Latest news with #neutrality
Arab News
3 days ago
- Business
- Arab News
In the wake of the WEF's challenges, neutrality and good governance are paramount
Geneva, Switzerland, is a hub for international cooperation. The city has provided a venue for dialogue among governments and nongovernmental organizations alike since the early 20th century, bolstered by critical aspects of the Swiss DNA: neutrality, good governance and a tradition of dialogue for impact and peace. Since its founding in 1971, the World Economic Forum, under the leadership of its founder Klaus Schwab, started as a private foundation and eventually became an official Swiss international organization guided by the mission statement: 'Committed to improving the state of the world.' The WEF and its annual gathering in Davos evolved from a European industrial conclave into the world's most influential event for brand building, networking and addressing the topics of the day among political figures, business leaders, NGOs and the social sector. The WEF today, however, is facing an impasse. As a perceived neutral platform for dialogue, for decades the WEF offered a unique value proposition geopolitically, from the Cold War period through the Middle East peace process and the end of apartheid in South Africa. This neutrality came into question in 2022 following the war in Ukraine. At that point, the WEF followed political pressure from the US, the EU and Switzerland, turning away all stakeholders, political and civilian, from Russia, thereby taking sides in the conflict and stifling dialogue. When asked directly why the Russians were excluded, one WEF representative at the time cited the excuse that 'Russia invaded a sovereign country' as a justification for the WEF's unprecedented political stand. This situation has played itself out historically with the US-UK invasion of Iraq in 2003, when moral justifications regarding human rights violations were used on a selective basis to underscore what was later revealed to be the false pretense of weapons of mass destruction. Moreover, without skipping a beat, the following January, the WEF invited the US and UK governments, their allies and other stakeholders to Davos, despite their invasion of a 'sovereign country.' As a perceived neutral platform for dialogue, for decades the WEF offered a unique value proposition geopolitically. This fault line is one, which, compared to Western countries, counterparts from the Arab Gulf to the BRICS and the Global South have addressed in a more pragmatic way. Instead of focusing solely on the Western, pro-NATO enlargement narrative, they have considered, rightly, their own business and economic interests and interlinked global geopolitics over the principles of so-called sovereignty and invasion. In terms of its own internal governance, the WEF has come under scrutiny in the past few years following a series of journalistic reports, notably from The Wall Street Journal, which started with looking into gender and inclusion policies and which ultimately led to the resignation of the founder. In the last month in particular, several alleged governance questions have emerged about Schwab, his family, the board and select members of the management team. While independent investigations are underway under the eyes of the Swiss authorities, and innocence is presumed until proven otherwise, it is important that these events not neglect a critical aspect: these issues — if true — would not have occurred had proper measures been installed to ensure good governance, checks and balances, and the proper oversight of what is today an official Swiss international organization. According to the bylaws of the WEF, Schwab has the right to appoint his own successor and either he or a member of his immediate family sits on the board of trustees. Schwab will therefore likely continue to pursue his own case and deny the allegations of wrongdoing that have been lodged to protect his own personal reputation and, even more so, his legacy. The authorities and the current board of the WEF may need to find a compromise, including naming him honorary chairman and/or meeting other demands. Serious questions must be addressed about how so many alleged internal issues were allowed to precipitate over an extended period without board members supposedly being aware. Beyond the organizational culture that was variably criticized in the media, it appears as though board members failed to ask the right questions or address issues, as did the regulators, in compliance with Swiss law, which mandates regular audit. The current circumstances should therefore give the WEF pause to pose some of the difficult values-based questions for an organization that is charged with convening the world's elite around the most pressing global challenges. Moreover, the WEF's partners, notably business and wealthy governments, finance its $500 million annual budget. If the WEF is going to continue to accept these financial contributions, it must also be held accountable. Against this backdrop, and at a moment when global leadership is under great scrutiny and redefinition, multistakeholder leaders have options to choose between myriad different events and initiatives for building their influence and collaboration, ranging from the Milken Institute to the Future Investment Initiative. Now is the time, however, for the WEF to revisit its purpose and decide if it will become one of the many hubs for corporate networking and deal-making or if it will stay true to its DNA: serving as a neutral platform, with good governance and focused on real impact. • Khalid Abdulla-Janahi, chairman of Vision3, has over 30 years of experience in banking and financial services.
Yahoo
25-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
Rye Republicans: Our Rye Public Library, elected representatives, and why it matters!
Many have followed the Rye Public Library - NH Outright event scheduled for May 29th. It was postponed indefinitely by the Trustees because the Library employees scheduling this event were engaging in advocacy for an ideology which our Rye Public Library (RPL) is not supposed to do. Imagine the library advocating for an NRA event, Pro-life event, or even a MAGA event, and you can see why neutrality is the best of town residents and even members of our Rye Republicans group voiced their concerns. Some pointed out that the RPL sponsoring such an event implied Rye citizen agreement with the NH Outright Program while others simply didn't want the RPL NH Outright Mission Statement "Our mission is to serve, support and advocate for LGBTQIA+ youth and allies across New Hampshire", the focus of their advertised program " Practical Allyship 101" and their programs targeting grades K-12 demonstrate a specific ideology and agenda. This implies that the youth have already made a priori alternative lifestyle choice. Rather, it is our view that, under the guise of "support", NH Outright is proselytizing alternative lifestyles to youth who: 1) may be struggling personally and/or socially, and 2) may be very susceptible to the power of suggestion. Indeed, these youth deserve our compassion and support, but their vulnerability should not be exploited by proselytizers offering alternative lifestyles as as a group oppose no lifestyle for any adults, live and let live. Many of us have lesbian and gay friends and family members and love them all. Contrary to the outright slander and vicious attack from some, we are not censors, bigots, or bullies. We simply feel that advocating alternative lifestyles FOR YOUTH is a controversial enough topic that our town's public library should not be taking a position. We call upon our Library Trustees and Director to maintain a position of neutrality on matters that are politically or socially controversial. No citizens of Rye require "Allyship" to feel welcome in our Library. The False Narrative; "Republicans Hate LGBTQIA+ " is ridiculous (but proved to be very effective in this matter). Seriously, do you really believe there are no Republicans in the LGBTQIA+ sphere? The REAL objection to the program, lost on the Trustees and Library staff was having our Library employees act as activists and advocate for an ideology. Think back to NRA, Pro - Life, MAGA, and tell me it's elected officials are voted in, trusting that decisions they make are consistent for all members of the community and not slanted toward one political group or another. In this particular situation, the Library Trustees majority recognized they were straying from the neutral position they were obligated to uphold and voted 4-0 appropriately canceling the NH Outright event. After the Trustees voted to postpone the event, there was significant hue and cry from advocates. Much of this backlash was hateful, objectionable behavior, which ultimately led to the Trustees reversing their vote 4-1 and allowing reschedule of the program. We are deeply disappointed with the Trustees' revocation of the earlier decision, particularly since the neutrality position remains Bean, on behalf of Rye Republicans Executive Committee This article originally appeared on Portsmouth Herald: Rye Republicans: Disappointed in library reversal on LGBTQIA+ event
Bloomberg
22-05-2025
- Business
- Bloomberg
Singapore DPM Says Holding Geopolitical Neutrality Not Possible
Singapore's Deputy Prime Minister Gan Kim Yong said neutrality is not possible, highlighting the rising challenges for the city-state that has long sought to tread a diplomatic tightrope amid US-China trade tensions. 'If you try to be neutral and walk the middle road, the road is getting narrow and narrower, eventually you will be at a knife's edge and you won't be able to stand on it,' Gan said at a conference hosted by UBS Group AG in Singapore. 'The key is we have to take sides, we have to take position, we have to do so based on principles.'
Yahoo
10-05-2025
- Politics
- Yahoo
DNC chair doubles down on his ultimatum for Hogg
Democratic National Convention Chair Ken Martin on Saturday doubled down on his ultimatum for rogue Vice Chair David Hogg: Take a neutrality pledge or step down. 'Party officers have one job: to be fair stewards of a process that invites every Democrat to the table — regardless of personal views or allegiances,' Martin said. After weeks of infighting about how the hobbled party should move forward, Martin laid out his longstanding vision on Saturday in a post on X and called out Hogg, who caused an uproar last month after he told POLITICO that he would fund Democratic primaries for 'ineffective, asleep-at-the-wheel' Democrats. Following Hogg's comments, Martin made it clear that as a party officer, you must remain neutral in Democratic primaries — and suggested Hogg should step down from his role if he can't get on board. The statement comes hours after it was reported by POLITICO that Hogg privately pitched a compromise to his party in recent days. He proposed a so-called internal firewall in which he would stay on as vice chair but be barred from accessing internal committee information about races as long as he was supporting challengers. 'Some critics have wrongly framed this as an effort to shut people out of the party or to discourage contested primaries,' Martin wrote. 'Let me be unequivocally clear: That's not only false, it's the opposite of what I stand for.' Martin, as many party officers in the past have argued, said that the pledge allows for a fairer process without interference from party leadership. In the lengthy thread, Martin mentioned Hogg by name, saying he respects the 25-year-old activist-turned DNC vice chair. 'When I ran for DNC Chair, I ran on a platform of democratizing the party,' he wrote. 'Those reforms weren't about any one person, and they certainly aren't about me versus David Hogg. … Long before David was ever involved in politics, I was pushing reforms within our Democratic Party.' Martin added that when you lead the institution that calls 'balls and strikes, you don't get to also swing the bat.' 'I am more committed than ever to introduce the slate of structural reforms that enshrine these values into the official rules of the Democratic Party,' Martin said. 'These reforms will require all party officers — including myself — to remain neutral in primaries.'
