Whatever got you here, please take some time to read this information or, bookmark it for later.




SENATOR KERRY (D-MA) (Kerry has been a rappatour for a number of years

I think we can report to you jointly that there was considerable energy and excitement about where we find ourselves at this particular meeting of the WEF. Many of us remember 2-3 years ago where there was a crisis atmosphere and deep concern about the meltdown of the international financial system and the discuss centered around the reform of those systems, even topics such as management and capital regulation and in addition to that the Asian problems last year were considerably on people's minds. This year was very different with the dominate topic on how to close the divide or the "digital Divide" which was pointed out in our discussions not so much as the "digital Divide" but the residuals of the Industrial Divide. Countries that didn't make it in the industrial revolution are countries that are having trouble in this new transition but they are not powerless to make it in this new transition and that is what is interesting about it because it is information oriented and information dependent and many less developed counties are deeply committed to education. Their citizens have a grab on to the information technology and use and maximize it and some of the endemic problems which were with us in the last quarter century or more which were basic infrastructure issues still remain. President we have an unwritten agreement that we don't give names. Some less developed countries raised the subject of whether or not they might be doubly left behind now. There was a consensus that if they adopt the consensus arrived at in judgment that they have reform in their systems, that they are privatizing, that they have competition. For example in Russia, you had privatization but it ended up to the former (Russian word) normaketura? And former apperatikes so without competition and rules and regulation, you have chaos. Mr. (Russian) shared with us as to what is happening in Russia and it was very bleak to be honest with you. But those countries which adopt transparency and begin to recognize the capacities fo privatization to encourage capital to come can quickly share in the information revolution, particularly those countries like India and elsewhere where they are deeply committed to education.

The topics which we discussed were: how to deal with the backlash against globalization, shaping the global agenda, tradewhere to go after Seattle, can the finance system sustain the next crisis, foreign policy, new rules for the new world. A very interesting session on an outlook for Russia, global responses to the genetic revolution, and then a series of discussion with CEOs of the major technology companieschambers, case, gates, Yahoo!, Eric Schmidt from Novell, all of whom shared views about governance issues, education itself, taxation of the internet and global policy responses to the so-called divide.

In summary, very quickly, we came out with a great sense of optimism about the possibilities. There was a deep commitment to fight for WTO with a new approach and working on a new model of how we do that so that there is greater inclusivity and greater transparency with respect to WTO operations. We were particularly cautioned by developing countries must have the same chance as developed countries to gain access to technologies and talked about how that can happen. Clearly there is both a developed world and corporate responsibility with respect to this effort to make sure that there is that kind of technology access. We need to have peoplethe people who demonstrated here yesterday and in Seattle who feel disenfranchised need to be franchised. Every leader there understands that and embraced that and intends to work towards that recognition that the rules are changing, the world is changing, the rules are changing and all of us need to change with it in our recognition that we need to be inclusive open, transparent, and accountable. The less developed countries must not be taken for granted. They must not be mandated nor rushed. At the same time the message was clear to the less developed countries with respect to their responsibilities about accountability, transparency, adoption of reform, privatization, and competition with respect to their ability to attract capital. We discussed the need for the next round and frankly, for better leadership for the next round and particularly, trade ministers and all agreed that trade policies are not trade policy alone, trade must contain a discussion of values with people and humanity. Humanities issues are front and center on the table. It was a very healthy and optimistic discussion in that regard. Carl.


I can agree with all of that , let me add very briefly, when we look at on we have been coping with policies in past years where the major challenges we have had to the global system, be it the Asian crisis where we had all of the intense discussion with regard to the steps which were taken. Look at the figures coming out of Korea now, they had 10% growth. We didn't do that badly. If you look at the state of the world economy, that confirms that particularly picture. We had intense discussions without any solutions on the entire issue of humanitarian intervention...East Timor, Kosovo, and the other challenges we are going to face. I think that was the general agreement that we are must more ambitious now than we were 10-15 years ago with regard to all of the issues with regard to global governance. Things that we tolerated and would have looked the other way ten years ago, we now care about and we need to do something for human rights violations and other things, we don't always have the right instruments. We had a far reaching discussion whether we can move forward the discussion on the adaption of all of the different international mechanisms and institutions that we have to be better able to live up to that more ambitious approach that we have at the moment.

We also discussed the upcoming of the Millennium Assembly of the United Nations not that any one expects the session of the GA of the UN to solve anythingthat would be a novelty. But it brings together all of the political leaders of the world for a couple of days of discussion on the issues fo the future and get some ideas as to what can be done and that applies to the extremely intense discussions which we had with the CEO's of the major information technology companies which were mentioned. The need to address not only the e-business issues which are so much in the center, the new economy issues which are in the center of the discussions in Davos, but the e-governance, e-politics the new politics which has to go hand in hand with the new economy, the necessity to reinvent politics for the new internet generation. What we can do, both in the highly developed world and in the developing countries and we discussed some initiatives that are not yet particular mature but we hope to mature them in the next few months and carry that public-private dialogue would be the different actors in different parts of the world. As you can see there was a fairly wide ranging discussion between this group of 40-50 political leaders that together we have spent 10-15 hours, together on all these issues.


JV:(I am 4-5 questions in)

I think there is a follow-up question which could be asked in follow-up to the Brazilian's question on the IMF/World Bank, will there be a new Bretton Woods meeting. My question really has to do with the e- politics. President Clinton's speech and tony Blair's speech on the Third Way. Senator Kerry there are many people in the United States, those that I talk to, those that I report to who really don't understand the Third Way, they haven't put together the reinventing government process in the third way, they don't understand the public-private partnership, they don't understand the change and what it means on the local level. How do you see this divide being addressedbecause most Americans many Americans because you have the conservatives who are the Right and the New Democrats whoa re center left and I don't know where the progressives areif they are left, left, but how do you see how does the Administration see it coming together?


I don't find the so-called third way, I went to that session to hear what they were saying [I heard Kerry congratulate Amatai Etizioni on the fine job he did], and it shouldn't be confusing to people at all. We have been living in a box in the United States for years. Democrats versus Republicans, conservative versus liberal, two different or four different concepts, depending on moments. They have tended to tug you in different directionsdemocrats say "Let's have the government solve this problem." Republicans come in and say, "We don't want the government to do it, the private sector will do it." There's your box. Those are the two tracks. All of a sudden people are saying, "we shouldn't be so limited in the way we do things." For example, democrats tend to be concerned about intervention about young children who are at risk and want day care or after-school care to help them. Republicans tend to say, "that's responsibility of mother and father or the family." They tend to ignore that they may not have [that kind of familiar support]. The new way kind of comes at it and says, "Maybe we can leverage interventions in their lives which involve the parents, that don't involve the government and in effect accomplish our goals and remain true to our principles and goals but do it in a more common sense kind of way. I think in effect Republicans are so angry at Clinton because they use to be the only ones talking about welfare reform but Clinton adopted it and did it. They use to be the only ones talking about violence in the streets but Clinton put 100,000 police in the streets and did it. So to some degree, it is the co-option of someone else's approach and doing it in a new way. One of the examples given at the Third Way workshop is that in Seattle, people learned that when people have heart attacks, the brain shuts off after x-number of minutes and if you don't get to people in a certain amount of minutes they die, so when they realized this, they wanted to response to it. To respond to it the old way, you would have to hire so many VMP? And raise taxes and do it. There are your choices. Either you do it the old way and increase taxes or you try a different way. The third waya different way which people didn't use to consider. Why don't we train people with CPR, then we don't have to raise taxes and we accomplish the goal and have citizen-community involvement." It is a different way of thinking about how you solve government problems. The problems that traditionally have gone into those boxes. Now you call it the third wayfifth way, it is a more practical way of dealing with problems which doesn't always look to government for solving problems. Increasingly, the new world we are living in is liberating people. That is why so many people who are on the Internet or in net-world are libertarians. Increasingly it is part of what fostered the communitarian movement in America. People understand that there are different ways to be free, to have choice, to maximize choice and still accomplish the goals of building the community. It's not that complicated.

BILTD: One phrase which Tony Blair said, "the pace of reform has to match the pace of change." FINISH.

Note: In Larry Summers press briefing, he looked directly at me SIX timeseye contact and refused to call on me. I tried to ask my question as he was walking out of the building and he said, CURTLY, I don't do that" or "I don't....that." (Interestingly he had just discussed helping lesser developed countries in his speech).