World Public Forum "Dialogue of Civilizations"

On 14 December 2009 the following declaration has been proposed by prof. Asher Maoz and adopted by the participants of the International Conference "Peace, Brotherhood and Human Dignity in the Monotheistic Religions", convened by the Peres Academic Center (Rehovot, Israel) on 13-14 December 2009.

An article by the World Public Forum «Dialogue of Civilizations»Founding President Vladimir Yakunin in “National Forecast” magazine published on July 2, 2010.

The «Dialogue of Civilizations» phraseology has become universally accepted in the diplomatic community. I am grateful to our Ministry of Foreign Affairs, to Sergei Viktorovich Lavrov for what have become notes of our diplomacy. However, this does not mean only diplomacy. Neither countries, nor public and business institutions can communicate through a dialogue. They are able to conduct negotiations, but the dialogue is conducted by representatives of civilizations. Communication between representatives of countries or business communities is dominated by interests of their own institutions; the dialogue is focused on willingness to understand the other party. That is why we think that the «dialogue of civilizations» is a manifestation of a civil society.

An article by Dr. Bruce Jones, Director and Senior Fellow of the NYU Center on International Cooperation, and Senior Fellow and Director of the Managing Global Insecurity Program at the Brookings Institution published at Policy Analysis Brief, The Stanley Foundation, March 2010.

The issue of relations between the United Nations and the G-20 is usually cast in terms of the G-20 stealing the United Nations’ thunder. But this misunderstands the nature of the G-20, the purposes and strengths of the United Nations, and the potential relationship between the two. Rather than viewing the G-20 as a threatened usurper of the United Nations, this analysis brief regards the universality of the United Nations as an enduring political strength of the organization. It also assumes that the G-20 (like the G-8 before it) will have minimal operational or actionable roles and will depend on the formal institutions to implement most, if not all, of its major initiatives. Given their nature, then, there is a necessary relationship between the G-20 and similar bodies and formal, inclusive institutions. A better way to think about the relationship between the two entities is to ask if the G-20 helps the United Nations perform and reform.

Full text of the article is available at the Policy Analysis Brief site of the Stanley Foundation

An article by Dr. Peter Roell, President of the Institute for Strategic, Political, Security and Economic Consultancy (Berlin) and Maxim Worcester, Senior Advisor at ISPSW

The new German Minister of the Interior, Dr. Thomas de Maizière, entered office on 28th October 2009. Under his predecessor, Dr. Wolfgang Schäuble, we had become used to frequent warnings of impending terrorist attacks, such warnings are now rare. We must assume that not much has changed with regard to the potential threat; the new low-key policy of Minister de Maizière is simply a reflection of his approach to the problem of terrorist threat.

In our analysis we have set ourselves the task of examining the potential impact of “Low Intensity Terrorism”. We have based our analysis on the EU Terrorism Situation and Trend Report (TE-SAT) 2010 and a range of publicly available sources. We have also looked at two definitions of Terrorism and a definition of Low Intensity Threats. Besides looking at the problems associated with this development we have also made some recommendations for decision makers in politics, the security sector, the defence sector, science, and the general population.

An article by Jonathan Fenby British journalist and editor of the Observer newspaper from 1993 to 1995 published on guardian.co.uk on Wednesday 9 June 2010.

For all their problems, at least China, Russia and Brazil know where they're heading. Not so Europe.

So it's every country for itself. The politicians of the world still mouth platitudes about a concerted response to the economic crisis, but their words ring ever more hollow. As does the claim of governments to be able to deal with the crisis which looms larger every day while markets watch and wait. The postponement of this week's meeting between Angela Merkel and Nicolas Sarkozy, the Tweedledum and Tweedledee of the crisis in Europe, is only the latest example of absence of the co-ordination that was meant to help us through.

A Memorandum of Cooperation between China Soong Ching Ling Foundation and Russian Public Foundation “Dialogue of Civilizations” has been signed in Beijing (China) on May 26, 2010.

Representatives of the Russian Public Foundation “Dialogue of Civilizations” and China Soong Ching Ling Foundation met in Beijing on May 26, 2010. Deputy Director of the Soong Ching Ling Museum Ms Chen Hongjun, Director General Liaison Department of the China Soong Ching Ling Foundation Ms Chen Aimin and Deputy Executive Secretary of the Russian Public Foundation “Dialogue of Civilizations” Mr. Sergej Schevchukov have participated in the meeting.

An article by Uri Dadush, Senior Associate and Director, International Economics Program and Vera Eidelman, Managing Editor of the International Economic Bulletin, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Greece, Ireland, Italy, Portugal, and Spain (GIIPS) have become increasingly uncompetitive since adopting the euro. But competitiveness is relative, raising an important question: how did Germany, Europe’s largest and most competitive economy, fare under the euro? The answer begins with Germany’s unification ten years prior, which was followed by massive investments designed to modernize the East’s economy and integrate it with Germany’s industrial heartland. Though this process remains incomplete even today, it has prompted far-reaching structural reforms and contributed to exceptional wage moderation following the immediate post-unification surge. Additionally, the introduction of the euro consolidated Germany’s unit labor cost advantage vis-à-vis its Euro area partners. Exports surged and domestic demand growth fell behind that of the GIIPS, widening bilateral trade surpluses. Germany, now poised to derive the greatest gains from the euro’s crisis-triggered decline, should boost its domestic demand to compensate for the deflationary measures taken by the GIIPS.