Agenda 2006
Global Competition: Challenges to the Private and Public Sectors?
Saturday, April 29, 9:15–11 a.m., Ballroom
Open session, on the record, full participation
The economic partnership of the United States and the European Union is the largest and most successful bilateral trade and investment relationship in world history, benefiting consumers, producers, and workers on both sides of the Atlantic. As such, this deep and interdependent relationship is a key pillar in the architecture of the transatlantic alliance.
But advances in technology, investment, trade, and labor flows have also resulted in unprecedented pressures on the competitive primacy of the U.S. and EU. Nations like China, India, and Brazil are now racing toward the top tier of competitive economies. Globalization has changed the world, creating new challenges and new opportunities. Government, business, and labor on both sides of the Atlantic need to reconsider economic policies that were once considered immutable and contemplate cooperative solutions to difficult problems. There is a unique opportunity for the U.S. and EU to learn from the policies of the past and chart a more successful course for the future.
These factors amplify the worth and relevance of transatlantic cooperation on core economic policy, including R&D, innovation, social safety nets, productivity, entrepreneurship, regulatory convergence, trade, industry-labor relations, and investment flows.
Guiding Questions
How should the U.S., EU, and its members respond to current trends? In what areas must the U.S. and EU take immediate policy action to level the playing field for business and workers in the global economy? Can the U.S. and EU anticipate — individually or cooperatively — the systemic adjustments that are needed to attract investment, increase entrepreneurship, and maintain competitiveness? To attain the competitive edge in critical industries of the future, can the U.S. and EU create and sustain the core domestic pillars required for comparative advantage in critical industries of the future – education, health care, innovation, management, infrastructure? Do the regulatory environments in the U.S. and EU reduce competitiveness through unnecessary layers by raising the costs of transactions? What is the appropriate role of government and business in ensuring corporate profitability, rising living standards, and the national economic welfare?
Dieter Zetsche, Chairman of the Management Board of DaimlerChrysler, with personal management experience on both sides of the Atlantic, will give the keynote address.
Followed by responses from:
Mark Fuller, Co-Founder and CEO of the Monitor Group, is a leading strategist for companies and governments on competitiveness action plans for productivity and prosperity.
Günter Verheugen, Vice Presdient of the European Commission and Commissioner for Enterprise and Industry, is Europe’s chief steward of industrial policy and promotes innovation and entrepreneurship.
Moderator: Craig Kennedy, President, The German Marshall Fund of the United States.
Framing a Transatlantic Agenda for a Global Era
Saturday, April 29, 11:30 a.m.–1 p.m., Ballroom
Open session, on the record, full participation
The bonds uniting the countries that comprise the transatlantic community were forged during the decades of the Cold War. The commitment of these countries to peace, development, and democracy brought them international legitimacy, which added immeasurably to the material strength of their combined economies and militaries and allowed them to prevail over the Soviet Union.
The focus of the Cold War agenda was Europe. In 2006, the focus of the transatlantic agenda is global. The opportunities and challenges of the 21st century lie far beyond Europe and involve issues that not only were peripheral to the transatlantic relationship during the Cold War, but also on which there was often disagreement across the Atlantic. Today, Americans and Europeans must work to forge a common policy on how to engage rising powers like China and India, how to meet the threat of global terrorism, how to restabilize the Middle East, and how to cooperate on securing energy supplies. This new agenda demands a new vision and framework for transatlantic cooperation.
Guiding Questions
Can the powerful unity of the transatlantic community during the Cold War manifest itself anew to meet the new threats of the 21st century? What issues should Europeans and Americans tackle together? How committed is the U.S. to working with Europe in meeting these challenges? In the Bush Administration lexicon does “partnership” actually mean “followership”? Are there differences across the political aisle in the U.S. on how the U.S. should work with its transatlantic partners? How committed is Europe to working with the U.S., and at what moment might Europe be prepared to “go it alone”? And, with differences among and within European nations, on what criteria can the European Union declare itself united on an issue? Do NATO and the European Union provide an adequate institutional framework for transatlantic cooperation?
Disscussants, followed by open-floor debate:
Jaap de Hoop Scheffer, is Secretary-General of NATO, which has seen its original mission expand substantively and geographically in the Balkans, Afghanistan, and Iraq.
Richard C. Holbrooke, Vice Chairman at Perseus LLC, is the former U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations.
John McCain, a U.S. Senator, sits on the Senate Armed Services committee and is a leading foreign policy voice on Capitol Hill.
Javier Solana, Secretary-General, Council of the European Union, and High Representative for the Common Foreign and Security Policy, takes the lead on EU foreign policy.
Moderator: Nik Gowing, Presenter, BBC World
21st Century Challenges: From Global Terrorism to Global Pandemics
Saturday, April 29, 2:45–4:15 p.m., Ballroom
Open session, on the record, full participation
In the post-9/11 era, the classic definition of security — the protection of the nation-state and its citizens against external attack — no longer suffices. A new concept, human safety, is emerging as the threats of terrorist attacks, criminal networks, and major pandemic outbreaks rise to the top of the policy agenda. Policymakers, bureaucracies, and business leaders on both sides of the Atlantic are rapidly developing responses to these transnational threats to “homeland security.”
The United States and Europe have made significant efforts — some successful, some not — to deal with the new, transnational threats provided by terrorist networks. Government precautions have changed in citizens’ daily lives, from entering an office to boarding a plane. But governments are also acting to prevent terrorism on fronts unseen by most citizens.
Pandemics are not man-made, but their risk, impact, and cost are influenced by human decisions. Some security experts rank pandemics above terrorism in terms of risk. Among the key issues are the viability of risk assessments, options for preparation and management, creating public resilience, the consequences for the functioning of government and the world economy, and the impact of federalist structures on the efficiency of catastrophic prevention.
Guiding Questions
Should we think of homeland security in national terms, or can we conceive of transatlantic homeland security? What do Americans and Europeans need to do in the next decade to safeguard themselves from terrorism and pandemics? How are terrorist threats organized? Are the threats based in politics, culture, or religion, or some combination thereof? How do American and European responses differ, and can we learn from each other? Can we plan against a massive attack and the potential consequences? What is the balance between liberty and security when faced with incalculable, yet potentially catastrophic, risks? Are we equipped to deal with the aftermath of an attack, and are there lessons to be learned from previous attacks? What is the current state of preparation on the national, pan-European, and international levels? How can international cooperation and coordination be improved?
Discussants, followed by open-floor debate:
Sir Richard Dearlove is the former head of the British Secret Intelligence Service.
Darrell Issa, a Member of the U.S. Congress, is Chairman of the House Subcommittee on Energy and Resources and serves on the House International Relations Committee.
Jules Kroll founded Kroll, Inc., the world’s leading risk consultancy, which gained fame for uncovering hidden assets from the likes of Saddam Hussein and Ferdinand Marcos.
Pierre Lévy
Moderator: David Ensor, National Security Correspondent for CNN
Building Democracy in Wider Europe
Saturday, April 29, 9:45 p.m.
Closed session, Chatham House Rule, partial participation
With the dual enlargement of the EU and NATO two years ago, a major part of Central and Eastern Europe became formally and firmly anchored in the main structures of European and transatlantic integration. This achievement shifted the foreign and security policy agenda of the transatlantic community toward a new geographical area with distinct problems.
The EU’s Wider Europe framework, the reform and integration process in the Balkans, and security issues arising around the Black Sea are three of the most salient challenges for security and democracy. The Euroatlantic community faces a chance to advance freedom, democracy, and civil society in its neighborhood. Success will depend on both democratic forces within countries but also on sustained commitment and assistance from outside. The democratic waves that swept through Serbia and, more recently, Georgia and Ukraine has followed a similar pattern, resulting from a comparable mix of civic and political, domestic and international, factors. These countries continue on a thorny road of democratic reform.
For many, the recent wave of democratic change has nourished hopes that other countries in Eastern Europe may soon undergo similar developments. Others have warned that governments in the region may respond with authoritarian measures to suppress democratic movements. To date, NATO and the EU have established various forms of partnerships to help create incentives for further democratic reforms in these countries.
Guiding Questions
How can the EU and NATO define and develop their relationship with aspirant countries to the east and south? What further forms of cooperation can and should be undertaken? What incentives can the EU and NATO offer Ukraine and Georgia given that, unlike Romania, they are neither in NATO nor about to join the EU? What are the tensions between engaging these countries individually versus as a region? How does Russia fit into the picture?
Discussants, followed by open-floor debate:
Traian Băsescu is the President of Romania, a NATO member and EU accession country.
Elmar Brok is Chairman of the European Parliament’s Foreign Affairs Committee.
Karel De Gucht is the Foreign Minister of Belgium and Chairman-in-office of the Organization for Security and Co-operation in Europe.
Daniel Fried, U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for the Bureau of European and Eurasian Affairs, has served on the National Security Council and spent three years in the U.S. embassy in Belgrade early in his career.
Mikheil Saakashvili is the President of Georgia, which has stated Euroatlantic aspirations.
Borys Tarasyuk is the Foreign Minister of Ukraine, a young democracy.
Moderator: Craig Kennedy, President, The German Marshall Fund of the United States
Beyond the Balkans
Saturday, April 29, 9:45 p.m.
Closed session, Chatham House Rule, partial participation
The arc of the Balkans across Southeastern Europe is where the United States and Europe have worked closely together in modern times to stabilize a region of crisis within Europe’s borders. Today, the Balkans is a living example of how reality can unfold following outside military intervention. The United States, Europe, and the world can see how significant resources committed by the transatlantic community over the last 10 years have been able to facilitate a lasting peace in the region.
2006 may bring closure on the outstanding Kosovo status issue and movement on the uncertain union of Serbia and Montenegro. It is also the year in which the last of the fugitives and prisoners under indictment will be brought before the International Criminal Tribunal on Former Yugoslavia.
Guiding Questions
As the Balkans move toward greater stability, will the transatlantic community remain united in finishing its common undertaking? Will the mantra of “in together, out together” prove to be rhetoric or reality? Have joint transatlantic efforts succeeded in consolidating democratic institutions? Did the U.S. and Europe do enough to support the growth of civil society and regional rapprochement? Do they have a role in pushing rapprochement to the point of reconciliation? What are the relevant lessons from the military intervention to post-conflict engagement for other areas in crisis? What is the most effective balance between pressure from outside the region, be it the U.S., NATO, or the EU, and pressure from within the Balkans for furthering stability and reform? Are stability and reform mutually reinforcing? Are the EU and NATO the natural destination for all the countries of the region?
Discussants, followed by open-floor debate:
Olli Rehn, the EU Commissioner for Enlargement, is the central figure in negotiating the EU’s relationship with the countries of the Balkans
Veton Surroi, a Member of Parliament in Kosovo, sits on the Committee for International Cooperation and European Integration. He participated in the Rambouillet talks.
George Voinovich, a U.S. Senator on the Committee on Foreign Relations, has helped Serbia and Montenegro meet requirements for international aid.
Goran Svilanovic, the Chairman of Working Table I of the Stability Pact for South East Europe, was a member of the International Commission on the Balkans.
Moderator: Ivan Vejvoda, Executive Director, Balkan Trust for Democracy
China: From the Arms Embargo to the YuaN
Saturday, April 29, 9:45 p.m.
Closed session, Chatham House Rule, partial participation
The future of the transatlantic relationship is increasingly being shaped by issues and threats that emanate from beyond the continent. China is a key challenge that the United States and Europe face, but on which there has been little genuine transatlantic dialogue. Both sides of the Atlantic have a major stake in the future political evolution of China. We want to encourage democratic trends, the rule of law, good governance, and respect for human rights in China. At the same time, we have substantial and growing commercial interests in China. The U.S. continues to play a key strategic role in Asia and carries responsibilities there that Europe does not, though Europeans readily admit their interest in the maintenance of stability in that region.
The recent controversy over the lifting of the EU arms embargo against China is a prime example of the spill-over effects that European-Chinese or U.S.-Chinese relations can have on the transatlantic partnership. In addition, there have been quarrels over security guarantees for Taiwan and human rights violations within China and how to deal with them as the international community. The heated debates about these issues show the increased salience of China’s rising power on the U.S. and the EU. Some observers even argue that we are currently witnessing the emergence of a new strategic triangle, which will — in competition, or, preferably, in cooperation — shape global politics in the 21st century.
Guiding Questions
How can policymakers in the U.S. and Europe coordinate their diverse, ambitious national agendas on foreign and security policy and economic and trade policy? Can they coordinate these agendas while also providing a stable, prosperous, and peaceful environment for their citizens and the international community? Should the EU and the U.S. strive to engage in a more systematic and comprehensive China-focused dialogue? To what extent do the U.S., the EU, and individual EU member states give the same priority to democracy promotion, commercial interests, human rights, and strategic concerns when crafting policy toward China?
Discussants, followed by open-floor debate:
Robert Cooper, the Director-General for External and Politico-Military Affairs at the Council of the European Union, helps shape EU policy toward Asia.
François Godement, President of the Asia Centre, is Co-chair of the European Committee of the Council for Security Cooperation in the Asia-Pacific, a security-focused NGO.
Robert Kagan, GMF Transatlantic Fellow and Senior Associate at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, is writing a book on the history of American foreign policy.
Moderator: Constanze Stelzenmüller, Director, GMF Berlin
Stabilizing the Middle East: A Transatlantic Project
Sunday, April 30, 8–9 a.m.
Closed session, Chatham House Rule, partial participation
Stability in the Middle East has long topped the transatlantic agenda. The war in Iraq and its chaotic aftermath, Iran’s nuclear ambitions, recent developments in Lebanon and Syria, Israel’s new leadership, and a Hamas-led Palestinian government have all contributed to deep uncertainty within the region. Thus, a critical issue for both Europe and the United States is how to work together to stabilize the Middle East.
In addressing Iran’s nuclear program, disagreement among the UN Security Council’s permanent five members is preventing serious action from being taken to contain Iran. Some argue that the U.S. and Europe should pursue alternatives to UN action. The underlying challenge is how to encourage a political maturation that would result in Iran becoming a more constructive member of the world community. On another front, Europe and the U.S. remain committed to solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Neither seems certain whether to hope for failure of the Hamas-led government and early elections, or for success. Many question whether democratic elections are the path to stability and security in the Arab world. Finally, in Iraq, Europeans share the same goals as the U.S. in desiring an Iraq that is stable, secure, federal, prosperous, and democratic, but seem unsure how best to advance this goal.
Guiding Questions
How can Europe and the U.S. work together to stabilize the Middle East? Is a regional security structure including Iran, Turkey, Syria, Jordan, and Saudi Arabia possible? How should the U.S. and Europe address Iran’s nuclear program? As the U.S. begins bilateral talks with Iran about Iraq, should the agenda be broadened? What is the right U.S.-European stance on Palestine? Should the U.S. and Europe support the Olmert government’s plans for unilateral withdrawal from the West Bank and boundary-setting? Are democratic elections the path to stability and security in the Arab world? How can Europe and the U.S. best help Lebanon? Is a coherent policy for encouraging change in Syria possible with Bashar Assad in power? In Iraq, can Europe play a role in a U.S. “exit strategy”? With the U.S. pinned down in Iraq, are there dangers for Europe? Can democracy be achieved in the Middle East?
Discussants, followed by open-floor debate:
Shlomo Avineri is a professor at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem.
Marwan al-Muasher, Member of Jordan’s Senate and former Foreign Affairs Minister, was the first Jordanian ambassador to Israel after the signing of the Israel–Jordan peace treaty.
Ana Palacio, Member of the Spanish Parliament and former Foreign Minister, has been involved in shaping the EU’s policies toward Mediterranean states and the Middle East.
Ghassan Salamé, professor at Sciences Po and Lebanon’s former Culture Minister, has been part of bilateral talks with Israel and multilateral negotiations to resolve regional conflicts.
Moderator: David Ignatius, Columnist, The Washington Post
Transatlantic Foreign Investment: Confronting Protectionism, Increasing Cooperation
Sunday, April 30, 8–9 a.m.
Closed session, Chatham House Rule, partial participation
Foreign Direct Investment (FDI) is the bedrock of the powerful U.S.-EU economic relationship. There is no larger bilateral transfer of capital in the world. Half of the world’s total FDI is American, and the bulk of it pours into Europe; EU nations put two-thirds of their annual FDI into the United States. The U.S. Department of Commerce reports that, in 2005 alone, $326 billion of FDI was conducted by the U.S. and EU.
This powerful flow of capital is facing its first serious threat in decades. Fear of outside ownership has prompted discussions about the proper balance between economic openness and national security. Recent takeover bids by Enel, EON AG, and the Chinese National Offshore Oil Corporation sparked public concern that vital domestic industries could be controlled by foreign — and potentially hostile — companies or governments. In particular, the recent purchase by Dubai Ports World of the British maritime giant P&O, which manages major American ports, caused a political firestorm on Capitol Hill.
Legislatures in both the U.S. and EU have responded defensively as politicians grapple with the tradeoffs of cross-border ownership. The U.S. and EU are considering muscular measures to protect domestic companies they deem “strategic assets” from foreign ownership and competition.
Guiding Questions
Is national security in the U.S. and EU being redefined in a way that could create conditions that hinder transatlantic and intra-European economic cooperation and integration? What is the appropriate balance between economic growth, open markets, and national security? Will political pressure to prevent foreign ownership increase as more foreign multinational companies emerge from the developing world? What effect will current proposals to limit foreign investment have on workers and businesses in the U.S., Europe, and the global economy?
Discussants, followed by open-floor debate:
Bob Bennett, a U.S. Senator and TPN member, is a sponsor of the Invest in America Act and is Vice Chair of the Congressional Joint Economic Committee and sits on the Senate Banking and Senate Appropriations Committees.
Joyce Chang, Managing Director and Global Head of the Currency, Emerging Markets and Commodities groups at JP Morgan, is a leading emerging markets sovereign debt strategist and one of The Wall Street Journal’s “Top 50 Women To Watch.”
Erika Mann, a member of the European Parliament, is Co-Chair of the Transatlantic Policy Network (TPN), and has extensive policy experience in the areas of trade and investment.
Moderator: Bruce Stokes, International Economics Columnist, National Journal
Do We Need a Transatlantic Energy Security Policy?
Sunday, April 30, 9:15–10:45 a.m., Ballroom
Open session, on the record, full participation
Securing reliable sources of energy has bedeviled nations of the transatlantic community since the discovery of oil. Threats of war and actual wars over access to energy supplies, and financial wars over pricing, were landmarks of 20th century geopolitics.
The beginning of the 21st century has seen energy escalate to a geopolitical imperative with nations defending existing, dwindling energy supplies while searching for alternative sources. Prices of fossil fuels have soared, terrorists threaten the energy infrastructure, and attacks at the source in some producer nations are now valuable terrorist weapons. Today, electricity grids and natural gas pipelines lace the maps of multiple regions, linking countries, continents, and pricing in complicated and unprecedented ways. While the EU was relieved at the end of the Russia–Ukraine gas row earlier this year, Europeans were confronted dramatically with the consequences of energy dependence. As a result, nuclear energy is not only back on the table but is rising to dominate the debate. Energy policy has become a critical arena for transatlantic coordination and cooperation.
Guiding Questions
How can the transatlantic community address the issue of energy security? Are the Black Sea and the Caucasus the solution to diversifying energy corridors into Western markets? If nuclear power gains in popularity, how do the U.S. and Europe keep their own lights on while they keep fissile material out of the wrong hands in sovereign nations? What new energy options are on the horizon? How does Turkey’s desire to join the EU couple with its strong strategic position in the energy world?
Discussants, followed by open-floor debate:
Egemen Bagis is the Foreign Policy Advisor to the Prime Minister of Turkey, a key NATO ally with a strategic role in energy transit.
General James L. Jones, Supreme Allied Commander Europe and Commander of the U.S. European Command, has identified energy security as a key issue for preserving peace.
Peter MacKay is the Minister of Foreign Affairs of Canada, which is an energy-rich North American country and NATO member that desires a sustainable and secure energy supply.
Andris Piebalgs, the EU Commissioner for Energy, has as his key task securing Europe with a stable energy supply while keeping electricity and gas at an affordable price.
Radek Sikorski is the Defense Minister for Poland, which has called for the EU and NATO partners to form a pact to secure their energy supplies, especially in the face of a crisis.
Robin West, Chairman of PFC Energy, has advised executives of leading international oil and gas companies and national oil companies on corporate strategy and acquisitions.
Moderator: Fred Kempe, Assistant Managing Editor, International, The Wall Street Journal
Culture, Identity, and Integration: A New Transatlantic Challenge
Sunday, April 30, 11:15 a.m.–12:45 p.m., Ballroom
Open session, on the record, full participation
The debate in Europe over whether and how to integrate minorities into society has become a central and controversial issue in current European political discourse. Traditional models of integration — including the so-called French Republican model and the Northern European liberal model — have been called into question. Critics point to the failings of governments and policies, as well as individuals, to successfully integrate.
While this debate is not only about religion or Islam, the religious and cultural dimensions undoubtedly play a central role. The EU’s own uncertain future, a massive demographic challenge, the lack of economic growth, and high unemployment rates all contribute to the anxiety. The U.S. is also increasingly concerned about how estranged, radicalized minorities in Europe can become breeding grounds for terrorist groups that affect homeland security. The U.S. and European governments have begun to build bridges between Muslim communities on both continents and to help each other learn from integration experiences.
In the U.S., immigration and integration are in the political spotlight as well. Recent attempts in the United States Congress to control or stop the flow of immigrants have sparked rallies and marches across the country as Latinos, some illegal immigrants and some multiple-generation Americans, have called for more immigration. This reaction represents the strongest showing of political unity ever among America’s most populous minority group.
Guiding Questions
How are Europeans and Americans confronting the challenges of integration today? How do minorities see these challenges in terms of identity, culture, and integration? How important is the role of religion, and especially of Islam, in this debate? How best can individuals reconcile their various identities and still feel part of a collective entity? What lessons, if any, does America have to offer Europe when it comes to these challenges? How will the recent protests by Latinos in the U.S. affect immigration and, ultimately, integration?
Discussants, to be followed by open-floor debate:
K. Anthony Appiah, a Professor at Princeton, has made culture and identity the core of his intellectual research and is himself from a multicultural background.
Daniel Cohn-Bendit, a dual French and German national, is a Member of the European Parliament and served as a local German official dealing with immigration and integration.
Rob Riemen is President and Founder of the Nexus Institute, which initiated the cultural debate on European identity during the Dutch presidency of the European Union.
Loretta Sanchez is a member of the U.S. Congress representing the 47th California district, a diverse community outside Los Angeles.
Patrick Weil directs the Center for the Study of Immigration, Integration, and Citizenship Policies in Paris, and has authored various laws regulating immigration in France..
Moderator: Roger Cohen, Editor-at-Large, International Herald Tribune