Klaus Schwab’s decision to move the World Economic Forum’s annual meeting
for the first time ever away from the ski slopes of Davos in Switzerland
delivered two powerful and somewhat contradictory messages to two distinct
audiences.
On the one hand, it informed those behind the destructive attacks on the World
Trade Center on Sept. 11, that they could not terrorize the world’s business
and political elite into submission. On the other, it acknowledged that the
terrorists were forcing the economic elite into making fundamental changes in
the world order if they wanted to prevent more 9-11’s.
Had it not been for the Sept. 11 attacks, the WEF – arguably, the world’s
top networking event, would no doubt have continued to be held at the Swiss
retreat. While that might have provided a quiet weeklong time-freeze for some of
the world’s most public and time-starved personalities – exactly as Schwab
has always made it to be -- it would have lent credence to critics, who contend
that the WEF has become a reactionary event where there is ‘all talk and no
action.’
Indeed, Schwab’s opening speech was laced so heavily with the word
“dialogue,” it seemed like the event was going to be nothing more than the
biggest spielfest of the year. The dialogue was entered by business leaders such
as the top executives from Microsoft, Intel and Coca-Cola, pop idols such as
Bono of rock band U2, statesman and politicians such as the Queen of Jordan,
Desmond Tutu and Shimon Peres over the six-day conference.
The forum is noted for its lack of resolutions and petitions. Of course, that
kind of activism would naturally upset the Swiss attitude of “neutrality.”
(Remember, the Swiss are voting this month on whether or not to join the United
Nations!).
It was against the non-aligned positioning that many states adopted during the
Cold War that John Foster Dulles, then U.S. Secretary of State, famously
declared “neutrality to be immoral.” The onus upon countries at the time to
join either the capitalist or the communist world is not dissimilar to the one
laid down by U.S. President George Bush in recent months since he divided the
world’s states into “our side” vs. “theirs.”
Against that backdrop, the WEF organizers had a daunting task. How to
recognize that fact that the terrorists had brought about a symbolic and
substantial change in the status quo and at the same time reaffirm that the
attendees were the real leaders of change in the post 9-11 world? For the
inescapable conclusion of the historic change in venue was an implicit
acknowledgement that ‘their’ side had forced ‘us’ into a new world
order.
Terror is often described by political analysts as a form of radical and violent
“cry for help” used by political organizations. If that holds true, then it
also holds the key to solving the issues that lay at the heart of the Sept. 11
tragedy. Cries for help, however violent and destructive, are displayed by those
who believe they are not being heard by the other side. Therein lies the
solution to the crisis and indeed the raison d’etre of the World Economic
Forum. That solution lies in the one world that sprinkled Schwab’s speech –
“dialogue.”
