Munich Young Leaders 2011 Blog

Well, I was all ready to offer my concluding thoughts on the Munich Conference and its utility, when Ambassador Ischinger went ahead and did it for me at a panel debate the Young Leaders are attending.

So, is the Munich Conference the gold standard of international security gatherings that it purports to be? Well, as Herr Ischinger posited, the answer is both yes and no. It is not a NATO summit, EU summit or a meeting of the UN Security Council, with a mandate and ability to deliver global change by diktat or negotiation. But then again, nor is it supposed to be. Instead, what the Conference offers is an unparalleled opportunity to combine policy statements and discussions on areas of international concern, with the informal networking abilities afforded by a gathering of world leaders and experts in the security field.

And the latter merit should not be underestimated. Too often in our hectic lives, we live by the tyranny of our diaries (or even worse, the blackberry calendar). We act on autopilot in response to rigidly planned schedules that do not provide the luxury of thought, or deliver the benefits of learning by listening to others. And if this is true of the humble director of a think-tank, it must be writ large for the doyens of the diplomatic world, whose every movement is usually carefully choreographed and managed. Munich provides the opportunity to break out of the mould, to sit down with friends and colleagues - both old and new - and take time to explore ideas that can help shape the world of tomorrow.

To take but one example, a chance detour taken today through the US Congressional delegation's sumptuous quarters, led to encounters and discussions with Senators, Representatives and a number of staffers (not to mention the unexpected bonus of an Oreo cookie - yes, the Americans really do ship in their own snacks). And the Young Leaders can therefore now forgive Secretary Clinton for having forced us to wait in a coach outside our hotel for half an hour while she checked in, in the knowledge that she too was no doubt taking advantage of the same facility. And unarguably to greater effect!

Just as there is a role for both hard power and soft power in the international context, so there is a purpose in formal international summits and more free-flowing global gatherings. As an example of the latter, there can be few greater exemplars than Munich. To its great credit the Koerber Foundation has embraced this idea, and opened a window onto this world for a privileged group of Young Leaders. And we owe its hard-working staff and the visionary Ambassador Ischinger a debt of immense gratitude for their inspired decision to establish the programme that we have benefited from having engaged with.

So Munich, the Young Leaders bid you goodbye, a bientot and auf wiedersehn. Perhaps even salaam and shalom if you want us to make a parting plea for cross-cultural convivencia. We shall gladly return if you'll let us back in, but in the meantime, we look forward to putting into practice the lessons we have learned for our future careers.

With the clock ticking down on formal proceedings on Day 2, and with a riveting Middle East debate winding down prior to dinner, some further reflections on the Munich Conference today would seem appropriate.

Firstly, the Conference has sometimes been criticised as being a meeting point for middle aged - perhaps even elderly - white men from the Old World. And it is true that looking down from the balcony where the Young Leaders are sat, there is a noticeable grey and white haired majority, with the odd bald pate thrown in for good measure. Now in part, this reflects the preponderance of such types in the echelons of the international affairs world - the only solution will be for the tides of gender change (and I don't mean through medical operation!) to work their way through Western political systems. That said, Ambassador Ischinger has attempted to play his part in speeding up the natural process through his control of the speaker agenda, helped by the placement of prominent female leaders such as Mesdames Clinton, Merkel and Ashton. Equally, the introduction of the cybersecurity and Middle East panels enabled the participation of a number of non-European and American voices into the debate. Who knows, perhaps next year a Young Leader will be asked to address the gathering!

This does lead into the second observation however, which is that the agenda still does seem Euro-Atlantic focused. This seems a little peculiar in an age when Asian security is an increasingly important issue in our world, and the Conference could surely benefit from the addition of leading voices from the Developing World in a more sweeping assessment of the global security situation. Indeed this point was made by a number of Asian speakers from the floor (and one Australian!) and was also reflected in the private Young Leaders' gatherings.

Finally, a completely random observation on how international politics sometimes intersects with even the best of intentions. This was best demonstrated by the Middle East panel, which was admittedly arranged at short notice, but failed to contain a senior figure from the Arab world on it! The Israelis contributed their National Security Advisor, and the Turks a former ambassador to give some sense of regional sensibilities, but the various Arab dignitaries scattered around the hotel were nowhere to be seen. I can only assume that there were political sensitivities involved in addressing a panel containing an Israeli (regrettable if true), or in discussing a still-volatile situation so openly (more understandable). Either way, we look forward to normal service being resumed tomorrow!

Liberty, equality, fraternity! The timeless values of the French Revolution remain alive at the Munich Security Conference. Or so it would appear from the proceedings of Day 2 thus far. And a good thing too, seeing as by the end of Day 1, we ran the risk of the conference being dominated by hard security issues rather than the values that underpin them for the West.

After an eye-wateringly early breakfast with a fascinating Japanese interlocutor who reminded us of the need for Europeans to participate in Asian security endeavours, the scene was set for a 'democratic transformation' of our own to rival that occurring in the Middle East. First up was the 'Angela and David Show', with the German Chancellor and the British Prime Minister competing with one another to see who could promote liberal values the most. Mrs Merkel's speech was the sunnier of the two visions, spearheading the primacy of human dignity and its attendant values of liberty and democracy as the central pillar of the transatlantic alliance. Mr Cameron's version was stronger. Declaring multiculturalism dead, he turned on the ideology of Radical Islamism and demanded a muscular liberal response to promote the universal liberal values that we all hold dear.

Was there to be a change in tone from the next pair of speakers (Munich appears to favour the idea of rhyming couplets on Day 2)? Emphatically not! It turns out that Hillary (Clinton) and Herman (van Rompuy) enjoy the same ideological closeness as the preceding German and British speakers. Mrs Clinton suggested that "the challenge is to help our partners take systematic steps to usher in a better future", stating that "this is not simply a matter of idealism, it is a strategic necessity" and that "free people govern themselves best". Although she did then dodge a question about whether US policy would now axiomatically pursue this goal (I was having visions of 2003 for a moment when this was asked!). The President of the European Council maintained a similar tone, praising the contribution of the EU to the spread of liberty. Although he nearly ruined it by calling the EU "sexy". "Worthy" perhaps, but sexy? An unusual choice.

The consensus on the Egyptian situation does appear to be becoming clear however. Leaders would like a definite but managed transition to a more democratic Egypt, where elections occur but are not deemed as the be-all-and-end-all of the democratic process. This is surely correct. Egypt must have change as the popular will demands it. But an unseemly rush towards a democratic process without the building blocks in place will only benefit the Radical Islamists of the Muslim Brotherhood, who are as opposed to universal values as President Mubarak is. Progress will come with the swift introduction of rule of law, a free press, proper political parties and process, and respect for minority rights. Elections then will have a real meaning and lasting value. And a truly democratic Egypt is likely to be the outcome.

So, can the conference love-in continue? Unlikely...the Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov is up next against the sparky US Senator John McCain. I am taking my seat by ringside for this one!

Munich. The Security Conference.

A forum where world leaders in international and security affairs are seemingly ten-a-penny. Where world events unfold even as speakers make their presentations. And where I find myself as part of a supremely distinguished and eclectic group of Munich Young Leaders privileged to participate in this most high-brow of international occasions. The excitement is palpable. The mood intense. And the delegates keen to debate their views about the changing nature of global affairs.

Chaired by the wily and urbane Ambassador Wolfgang Ischinger – who treated the Young Leaders to a masterclass in diplomatic analysis over a sumptuous dinner last night – the Munich Security Conference is widely seen as the gold standard for international security conferences. And when you enter the gilded hall of the Bayerischer Hof it does not flatter to deceive. Aside from the spectacle of the great and the good arraigned before us, the first four speakers were the German Minister of Defence, the NATO Secretary-General and the British Foreign Secretary. As I blog, Bob Zoellick is locking horns with George Soros and Wolfgang Schäuble, amongst others. It certainly beats a Friday afternoon in the office.

But star power alone is not sufficient to justify the conference’s billing. Were the assorted dignitaries merely to mouth platitudes, Munich would be little more than a talking shop. So, why is this conference different from all other conferences? Well, I think this gathering has already been distinguished by the fact that the speakers are not afraid to tackle tough questions and cause controversy, or to launch major initiatives from the bully pulpit. Already Mr Fogh Rasmussen has driven a horse and coaches through the cosy complacency of European Defence considerations with a clarion call for Europe to spend more and pool more on defence. And Mr Hague has called for a global summit on cyber security and offered London as a venue (as a Brit, I await with interest). And this from the first panel.

Whether this is beginner’s luck, or an accurate reflection, only time – and perhaps this blog – will tell. But I am particularly pleased that the unfolding and potentially transformative events in the Middle East, which are of course on everybody’s mind, will be addressed by a panel convened at short notice tomorrow. For now, I will make do with snatched conversations on the topic with friends and colleagues old and new, in the maze of lounges, corridors and bars that comprise the hotel. As a student – and sometime practitioner – of international relations, I can think of no better start to this three day odyssey!