Verona Eurasian Economic Forum: freedom of expression, tolerance, mutual respect

The XVII Verona Eurasian Economic Forum agenda, which took place last week (5-6th of December) in Ras Al Khaimah, one of the 7 United Arab Emirates, was announced as “New Architecture of Cooperation for the Modern Economy, ” and Its 1000+ representatives of government, business, media, and public circles from all continents except Australia can testify that the content of speeches and the general atmosphere were in line with its name.

Interestingly, another economic forum in Davos, Switzerland, uses similar words for its agendas. For example, the one in January this year called for “advancing dialogue, cooperation, and action-oriented partnership at a time of growing fragmentation and polarization.” However, judging from the opinions of those who attended both Forums, the Davos participant selection process, the exclusion of representatives from certain countries, the size of fees—tens of thousands for Davos vs. zero for Verona—and most importantly, the unipolar vs. multipolar vision of the world order, the resemblance is by the name only.

The world is indeed dangerously polarized and fragmented, and when it faces fundamental security, economic, climate, and many other challenges, the calls for cooperation are as crucial as ever. I leave it to business and financial experts to share their opinions about the achievements of the Verona Forum in their fields, but I came to Ras Al Khaimah in search of partners and new ideas that might inspire young people and engage them in promoting international dialogue in vital areas for humanity, like focusing on next-generation energy sources, increasing speed and logistical transportation access within and between nations, reviving arts, science, and cultural exchanges, water accessibility, health/longevity, and, most importantly peace and security for all.

The American University in Moscow that I founded in 1990 with the blessing of then U.S. President George H.W. Bush and Soviet President Michael Gorbachev did manage to engage students in learning these ideas, but our work was limited only to the American and Russian professors and students, and frankly, their numbers were not very high. The funding pledged by the American side has not materialized, first due to the limited support in Congress and then the total dismissal of this project by the Clinton administration.

Bush’s ideas, quoted by his Vice-President Dan Quayle in his letter to me (pictured), that this university “will lead not only to an increase of understanding between our people but to the acceleration of economic and political progress the peoples of the Soviet Union are so earnestly striving” have been largely ignored by all future U.S. Presidents.

Fortunately, we found private sponsors that allowed us to continue our work for over 34 years, although not on a scale envisioned in 1990. Leading American and Russian universities were involved in these exchanges, plus regular U.S.-Russia experts meetings in Washington and Moscow to generate new ideas.

Unfortunately, face-to-face work almost came to a halt due to the Ukrainian tragedy, but new communication technologies allow us to continue these activities. In fact, the number of participants and countries involved increased substantially.

Still, the big problem remains the attraction of young people to these communications, and judging from the reactions to my presentation at the Verona Forum, it might lead to some beneficial partnerships. University professors from different countries expressed interest in attracting their students to this program and making presentations themselves.

On the Forum sidelines, there were many discussions beyond the economy, and it was impossible to avoid the events surrounding the war in Ukraine. This crisis is threatening a global catastrophe, and the general agreement was that diplomacy instead of more weapons was necessary to avert the worst-case scenario. It was a universal agreement among participants that after gaining independence from the USSR, Ukraine, with its well-developed industrial and agricultural sectors, favorable climate, and fertile land, could have become one of the most prosperous European nations had its leadership chosen a neutral status and friendly and mutually beneficial relations with any country, including Russia with whom it had many centuries family, religious, cultural and economic ties. In this case, there would have been no war, and the country could have lived peacefully and happily within its 1991 borders. This would be a real win-win for everyone except those with other agendas contradicting those of Verona Forum participants. One of them also recalled his participation in the Davos Forum and said that being at Verona one, he feels their agendas might look similar, but here it is with a human face.

Finally, in our highly polarized world, thanks to the enthusiasm of the organizers of the Verona Forum from the Italian Association “Conoscere Eurasia” and its permanent founder and President, Professor Antonio Fallico (pictured with Sheikh Saud bin Saqr Al-Qasimi, Ruler of Ras Al Khaimah and a Member of the Supreme Federal Council of the United Arab Emirates), such inspiring events as the Verona Eurasian Economic Forum are held, as well as BRICS+, Shanghai Cooperation Organization (SCO), and other gatherings where no one claims leadership, hegemony, or calls for sanctions but where participants instead discuss mutually beneficial cooperation on the win-win paradigm that give hope that humanity will survive this crisis and move on.