please. Minister. Well, my vision for 20 years from now is, I don't know whether it's a vision or it's a wish, but it's basically a two-tiered program going back to previous points raised in the conversation. One is I would like to see a situation in the world where inclusion is widespread, both within countries and across countries, so that yes, you have to deal with the tale people that are left out because of mistakes, but that in general, the condition of societies is that there is widespread inclusion, therefore widespread education, job security, and all that. Second, which is related to the first one, is that I would like to see a world where there is no compelling reasons for people that have to live, go away from, run away from the place they have been born so that they can happily and decently live in the place of origin, which means that there is no threat to their security, no threat to their survival, there is no threat that would lead to anger. This would imply a major reallocation of resources, a major redirection of policies, of course economic policies, but also security policies and social policies. 20 years from now it looks like a huge distance, it is not. If we start right now then the 20 years from now panel would discuss what to do in practice to fix the final steps in that strategy. This would be my vision. And either of you get the please. Well, I must say that some of us in Egypt thought of this, not exactly, not precisely, 2037, but 2020, 3040 and 50. First fact, that Egypt will be 100 million inhabitants in 2020 or around 2020. And then 110, 20 and 30 and there are some who says that who claim that Egypt will be 150 million people by 2050. Then I heard here from some of the experts that the world will be eight billion people by 2050, eight billion people. So we have to get ready for that. I believe land is everywhere, so it is not, in short, the water is there also. And I don't think we will be faced with a crisis of hunger, world crisis of hunger because we can produce food and even with the help of technology. Also the health, there is a lot of progress and scientific progress that would help promote health care in a better way for across the world, across the countries of the world. But what is or should be the focus of our attention, can the economy really produce jobs? That's the point our colleague was raising jobs. This is the first thing, job opportunity. And with the job opportunity, a good education. But with the education running ahead of other assessments, we might reach the point of that. We don't need all these young people to fill all those jobs. Others will be filling those jobs like robots. So the vision is there. We want to see or to visualize, to predict, but scientifically predict, that this will be the number of inhabitants. This will be the level of production that is what we can fulfill. Here are the areas of crisis, jobs, et cetera, or any other. And that is an effort to answer this very good question about 20 years from now. This is very good. Perhaps 20 years from now, the professor or the minister says that it is too early to assess. I believe that, no, 20 years is around the corner. The time pass very, very quickly. And let us mix wish with vision. There is nothing wrong in having a wish, a good wish that, yes indeed, wish. You are right. Part of it is wish. Part of it is vision, scientific vision. But the whole thing should not be a wishful thinking. So that's what I wanted to say in comment on that. And Mayor, you've talked a lot about vision as well. Mayor, please go. And not too much time. Yeah. Vision and dream. I totally agree this education is key. It's main key in life. Education for children. Education for people in need is a key, go out from the difficult situation. Education is a key for good future for many countries. But about dream, I hope in 2025, it's time to go so fast. Peace for Syria, Iraq, stability, peace for Ukraine and stability and economical success for European Union. And actually, Ukraine, I have a dream to be part of in European family. And yeah, and what I can say, everything depend from us. How, where, it's very important to have a dream. And also, it's very important to fight for your dream. Let's get some more questions, some more comments. And I'm looking for the person who looks the youngest here. With a hand raised, all of you just put your hands down. Someone who's under 25 years old, could you raise your hand with a question? I see people pointing at other people. Thank you. Yes, please. We'd love to hear your comment, your thought, your criticism. Yes, could you, would you mind standing up first for your courage, for fighting for what you believe in for your vision? Let's hear your thought. So you talked about education and jobs and technology. And that sounds also, this sounds all very great. And you want to smaller the gap between rich and poor. But my question is, what's about the problem of inequality, for example, between gender, women and men, or between religions, or between black and white, depends on what country you're looking at. So the question then, say the question again. So just the basis of it is, how do you deal with that challenge? You talked about the poor and the rich. Yes. My question is, what about the inequality? Great, great. No, thank you. Thank you. What about the inequality? And if I hear your question correctly, it's okay. This is all nice in vision and in theory. But in practice, how do we deal with this very substantial question on our earth right now, the major inequality gap that's there? And we have a lot of experience here. What are your perspectives? You look like you're about to say something. Yes, please. Yeah. So quickly, I think we've mentioned that. The answer to your question has been mentioned again and again. It takes leadership and it takes will. In our country, we have 68% of women in parliament. It didn't just happen overnight. It took someone to take a decision and say, we're going to have more than 50% of women in parliament. And today we have it, 68% of women in the run in parliament. So it takes work every day on each side to speak to the women and encourage them to join leadership, to speak to the men and educate them on allowing women to speak and to sit at a table. And I think for every problem that you mentioned earlier, it's that same approach. Do you want it? What are you going to do? And don't wait for someone to give you the solution. Start. Do it yourself. If you think there's an inequality in your town, I don't know if you come from Davos. Start an initiative. Do something. Encourage your colleagues and your friends to speak more for girls in your school or for young people in your region. Don't wait for someone. Do it yourself. Yeah. Please. Yeah. I want to congratulate this young, young lady. Young lady, that's right. Of less than 25 years of age. Her point is very well taken. The problem is a problem of inequality. And that shows how intelligent, educated they think properly. But now I just want to raise a point here. You mean equality in rights, opportunities, but not in success. It is on you. It is your responsibility to succeed. Your responsibility to accumulate experience and to think properly. And to seize the opportunity at the right moment. So you have a lot of responsibilities once you talk about equality. So equality doesn't come that easy or guaranteed, and the government will do it. No. Definitely, constitutions and law should guarantee the equality in rights, opportunities, and all the basic things of life. But it is the determination of the young people to seize the opportunities, to build on those rights, and to move on. So inequality, yes. Worst thing is inequality. But once the basics have been put in the right place and the equal rights have prevailed, then comes the role of each individual to seize on that and achieve his or her own success. Great. Any other thoughts? Please. Well, I think the issue is absolutely central. So I also associate myself with congratulations. In a way, the notion of inclusive growth deals in part with inequality. Until recently, there was some economic belief that inequality would be generated by higher growth. So if you grow more, you have also more inequality. This has proved to be quite wrong. Actually, if there is less inequality in a society or economy, there is even more growth. So the two things are compliments, not substitutes. And this is extremely important in shaping the policy design. This is the first piece of evidence. The second piece of evidence is that the master way to reduce inequality is by creating job opportunities. Jobs today and jobs in the future, so that there is a legitimate aspiration. A dream can become reality if you know what you can get in the future and what you would like to get in the future. Tax policy can, of course, help because you redistribute wealth and income through tax policies, both in terms of higher and lower taxes. But then you raise a very specific point about gender inequality. Now, this is one component of inequality, which requires specific policies. For instance, policies that help women participate in the labour market, at least as effectively as the men. And we know that this is not the case in many countries. And for that, experience shows that you need specific policies allowing women to go out of their house and also participate in the labour market. So this is very, I know it sounds very boring, but I'm trying to encourage you the fact that there are policies that can help reduce inequality. Reducing inequality must be on the top of the agenda of an inclusive growth program, and it can be done. So this is part of the dreams. A gentleman before asked how do you translate a nose into yes. If you design policies that generate visible results. And I think that there is a great role for, quote, unquote, the public, not only to vote yes or no, but also to be very active in suggesting what should be the contents of policy reform and indicate governments and leadership to achieve them. This would possibly translate many of those nos into a yes, because it's a yes to a very specific proposal. Any thoughts, sir? Questions, yes. In the front row, sir, yes. Hi, my name is Dan Gilaman. I'm from Israel. I want to share my pride in the fact that my friend, I hope I can call you my friend, Amer Musa, actually achieved both dreams. He became foreign minister and he was indeed a very successful one. But I want to inject a word into the discussion which to me was missing from the discussion and is missing from Davos 2017. There is a spirit of pessimism which permeates this meeting and which permeates the world at the moment. And I want to try and introduce the word optimism because to have a dream and to have a vision and to fight for it, you have to be an optimist. Shimon Peres, who minister Musa worked with very closely, was an incurable optimist. And he always said that optimists and pessimists end up the same way. So isn't it better to live as an optimist? And I think he proved it throughout his life when he left us a few months ago at the age of 93. So my question, my suggestion and my cry to Davos, to the world and especially to this distinguished forum and panel is be optimistic. And my question to each of you is having your experience, whether it's in boxing or mayorship, whether it's in academia or ministerial job, whether it's in politics and whether it's in the incredible rejuvenation and rebirth of Rwanda, are you each and every one of you after everything you've said and everything you said should be done and the way you see the world in 20 years, are you optimistic? Great question. Personally, how do you feel? Are you optimistic? Myself? Yes, you personally, as I heard the question. Thank you Dan for raising this issue of optimism and pessimism. You raised two points. Number one, the atmosphere, the feeling in this session of wealth. And the other issue is whether we are optimists or we should be optimists. First, it is not pessimism that is prevailing. It is a question mark. Nobody knows what will happen. This new president of the United States and the United States is the superpower, no question about that. So whatever happens there will affect the whole world. So what kind of policy? Is he serious about this or that step? Is he serious about what he said on politics and economics and trade and the relations with countries and China, et cetera? So it is a concern. We are really concerned, all of us. Perhaps our concern will end up in an optimistic note and things will go in a better way and perhaps not, we'll see. As for me personally, I am optimistic. I am optimistic because we live in a different century, 21st century. With a lot of achievements and vistas of opportunity and young generation, that is prevailing even from numerical point of view. The Arab world, 400 million inhabitants, 70% are young and so on and so forth in the Middle East and in Europe and in the whole world. With young people forming the majority, this means a lot in dynamism, in looking to the future, in this spirit of competition and the science and the strides of science, of technology. That makes, which means not only because a car, a drive less car, not only this, but medicines. The strides in health, in dealing with, in beating so many of the ills, the real ills of the year. So that's why I am optimistic. If you ask me pessimistic or optimistic, I am optimistic. Let's just hear from one of the... Minister Paduan, are you optimistic or pessimistic? I consider myself to be an optimist, otherwise I would not be doing this job. All the difficulties raising up on a daily basis and I continue to believe that there is a solution. Maybe it's me, but I think it's a job. But I also would like to challenge the fact that this panel is pessimistic. We have spoken with different language about the fact that there is disillusion in many parts of societies. But the fact that there is disillusion doesn't mean that there is no positive solution to the causes of that disillusion. And therefore I consider that as an optimist I reject the notion of widespread pessimism. And I rather say we are facing challenging times. Those challenging times generate disillusionment which is justified because people don't see a bright future. And it's since, again, going back to the title of this event. Leading in divided times means that leaders have an additional responsibility to provide, to have a dream and to try to translate that dream into practical action. This is the big challenge, but I think that leading in times like those ones we live today, this is unavoidable. This is why I'm optimistic. And I will not ignore the other panelists, but I'm looking at the time. We have about seven or eight minutes left. And we're not going to have time to answer the hands that were up, but I'm very curious personally as well where your minds are at right now. And if we might do almost like a popcorn questioning period, we're not going to be able to get to all the questions, but just where are your minds at right now? Others want to share a thought question, an idea. Now they're no hands. Now they're hands. Yes, sir, in the middle, please. Sorry, there are a couple of you. Those two, yes. Another one. We talked a lot about divides and gaps between gender and others. We talked about believers and nonbelievers, but what about the difference between Muslims and Christians and Muslims between each other? Do you consider this a religious conflict or is it just going away? Gotcha. Let's hear a few more questions. And sir, in the middle also, yes, with your hand raised, your hand's been raised for a while. Yes, thank you. So the question so far, the conflict's out there, is the basis religion or is there something else going on? Your question. I'm hearing an awful lot about what has to be done, what should be done. And at the same time, I'm hearing some wonderful stories of people doing things. I'm waiting for politicians especially to invite people to do things actively with them, rather than trying to do things at them. That's a challenge. Yes, yes. Great. And are there questions? Yes, please, sir. Yes, great. And the microphone's coming toward you just because it's livecast. A question to me. I'm the moderator. I'm innocent. No, come on. It's a question to you. Not that you're guilty. My question is, I'm Tyerson Mazer from Turkey, Istanbul. My question is, next to the case, we will have plenty of robots in the workplace. For timing, we have an inequality between men and women, and there's a huge negotiation between two of them to use properly. How about the robots? There will be third party. How do we manage this? Okay, great. So this goes to your point. Are robots even more of the enemy here? Good. And other questions, and then I'll leave it to the four of you to just give some closing comments then. Yes, in the back. Why don't we go with the hat on? I can't quite see your face due to the lights. But could you stand, and maybe if you could share where you're from as well? Yeah, I'm from Switzerland. I'm from the north of Switzerland. Super. Very specific. Near Zurich. So your question or thought? You mentioned a lot before that it's important to have a dream and to fight for it. But don't you think that, especially in politics, the problem is that everyone has its dream and everyone wants to fight for it till the end? And that is what causes the major problems we have today. Right. So one side has its dream. The other side has its vision, its dream. Your advice is let's fight for the dream. What do you do? Yes. And a very eager hand in the way back. Yes. Is there a microphone that could head toward the way back? Woman with a hand raised. Standing. Thank you. I thought I wouldn't get a chance to speak. Anna Schelle is my name. I'm from a Kurdistan broadcaster from North Iraq. I've got a question, Mr. Moussa. And as you know, the town of Mosul is soon to be completely liberated. Do you think the ethnic groups in Iraq and the Kurds and the Arabs can come together peacefully? Do you think that we can avoid Iraq being divided? The Kurds in North Iraq have wanted independence for years. How do you think the Arab countries would react to that? The President of the Kurds is saying that the borders have been drawn by violence. Our right really now is to, he said, is to get independence. What do you think? A question if I heard it correctly through the translation was how to deal with the challenge of reconciliation and the challenge of relationships in Iraq. Your focus is on the Kurds in Iraq. It was directed toward Mr. Moussa. We have about four minutes left. We have a lot of amazing questions. And I have no doubt we're not going to be able to go to the depth of answers that any of these questions merit. Part of the goal here was just to hear where your minds are at right now. It's important. With just a few minutes left, you feel free to either comment on one of the questions here or to just more generally share your own thoughts on where you've come over the course of our conversation, what your thoughts are in relation to what we've heard. And Mr. Moussa, please. Okay. And if you could hold it to about a minute or so just for a second. First of all, the question pertaining to the individual dream and the contradicting dreams. We were talking about the individual dreams, of course, but also about the collective dream of a nation, of independence, of progress, of wealth, et cetera. So there are individual dreams, of course, to be a very famous doctor. Another one has the same dream and perhaps in the same specialization, but this will be left to competition and the best will win. But let us also agree that there is a common dream for a certain society, certain people, and this is also an issue that we have discussed. The next one about the Islam and Christianity. First of all, there is no quarrel between Islam and Christianity as such. Of course, there are certain outbursts here and there, but there is no quarrel. In fact, there is a quarrel within all religions between the extremists, the fanatics, the violence, and the rest, the mainstream of all religions who have conciliation and understanding and living together and so on. For the world of Islam to which I belong, yes, indeed, we are going through a trouble time. Similar to what we read in books about the troubles between Protestants and Catholics, et cetera, and the Orthodox Church, which happened two or three centuries back. It happens now in the world of Islam. So this is a natural development that all religions suffer from. And I believe in the Jewish religion, there are certain trends that are unacceptable in their behavior, in their even jargon, by the rest of the Jewish mainstream and the Jewish society. So, of course, today, because of the media and the means of contacts and things are going on a faster pace. But it is not, we are concerned, no question about that, but we are not pessimistic about the future of the relationship within Islam and within the religious community, international, religious community with the Islam, Christianity, Jewish religion, and also Buddhism, and the time will come, and the 21st century and the centuries to come. Do give us hope that there will be other issues, more important, more pertinent to the lives of people, to wellness of people that will make such arguments of today just fade away. Mayor, you heard, at least I heard, a questioning of your strategy, which was get a vision and then fight for it. What happens if each side has a vision, both sides fight. Do you not end up with a more difficult circumstance? That in a minute or so, in total. It's a very important word, tolerance. The question of vision and of people who share this vision with you, if the majority of the people have the same vision and its democracy. It's also, good question was the difference between religions. I don't care. I don't, for example, I support the people who don't care which color of skin, which religion. I don't care about vision of another people, if tolerance have main priority in this way. It depends on many things. It's actually, right now, the modern world, the world has changed. It's changed so much. For example, 50 years ago, we didn't have a chance to travel around the world. Right now, the world is getting much smaller. Right now, the people connected with each other much faster through network to modern connection. That's why it's the question of fight you have to mean not fight for something. You have to defend your vision and share your vision with people. If you have a lot of people, majority, who share with you, your vision with you, your values, is a clear answer for equation. Thank you. Within a period of tolerance. And quickly, for sake of time, Minister, final thoughts. Final thought is that to be effective, the policy must be able to turn no into a yes. But people perceive that this is good for them. And second, I'm beginning to suspect that in order to achieve a yes, you need to have a vision. This is good. Please. Thank you. I want to come back to what our colleague from Israel was saying earlier, the sense of optimism. I'm a very optimistic person and only because when I was born, our country was divided. Only because my parents and people of their age were optimistic that one day we could be united, that I stand here today and I'm able to speak with you and share with you. So it's only fair that I align with our thoughts. Now, as we were saying earlier, I wish that if we have to meet again in this room, we do not discuss leading in divided time. We really discuss leading in united time. We should really try and emphasize bridges, build bridges, connect. I did my engineering school in Germany. I arrived at the age of 20. I was not speaking German. After a year, I was able to speak German. And there's one story I would like to share with you. One of my German colleagues once said to me, Do business with the under-authentic student, seriously? I was really sad that she said that to me. She basically said, you are not like other foreign students. You speak with us. If she had come to maybe our side of the world, we would have spoken with her because that's our nature. That's our culture. But what I quickly understood in Germany, at least in the town where I was, is that if I was not the one going to them and explaining to them who I am and what I have, what are my values, who I am as a person, that connection would have not happened. So don't wait for that to happen. Be that bridge. Do the necessary step. Thank you so much. Thank you. And just to close, we're dangerously slightly over time and I recognize which country I am in right now. Yes. But just to leave you with one question that I think is a key theme that I've heard both from all of you and from our distinguished panel, what are you going to do? What are you going to do? Rather than waiting for the people on this stage or some other stage to do something for you, you should. What can you proactively do to help bridge that divide? Would you join me in a huge applause for our distinguished panel and for all of your thoughts as well? Thank you so much. Thank you.