Carl Bildt
The writer was Sweden's foreign minister from 2006 to October 2014, and was Prime Minister from 1991 to 1994, when he negotiated Sweden's EU accession. He is a member of the World Economic Forum's Global Agenda Council on Europe.
The writer was Sweden's foreign minister from 2006 to October 2014, and was Prime Minister from 1991 to 1994, when he negotiated Sweden's EU accession. He is a member of the World Economic Forum's Global Agenda Council on Europe.
This month marks 30 years since Europe—and human civilisation generally—began to undergo a miraculous transformation that is now etched in the world’s memory. By the summer of 1989, the Soviet Union was already in terminal decline.
In August 1941, even before the United States had entered World War II, British Prime Minister Winston Churchill and US President Franklin D Roosevelt met secretly off the coast of Newfoundland to discuss how the world could be organised after the war.
It was at the 2007 Munich Security Conference that Russian President Vladimir Putin first signalled a cooling of Russian-Western relations.
After a suspiciously sudden conversion, Russian President Vladimir Putin now claims to be worried about the fate of millions of refugees who have fled the carnage in Syria.
What is left of NATO and the transatlantic order after US President Donald Trump's tumultuous week in Brussels, the United Kingdom, and Helsinki, where he defended Russian President Vladimir Putin against accusations of cyber warfare by America's own intelligence agencies?
In an age defined by US President Donald Trump's rage, Russian President Vladimir Putin's revisionism, and Chinese President Xi Jinping's unbridled ambition, the international order is becoming increasingly disorderly, dysfunctional, and even dangerous. How did we arrive at this state of affairs? And how can we leave it behind?
Every year, the World Economic Forum publishes a Global Risks Report, which distills the views of experts and policymakers from around the world.
Is the world sliding dangerously toward cyber Armageddon? Let us hope not; but let us also apprehend the threat, and focus on what to do about it.
Travelling through Germany in the run-up to its federal election on September 24, one cannot help but be struck by the lingering signs of profound trauma from the 2015 refugee crisis.
A vast majority of countries want to eliminate the existential threat of nuclear catastrophe, and rightly so. But achieving a world free of nuclear weapons is easier said than done, and there is a risk that some attempts to do so could prove self-defeating.
It has been one year since the failed coup in Turkey, and questions about the country's future still abound.
One thing we do know is that the future will be shaped by two key trends: digitisation and urbanisation. And the possibilities introduced by the former will likely help us overcome the problems associated with the latter.
I sincerely hope that a brutal exit in the spring of 2019 can be avoided, and that the “deep and special partnership” that the UK talks about will materialise by, say, the spring of 2021.
I must confess that I am a firm believer in the benefits of globalisation. To my mind, the gradual interlinking of regions, countries, and people is the most profoundly positive development of our time.
Angry American voters who feel slighted by the Washington establishment have had their say. A stunned world must now come to terms with what the election of Donald Trump as the 45th President of the United States means for global stability in the years ahead.
Istanbul, in western Turkey, is one of Europe's great cities. As Constantinople, it was the capital of the Roman and Byzantine Empires, and after its capture and renaming by Mehmed II in 1453, it served as the capital of the Ottoman Empire for nearly another 500 years.
If Obama can ensure the ratification of the TPP and bring the TTIP negotiations to a conclusion, he will have laid the groundwork for future progress. If he falls short on either task – or, catastrophically, fails on both – the world will face a far more uncertain future.
Muscular language has become increasingly prevalent in the debate about how to counter the threat of jihadist terrorism. Television