Davos -- The star of the World Economic Forum this year in Davos is "the crisis," confirming how widespread the concern is over the repercussions of the global financial and economic situation, which has been in a state of collapse since early fall. However, the star that shone brightest in the minds of those attending the forum at the winter resort in the Alps, was "trust" and who would be its source on the path of overcoming despair and heading towards recovery after restoring, and perhaps even completely restructuring, the elements of the next phase resulting from the reform of capitalism. Because the new US President, Barack Obama, enjoys a special status in the minds and imaginations of many in the world, perhaps there is a desire, and not only a need, for a renewed US leadership of the world towards what comes after the flaw-stricken capitalism, and that is the star hiding amidst the clouds of expectations. Nevertheless, the meaning and definition of leadership and trust take a new direction in the era of "the crisis" and of collective thinking to find ways to emerge from it. Here the unique role of the Arabs becomes prominent. Indeed, Arab leaderships can shape a role for themselves, by which partnership would replace spite and the Arabs would obtain a strategic seat at the table, instead of playing the roles of momentary bailout banks. Only by this can the contribution of the Arabs be taken seriously in the West's, and especially the US's, considerations, instead of it continuing to be viewed as scattered, eager to be recognized and accepted, and willing to be exploited without long-term benefits. Last year in Davos, holders of large Arab funds, whether governmental or non-governmental, spoke of surprise at the lack of Western, and especially American, enthusiasm for the money of sovereign wealth funds. Indeed, the talk of annoyance from resisting and opposing Arab money ready to be invested in the US reeked of racism. Today, the situation is entirely different, as many financial institutions are nearly begging for the investment of such sovereign wealth funds, as part of the process of saving the economy from the predicament of "the crisis." Indeed, in times of recession, liquidity is king, and there is an overwhelming desire to channel funds from the Gulf into investments in countries that are suffering from recession or are at its threshold. However, this year these funds are not at the same level of wealth as last year, having they too been "torched" in investments and bailouts devoured by the flames of the crisis. Furthermore, those representing them have lost much of the stardom they had enjoyed last year in Davos. According to a report from the Council on Foreign Relations (CFR) in New York, the foreign assets of GCC countries have dropped from 1.3 trillion dollars in 2007 to 1.2 trillion dollars in 2008, the UAE, Qatar and Kuwait having suffered the greatest losses. Gulf Stock markets lost 535 billion dollars of their value last year, which is equivalent to the totality of their oil revenues during the period when oil was hovering around one hundred dollars a barrel. Simply for the purpose of showing the losses of the Arab region for various reasons, an international study has estimated the cost of two decades of conflicts in the Middle East at around 12 trillion dollars, a price-tag that is likely to rise in the case of ongoing conflicts in the region, according to the Strategic Foresight Group (SFG). Such a juncture in international economic developments, in addition to the political situation in the Middle East, require that we begin to lay the framework of a strategic vision that would overcome the division and dispersion prevalent in the Arab region. Who is qualified for such leadership? Are such a leadership and such a vision possible in times of division and competition? Is there a way for multiple leaderships, at different levels, even in the midst of Arab quarrels, so that Arab states and their peoples would not pay the expensive bills, as took place in the unsuccessful investments that were not based on a coherent strategy, or as in those resulting from ongoing conflicts? Such questions are raised at many regional or international gatherings, such as Davos, as the cover of the Herald Tribune contained an advertisement which coincided with the opening ceremony of the economic forum entitled "Saudi Arabia: a Prosperous Economy in Times of Recession." Saudi Arabia is the only Arab member of the G20, which has locally replaced the G8 of developed industrial countries, and which is currently going through one of its most difficult periods due to "the crisis." China is also a prominent member of the G20 alongside other countries, African, Asian and European, in addition to the US. The world's attention turns to the G20 when they meet next April. The Davos Forum seeks to be a kind of experimental laboratory and to drive collective thinking to the highest level for politicians, thinkers, artists, businessmen and businesswomen, so that they may produce specific recommendations for the G20. And it does well to do so. Indeed, Arab forums should make their own such a goal, so that they may influence and contribute directly to the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia's representation of general Arab interests at the G20. Certainly, there is an opportunity for an Arab participation in defining the new post-"crisis" era, a crisis unprecedented in the history of capitalism. There is talk of a new "-ism" that would come after capitalism, communism and socialism. There is an equal opportunity to influence policy-making towards the Arab region and the Middle East as a whole, if Arab states, and especially the Gulf States, were to succeed in taking advantage of the ripe opportunity to influence the post-"crisis" phase. Some of those who are angry at US arrogance, which has involved racism against Arabs, are rejoicing at what happened, and many of those who were arrogant are now running after Arab money from sovereign wealth funds or other sources. Rejoicing at others' misfortune does not constitute a strategy. Partnership is the best revenge from racism, and the best investment in shaping the position held by the Arabs in the future of the world. US President Barack Obama wants such a partnership. He addressed the Muslim world in his first interview after his inauguration, and chose it to be with the Al-Arabiya television channel. Such a move holds an important message, one not limited to partnership in resolving conflicts but rather partnership in shaping the direction of the coming decade, if not decades, of US relations with the Muslim world and the Arab region. Barack Obama does not offer such partnership to the likes of Al-Qaeda, as he does not address Al-Qaeda in heading towards mutual understanding with the Muslim world. He is addressing the states, institutions and peoples, who are rational and ready to build, and not those who remain attached to the ideology of destruction. He understands the relationship required between, on the one hand, countries suffering from a financial deficit and in need of borrowing, such as the US, and, on the other, countries that hold such liquidity and are able to provide loans, such as Saudi Arabia and other members of the GCC. The fact is that the US prefers to borrow from countries like Saudi Arabia rather than from countries like China for many reasons, such as trust or historical and ideological affinity. Indeed, China remains a communist country, and it is a great power preparing to compete for the position of world superpower. As for the Arabian Gulf region, it would be the ideal partner which would complement, be beneficial and benefit itself, if both sides of the partnership succeed in shaping its foundations and conceiving its future, strategically and practically. Because governments have nearly returned to nationalization as a necessary measure to bail out large interests, there is a pressing need for governments to reconsider the nature of their view of citizens and of small and large interests in the various sectors. Arab governments have failed to educate and train cadres, out of fear for themselves of independent cadres. Today there is no option in partnerships between governments and interests but to make education, training, research and development a fundamental basis for new directions and strategies. Academic, intellectual and media institutions in the US have also failed to educate the individual in America as a citizen - in terms of purchasing power and political responsibility, with duties imposed by democratic systems. In order for the Arab contribution to live up to the responsibility of its new partnership and position in the world, there is no option but to give up many of the patterns of habit and habitude, and of how to address others far from the culture of obedience and submission. It is true that there are new developments and ideas in many fields in the Gulf region of the Arab World, but the bonds of burdensome traditions place obstacles in their path, prevent the recognition of modernization efforts and obstruct trust. Trust - the precious commodity that moves the future - is what those meeting in Davos have sought. Who is its source? Who inspires it and who can guarantee that it will be sustained? Certainly President Barack Obama and his team are a fundamental and main element of the search for trust. However, at a time when there is a need to reflect, think and work together, the elements that complement that of the US have a certain weight and importance in shaping "trust." Once again, one of the exceedingly important and effective elements is the Arab region. Indeed, the current economic and financial crisis is not "their problem" but "our problem." This is what those meeting in Davos have understood, led by the Forum's Executive Chairman Klaus Schwab, who always thinks creatively and ambitiously when setting the main bullet points for the Economic Forum in Davos. Creativity this year is in emerging from "the crisis" with new foundations for the private sector's relationship with the government and with citizens, after the decline of trust in capitalism and its fall to the tunes of wretched greed. It is a year of self-reflection and of reconsidering one's relationships with others. If a new star is to result from collective thinking over the present world crisis to replace anxiety and confusion, perhaps it will come from the new trust and partnership, towards a future with a different kind of "-ism," one which stands between capitalism and socialism or above them both.
