You can edit the text in this area, and change where the contact form on the right submits to, by entering edit mode using the modes on the bottom right.
123 Street Avenue, City Town, 99999
(123) 555-6789
email@address.com
You can set your address, phone number, email and site description in the settings tab. Link to read me page with more information.
Power has become perishable, transient, evanescent. Those in power today are likely to have shorter periods in power than their predecessors. I’m talking about military power and power in business, politics, religion. One of the most perplexing arenas in which this is happening is in the world of business where the conversation centres on the concentration of wealth in a few large companies. Of course there are large, powerful companies but a study by NYU professors shows that the probability of a company in the top 20% of the business sector remaining in that category five years hence has halved. The turnover rate of business executives is also increasing significantly. It is far more slippery at the top.
The “more revolution” – there are more of us, and we have more resources – overwhelms power. The “mobility revolution” circumvents power by moving people and information further and faster. And the “mentality revolution” undermines it by making people less deferential.
In coming years, clashes between cultures or religions will be a far less important source of international friction than the changes in living standards of the global middle classes. In a video Q&A, Moisés Naím discusses how the economic slowdown in rich countries and the continuing growth of emerging markets will intersect to fuel domestic political conflicts and reduce the ability of governments to cooperate internationally with each other.
ALEC HOGG: In this special podcast, from the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos studio - we speak with Moisés Naím who is with the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace now Moisés, but cabinet minister in the past, editor as well - your passion though seems to be since I've known you for some years, the illegal economy and it was interesting to note that in the Global Risk Report of the World Economic Forum, for the first time, it really got due recognition.
Amid global tensions over currencies—notably the U.S. federal reserve’s decision to pump more money into the American economy and China’s exchange rate policy—the leaders of the Group of 20 economic powers meet in South Korea this week. In a video Q&A, Moisés Naím analyzes the importance of the G20 meeting, the stability of the global economy, and what leaders from developed and developing countries should do to spur economic growth.
Standing more than 6 feet tall in his black wingtips, Ambassador Thomas Pickering looms over most of his interlocutors in much the same way as he towers over the landscape of U.S. foreign policy. Over the course of what the Washington Post has called "the most dazzling diplomatic career of his generation," Pickering has, among other things, helped to conclude successfully the Gulf War, contend with the outbreak of the Palestinian intifada, face down death squads in El Salvador, and orchestrate U.S. relations with Russia through a staccato series of crises and meltdowns. Yet for all the superlatives attached to his name, Pickering remains — by choice, perhaps — a virtual unknown outside his profession. Here, in a May 1 conversation with FP Editor Moisés Naím, Pickering traces the trajectory of U.S. power from Cold Warrior to Benevolent Hegemon and offers his views on how that power has been wielded, shaped, expanded, and constrained.
A terrorist operating out of a tent in Afghanistan may do more to spur change in the U.S. armed forces than several decades’ worth of blue-ribbon panels, commissions, reports, and initiatives on military reform. For even if the Army, Navy, Air Force, and Marines remain unsuited to taking the lead in disrupting shadowy terrorist networks, the sight of a passenger plane crashing into the Pentagon has once and for all replaced the vision of Soviet tanks bursting through Eastern Europe as the free world’s Nightmare Number One. Will fundamental changes in U.S. military strategy, tactics, and budgets follow? As fate would have it, Foreign Policy had long planned a roundtable discussion with FP Editor Moisés Naím and four of America’s most distinguished retired military leaders for September 12 — one day after the terrorist attacks on American soil. The participants’ cumulative 100-plus years of military experience include enforcing the Dayton Peace Accords in Bosnia, commanding the U.S. 6th Fleet, serving as deputy commander in chief of the U.S. European Command, and heading the Marine Corps Combat Development Command. Delivered in the heat of crisis, their prescriptions for responding to the attacks are thoughtful and wide ranging. And their views on everything from the obstacles to Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld’s reform efforts and the amount of waste in the defense budget to the military’s remarkable technophobia are, in many ways, as unexpected as they are provocative.
Migration is as old as history. But the flow of humans across borders today versus that of centuries ago is about as similar as, say, the Mayflower and a shipping container. Roughly 150 million people now live outside their countries of birth. Alien smuggling is a $7 billion a year business. More than 12 million refugees crowd camps and shelters around the world. Regulating this global movement of people was hard even before terrorist attacks turned every border check into a paranoid pat-down. Just ask Doris Meissner, ex-commissioner of the U.S. Immigration and Naturalization Service (INS), who spent seven years dealing with refugee crises, a schizophrenic Congress, and interest groups from the fans of Elián to the friends of Sikhs. And as Meissner pointed out in her conversation with FP Editor Moisés Naím in Washington on January 10, the only thing harder than agreeing on a sensible domestic migration policy is agreeing on a regional or — God forbid — a global one.
FOREIGN POLICY: Some observers have blamed last year’s terrorist attacks against the United States on lax U.S. immigration policies that allowed terrorists to enter the country and move about freely. U.S. Congressman Thomas Tancredo went so far as to conclude that the ins is "incompetent and incapable of protecting the people of the United States." What do you think? Doris Meissner: To blame either our immigration policies or a single agency is just irresponsible, in my opinion.
Larry Summers is to modesty what Madonna is to chastity," wrote Wall Street Journal columnist Paul Gigot in 1995. But if Summers is in fact an immodest man, he at least has much to be immodest about: one of the youngest full professors of economics at Harvard, winner of coveted awards from the National Science Foundation and the American Economics Association, former vice president and chief economist of the World Bank, former secretary of the U.S. Treasury, and now president of Harvard University. (He is also, in addition to his many other institutional affiliations, a member of FP‘s editorial board.) Along the way, Summers established a reputation as an inspirational teacher, injected a healthy pragmatism into an often-abstract social science, helped douse financial fires around the world, and — not least — alienated more than a few onlookers and colleagues with his take-no-prisoners brand of intellectual combat. Here, in a conversation with FP Editor Moisés Naím in May, Summers takes on his critics, offers his views on everything from the state of the global economy to distance learning, and explains how Larry Summers, the academic economist, learned to live with Larry Summers, the public servant.
Moises Naim , editor of Foreign Policy magazine and author of " Illicit: How Smugglers, Traffickers and Copycats are Hijacking the Global Economy ," was online Tuesday, May 30, at 2 p.m. ET to discuss his Sunday Outlook article on how today's fluid and non-traditional borders pose unique security challenges. Naim says that in the 1990s "political unions, economic reforms and breakthroughs in technology and business came together to revolutionize the world's borders." Globalization and increasing technology changed how business transactions, legal and otherwise, take place and have altered long-held concepts of sovereignty.