Introduction

But this is only one aspect of the response process that this journal intends to initiate and gradually conduct, step by step, with each publication. The studies it will prioritize are those that aim at stimulating strategic debate in a world in turmoil and to conduct rigorous analyses of reality, with the ultimate goal of potentially transforming it. The pessimism of reason must not annihilate the optimism of will. The last few years have been among the bloodiest in several parts of the world. The prominent international players have redefined a global system that is gradually distancing itself from the familiar norms, international humanitarian laws, and the ideal standards that should dictate the behavior of individuals, states, and groups. Thus, we have entered a new era of the global system that is increasingly fraught with violence, ambiguity, and profound uncertainty.

We had the privilege of hosting Josep Borrell, the High Representative of the European Union for Foreign Affairs and Security Policy, at the Euromed University in Fes, Morocco, where he delivered a lecture on “Our Strategic Responsibilities in the current geopolitical context.”

In his lecture, given before the October 7^th 2023 events in Gaza, he discussed the challenging geopolitical situation the world is facing due to the war in Ukraine, which has had ripple effects, across the globe, causing spikes in the prices of energy and food. Borrell described this as “the most significant geopolitical event of the year and likely for years to come,” noting its impact on Europe’s and the world’s food and energy security. Little did he know, nor did anyone else, what would unfold in Gaza, otherwise, such a narrative would have changed, insofar as, the impact of the Gaza war on international law and the global system continues to be, as we write, profoundly disheartening.

The Western smile no longer holds its allure, and international relations theorists are now gripped by fear and panic as they witness the erosion of their intellectual dominance. Their schools are increasingly being confined to their societies as many of them have indulged in interpretations that contradict the fundamentals of objectivity, causality, and especially humanitarian international rules.

The true nature of the Western interests seems to have unfolded as a main reason for the loss of credibility the multilateral system, particularly with regards to international peace and security, and has been exposed to all as a facade. This refers to the policy of double standards, where the West defends one set of principles in the Ukrainian case and the opposite in the Israeli-Palestinian scenario.

The bloodshed we see in various parts of the world could have been mitigated if not for the presence of a weakened international organization like the United Nations, which its founders intended to be a global beacon of peace with the legitimacy to intervene based on precise rules to maintain peace and security everywhere.

However, the reality is far from such an ideal. The nature of the permanent members of the Security Council, their strategic contradictions, and enduring immediate interests turn the global stage into a farcical carnival with permanent powers that possess the right to veto and have agreed never to agree. Even on the rare occasions, they do agree, their resolutions remain ineffectual, mere ink on paper.

These events and others are prompting many world regions to form new alliances, engage in unconventional relationships, and adopt bold policies that upset the foreign policies of many Western powers, particularly on the African continent with its population of 1.4 billion people, representing 15% of the world’s population. Projections indicate that by 2050, the continent will host a quarter of the global population, rising to a third by 2075. Following the military coup in Niger, for instance, France’s influence has begun to wane, and along with the United States, they have started to acknowledge the significant implications of Russia’s strengthening presence in Africa. They are also becoming wary of the ramifications of China’s construction of new Silk Roads.

Russia is forging military partnerships with many African nations, including Cameroon, Ethiopia, South Africa, and even Mali, which has welcomed elements of the “Wagner Group” into its territory. Russia’s strategies often rely on means that Western countries do not employ in the region.

China operates across Africa and in many parts of the world with unprecedented silence and intelligence; it has a long-term strategic vision through the creation of new Silk Roads. It has convinced many African nations to join this modern economic and trade route and is daily altering Africa’s economic landscape.

Shifts are occurring among the civil, military, political, and economic elites in numerous countries, particularly in Africa, Asia, and the Arab states. Former colonial powers have failed to grasp that the current leaders, educated globally and holding different intellectual beliefs from those who lived through the colonial era and took power post-independence, maintain their intellectual sovereignty within the sovereignty of their states. Every nation, blessed with resources and capabilities, will inevitably seek partnerships based on mutual respect, equality, and balance, regardless of how long it takes. These elites view the unfolding dynamics of the global system, crafted according to the whims of major actors imposing standards on others they do not apply to themselves, with legitimate astonishment. This astonishment compelled these elites to chart a different path for their nations, shaping policies and forming South-South alliances that span continents. These alliances are set to grow in strength and influence as time progresses.

The Complexities of International Security Environment & Strategy Formulation

The current international security environment is characterized by volatility, uncertainty, complexity, and ambiguity, more so than ever before. These characteristics often leave strategic experts confused when it comes to diagnosing the present and anticipating the future. However, incidents like the one involving French President Emmanuel Macron can provide valuable insight.

Before the outbreak of war in Ukraine, Macron made a statement about the “brain death” of NATO, which sparked strong reactions from his allies. German Chancellor Angela Merkel criticized the ruling as “inappropriate,” while Moscow welcomed it as an “accurate definition of the current reality of NATO.” Donald Trump also criticized the statements, calling them “insulting” and “extremely dangerous.”

At that time, Macron believed that the Americans could not be relied upon to guarantee European security, and felt that Europe needed to take defense into its own hands. However, after the Russian intervention in Ukraine, the French President changed his stance and all European countries rushed to American protection under NATO.

Macron’s earlier statements were seen as unstrategic and unwise, and the consequences of the war in Ukraine led to other countries changing their defense policies, such as Germany. Sweden and Finland also joined the alliance after decades of military non-alignment.

Sweden became the 32^nd member of NATO after raising its flag at the alliance’s headquarters in Brussels. The decision came after challenging negotiations with some alliance members, particularly Turkey and Hungary, and after more than two centuries of neutrality and non-alignment. Sweden has not been involved in a war since its conflict with Norway in 1814, and during the Cold War, it preferred to remain peaceful and stay away from any military alliance against the Soviet Union.

Similarly, Finland has joined the NATO alliance. This Scandinavian country shares a 1,300-kilometre border with Russia, making this move a significant turning point for Finland, which had previously maintained a policy of military non-alignment, on the international scene.

Finland was also under the control of its neighbor for a century until the Russian Revolution in 1917. Russia has attacked Finland twice, in (1939-1940) and (1941-1944), and Finland lost both times. Following the end of World War II, Finland adopted a policy of neutrality, which later evolved into the principle of military non-alignment following the collapse of the Soviet Union.

This policy was always seen as a protection against Russia, due to the fear of a new conflict with its neighbor. However, with the war in Ukraine, new war strategies were coined and the alliance began to be seen as a semi-reliable security source.

The total length of the border between Russia and the defense alliance will almost double. Stockholm and Helsinki will benefit from the protection provided by Article 5 of the NATO Charter, which states that if a member state is attacked, other states will consider it an attack against all members and will take measures to provide assistance.

No one can accurately predict what might happen in the future, especially with the possibility of a change in the administration of the United States. However, the role of the strategist is to understand the strategic environment, and build a strategy that is consistent with it. The strategist should exercise influence to control volatility, manage concerns, simplify complexities, and uncover ambiguity.

About the New African Order

Several global superpowers are hastening to rectify their late arrival in Africa, enhancing their presence or reclaiming their influence after others overshadowed them. A prime example of this is the U.S.-African Summit held in Washington in December 2022. The Summit witnessed the participation of approximately 50 African leaders. Additionally, French President Emmanuel Macron embarked on an African tour starting in Gabon, in March 2023, attending the “One Forest Summit” dedicated to the conservation of the Congo River Basin’s forests.

Besides, this tour also took him to Angola, the Republic of Congo (Brazzaville), and the Democratic Republic of the Congo. Furthermore, the city of St. Petersburg hosted a Russian-African Summit in July 2023, with 49 out of 54 African countries participating.

For the United States, the race is on to catch up with foreign investors and counteract the growing influence of China and Russia in Africa.Africa is projected to be the backdrop where many future historical events unfold. The U.S.-African Summit is a belated acknowledgment of this fact. During the Summit, the American President expressed support for granting the African Union permanent membership in the G20 and he committed to a whopping $55 billion investment in Africa over the next three years. This investment targets green energy, healthcare workforce training, and internet infrastructure upgrades.

France, on the other hand, is battling to regain its historical foothold in Africa from other players like Russia and China. The level of anti-Paris sentiment in Africa has intensified so much that French foreign policymakers have begun adopting terms such as “humility” and “responsibility” in their discourse on Africa. This can be seen as an acknowledgment of the significant missteps in French strategies in the region since those nations gained independence.

The recent military coup in Niger has only compounded the imminent threat of France losing its stature in Africa, especially considering Niger’s significance to France. Following their withdrawal from Mali, Niger has become the main base for French forces combating extremism in the region. While Niger might not possess the commercial or geopolitical weight that other countries do, it stands as the West’s, particularly France’s, last trusted ally in Africa.

This geopolitical jostling for dominance and influence in Africa underscores the continent’s rising importance on the world stage. The 21^st century will be significantly shaped by the events and developments in Africa, and global superpowers are keenly aware of this reality.

Both the United States and France are keenly aware of Russia’s expanding presence in Africa. From military partnerships with nations such as Cameroon, Ethiopia, South Africa, and Mali (where the infamous “Wagner” group elements have been ushered in), to the unorthodox methods seldom seen from Western nations, Russia is recalibrating its African strategy. This includes deploying mercenaries, bartering weapons for natural resources, and using wheat as an instrument of foreign policy.

In a recent Summit in St. Petersburg, Russian President Vladimir Putin pledged to supply grain shipments to six African countries (Burkina Faso, Zimbabwe, Mali, Somalia, Central African Republic, and Eritrea) over the forthcoming months. This move comes amid concerns about the suspension of a grain export agreement in the Black Sea region involving Ukraine.

Echoing the American president’s sentiments at the U.S.-Africa Summit, Putin promised African leaders that the African Union would gain full membership in the G20, comprising most of the world’s largest economies. Additionally, a healthcare assistance program worth 1.2 billion rubles was announced for African nations, coupled with Moscow’s commitment to helping the continent develop its energy sector.

China, meanwhile, operates in Africa with an uncanny blend of discretion and strategic insight. Its long-term vision materializes in the creation of new Silk Roads. By successfully persuading many African nations to embrace this modern trade and economic corridor, China is reshaping Africa’s economic landscape at every level.

The major industrialized nations, especially France (a former colonial power), have struggled to grasp the shifts within Africa’s civil, military, political, and economic elites. They have overlooked a new generation of African professionals – doctors, engineers, bankers, professors, and military officers – who have studied worldwide and possess intellectual backgrounds distinct from those who lived through colonial times and forged post-independence positions.

These Western powers fail to recognize that in a world marked by ambiguity, suspicion, volatility, and uncertainty, Africa’s emerging elite seeks equitable partnerships, balanced relations, and non-patronizing connections without moralizing undertones.

China’s success in Africa can be attributed to its win-win strategy. This approach stands in stark contrast to former colonial powers like France. Various African countries are now distancing themselves from French language and culture, long considered by the Élysée Palace as its influence locomotive for over a century. In a historic move, Mali abolished French as its official language through a constitutional amendment. Furthermore, many families from the Maghreb region no longer send their children to study in France, opting instead for English-speaking countries like the United States, the United Kingdom, Canada, Germany, and Switzerland. These shifts indicate a new alliance map, with Africa establishing new operational norms and international partnerships, based on mutual benefit. The former colonial powers may find themselves sidelined in favor of others who have astutely understood the emerging African order.

Alliance of Civilizations or Dialogue for Coexistence

The concept of dialogue between civilizations and cultures has become one of the most discussed concepts and topics in recent years because of the endless clouds of darkness that blacken our era of political conflicts and social, religious and cultural crises.

Taking it from definitions far beyond its well-known lexical connotation, reliance on it has also heightened the need to refer to it as a method for solving regional and international problems, rapprochement between peoples, reforming crooked policies and ideas, and adhering to goals that promote human values and principles that are the common denominator among all civilizations and cultures.

We all dream of building a single human family and a common community home, tolerance, alliance, and beauty, but reality confirms that three obstacles make the principles of peaceful coexistence difficult:

Some social disparities and crises make the safe life of millions of people something distant.

Man-made policies that make the present and future industries fraught with dangers and woes and make societies share many fears. Cognitive precedents that frame minds and direct reality and human behavior. The area must, therefore, be opened for exploration, purification, and rearrangement.

Several examples can be introduced to illustrate these aspects.

Many people clandestinely migrate out of necessity in search of a better life or to escape the scourge of war and sedition; there are also painful facts and terrifying figures provided by the recent United Nations reports regarding the movement of clandestine migrants and refugees across the Mediterranean.

These figures indicate a tragic increase in the number of deaths, which exceeded 130 percent compared to previous years, as the Mediterranean waters became a graveyard for migrants coming from Africa, the Arab countries, and the Middle East.

The problem of migration is intractable as it overlaps the factors of sovereignty, economy, integration, political asylum, and elections. Among its results is the rise of nationalism in European countries, which has emerged in France, Italy, Belgium, the Netherlands, Denmark, and Central European countries, without forgetting the deterrent laws that await immigrants, and the Islamophobia that has begun to affect millions of Muslims.

In addition, the ideological and cultural factors also overwhelm some in the interpretation of certain policies; we would do well to remember that the Russian President interpreted the war in Ukraine as aimed at “liberating Ukraine” from “neo-Nazis, their supporters, and their ideology.”

It is no surprise that the determination given to the ideological and cultural factor contributes to a destructive war mechanism that obscures the main causes of tensions that exist today on all continents, and therefore often supports a unilateral distribution of responsibilities. The “Diseases” of the other’s culture are sufficient to explain the difficulties of living with it.

There are also man-made policies that led to human activities causing climate disasters that humanity has never known formerly. The heat that the United States, Europe, and many Arab countries are experiencing has never been known to humanity in recorded history. Average temperatures will rise by 1.5 degrees Celsius, with extreme heat waves recurring every 10 years due to global warming. Droughts and heavy rainfall will also become more frequent.

With the war in Ukraine, peaceful values, the value of some wheat, gas, and oil-exporting countries, and the value of some geographical areas, such as the Black Sea, which is a major artery for the movement of goods at the crossroads of Europe and Asia, have become apparent to the world, and especially to Europeans.

Furthermore, the Swedish police allowing an extremist in the Swedish capital Stockholm on the first day of Eid al-Adha, to tear up a copy of the Noble Qur’an and set it on fire, can only be condemned.

I searched into the weeds of international human rights declarations for grounds that could give the right to Swedish jurists to allow this crime under the pretext of freedom of expression, but I did not find anything.

Rather, it is an abuse — among other things — of the international norm package in the field of human rights and public freedoms; every observer can understand that such practices of a formal and encouraging nature of religious hatred can only serve the agendas of extremism and terrorism.

International theories were also formed about conflicts and civilizations, and schools were formed, especially in the United States, for scientifically rooting these concepts.

Unfortunately, however, many theorists have gone astray when they referred to some civilizations as the antithesis of civilized civilizations and that they carry within them viruses that undermine issues of coexistence between nations and peoples.

Through these examples, we understand that the world is suffering from multiple difficult crises and civilized dialogue is an absolute necessity that should not only include the issue of religions and cultures, as is common for some, but also it should deal with political, economic, social, environmental, and intellectual fields. It can only be universal and inclusive to systematize human diversity in all its forms and interests.

We must carry a correct view of the present, the future, and creativity that creates peace. If a man could only light the candle without being aware of the alternative, he would not be guided to light bulbs and the entry of electricity into all aspects of life. Therefore, I say that the global dialogue must be smart and build on the common denominators that bring people together, look for positive and fruitful alternatives to all the crises we have spoken of so that common concepts can be systematized, shared goals unified, and common human destiny safeguarded in a world where the United Nations Population Division estimates that its population has crossed 8 billion.

Crossing this symbolic threshold is an opportunity to celebrate diversity and development, taking into account humanity’s shared responsibility to live in prosperity, security, and peace.

The Labyrinth of the Lost

The latest book of Amin Maalouf, the Lebanese author and Permanent Secretary of the French Academy, which was recently published by the prestigious French publishing house, Edition Grasset, is a must-read. The Labyrinth of the Lost: The West and Its Enemies examines the current manifestation of the struggle between the West and its opponents throughout history.

It goes over the courses taken by four great historical powers: the Meiji era of Japan, which has now blown the entire world away with its industrial development; Soviet Russia, which had posed a grave threat to the West for three-quarters of a century before it collapsed; China, which has become the primary challenger of the West’s supremacy in this 21^st century through its developments, demographic weight, and rival ideology; and finally the United States of America, which has stood up to the opponents who challenged it and became the globe’s police force and planet Earth’s leading superpower.

In this context, Amin Maalouf is right to ask: “Is the West really in decline?” He answers this question at the outset: yes. This descent is real, and it sometimes takes the form of political and moral bankruptcy.

However, those fighting the West and challenging its supremacy, for good or bad reasons, are facing even more perilous failings. Neither the Westerners nor their rivals have the capacity, today, to lead humanity out of the labyrinth in which it finds itself. Thus, it is crucial that we rethink the frameworks and tracks governing and managing our world today, if we are to ensure a safe future, a world without cold or hot wars, and endless conflicts for hegemony.

Maalouf introduces and concludes his book with the claim that we are caught in a twisted monster. He explains that the notion that humanity must be led by a hegemonic power, a lesser evil that should not subjugate others, is misguided. No one deserves to occupy this position, not China, not the United States, Russia, India, England, Germany, France, nor even a unified Europe. Any of these powers, without exception, would become arrogant, predatory, tyrannical, and despised if they found themselves capable of anything, regardless of the righteousness of their principles. This is the great lesson that history offers us, and accepting it would be the foundation for satisfactory solutions.

We all hope so. In my view, however, the problem is way more significant. The global order has, first of all, become marked by ambiguity, uncertainty, and unpredictability. Secondly, the number of influential actors is constantly rising. Looking into this question from the perspective of the sociology of international relations leads us to conclude that the logic of the old order resembled that of a complex three-dimensional chess game. On the upper board was the largely unipolar military power, and the United States has maintained this superiority. To date, the United States remains the sole country that can send deterrent forces to various regions of the world.

On the middle board, economic power was multipolar for over a decade, and the main players were the United States, Europe, Japan, and China, along with others of increasing importance. On the lower board, transnational relations; this encompasses non-state actors, such as bankers transferring money electronically, terrorists, hackers threatening cybersecurity, and global challenges like pandemics, climate change, and so on.

Amin Maalouf’s theory leads us to another idea he developed in a previous book “Adrift: How Our World Lost Its Way.” In his view, there are emerging or nascent nations now becoming powerful on the international scene, which has become shaped by an arms race, and they are imposing themselves on everyone; and we face collective climate, environmental, and health threats that loom over the planet. Thus, he explains, “we can only confront them through universal solidarity, which we must pursue because it is the only way to avoid the peril they would create.”

At the same time, the author reinforces his thesis by highlighting the major shifts underway on the international stage and their profound implications for civilizations. The United States’ position on the international stage is changing radically, it is losing its moral legitimacy. In Europe, which had, in the past, boasted of its human and moral principles to its citizens, the author believes that policies antithetical to those principles are being adopted. Meanwhile, the Arab and Islamic world is caught in a deepening crisis.

Nonetheless, a deep dive into the history of international relations demonstrates that it has always had contradictions. Indeed, they were more pronounced at times. This leads us to conclude that civilizations will endure so long as economic resources, political systems, ethical traditions, and the pursuit of science and arts (the component parts of civilization) remain.

However, the struggle to shape the world order will remain heated, and the influence of the United States will decline relative to the past, as will its stature. Other countries such as China will rise in prominence, but they will not become as hegemonic as the US has been for decades. Rather, these countries will become economically and industrially influential, and they will lead non-Western military alliances.

These players have understood globalization, and they have astutely and successfully embraced its rules. For instance, they offer any country they deal with commercially that one nation’s economic success does not necessarily imply the failure of the other. They have gone beyond the friend-enemy dichotomy and opted for a “win-win” framework.

UN Resolution on Countering Hate Speech

In July 2023, the UN General Assembly adopted a resolution, against the religious hate speech following the latest Holy Quran – burning incidents.

The 193 members of the General Assembly unanimously adopted “Resolution A/77/L.89” submitted by Morocco condemning such incidents.

This historic resolution takes the position of “Strongly deploring all acts of violence against persons on the basis of their religion or belief, as well as any such acts directed against their religious symbols, holy books, homes, businesses, properties, schools, cultural centers or places of worship, as well as all attacks on and in religious places, sites and shrines in violation of international law.”

This historic resolution came in a world shrouded in seemingly infinite darkness, invading societies beset by political conflicts, social, religious, and cultural crises. All those factors are surrounded by a global context of absurd and rejected behaviors. Those behaviors restrict and disturb all religious norms, and origins, along with mutual humanitarian principles. In addition, they are against all international community codes as they encourage hate speech against Muslims and Islam.

The incident of burning the Holy Quran that took place in Copenhagen, Denmark, and followed by the offensive, hate-motivating actions in Stockholm, Sweden, are only serving terrorism. The continuity of those actions will not lead to anything except creating a shelter for religious and cultural conflict acceptors. In addition, they will hinder the process of establishing a unified humanitarian family and a strong community.

During the presentation of this resolution before the General Assembly, the intervention of the Ambassador, Permanent Representative of Morocco to the United Nations, Mr. Omar Hilale, a distinguished diplomat whom I am honored to know, was noteworthy. He is a principled man with a profound understanding and unwavering commitment to his values and patriotism.

Hilale said that the latest resolution is a continuation of the historical resolution (73/328) that was adopted by the UN General Assembly in 2019, and the resolution (75/309) of June 18^th, 2021, 2021 that declared the International Day for Countering Hate Speech.

In this context, we remember His Majesty King Mohamed VI’s Royal Message at the opening of the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations 9^th Global Forum in November 2022, in Fes-Morocco, which was attended by the UN Secretary-General.

His Majesty warned: “Never before has our civilization been so exposed; never before has ‘living together’ come under such a threat, on a daily basis; rarely has the Other been perceived with such a level of suspicion, or used to stir up fear and foment hatred; radical positions are permeating the debate and cancelling out moderate voices; religions are too often manipulated, when they are not simply stigmatized; Populism is rocking societies and inventing questions without answering them, except to brandish migration as a scarecrow or an electoral weapon, and to turn migrants into scapegoats.”

This defining and correct description asserts the necessity of establishing strong, bold, society-constructive initiatives that are tolerance supporting and not destructive and dividing. In addition, those initiatives should enhance the collective commitment to support the culture of peace, aestheticism, acceptance, love, and good for humankind.

This resolution is credited for noting with deep concerns the increase in discrimination, intolerance, and violence against several religions, particularly acts motivated by Islamophobia, anti-Semitism, and Christianophobia, as well as acts of violence motivated by discrimination against people of religious minorities.

During his presentation of the Moroccan draft, Hilale mentioned three procedures for multi-party commitment for countering hate speech. It included the necessity of setting a unified and credible definition for hate speech which would help in resisting it based on the principles of international law, alongside, organizing a global governmental conference in 2025 for countering hate speech.

He also pointed out the necessity of inviting all member states and social media corporations to support effective criteria to restrict hate speech, and calling for supporting users with working report options for countering the hate speech.

In a nutshell, the process of approving the resolution witnessed various attempts by the European Union to remove any sentences related to invoking the international law for any acts against religious books, and symbols. It would weaken the impact of the resolution, but all those European adjustments were rejected by the majority of members, thanks to the determination of Hilale.

It led to the approval of the resolution by the European Union to be on the same page with the rest of the UN General Assembly members.

Did Martin Luther King, Jr.’s Dream Come True?

In August 2023, thousands of Americans flocked to commemorate the 60^th anniversary of the March on Washington for Freedom and Jobs, led by civil rights leader Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr. and his iconic speech “I Have a Dream.”

At the same place, the Lincoln Memorial, crowds gathered to remember King’s struggle, chanting slogans against hatred and racial discrimination, considering the day, when King delivered his speech to be a turning point in the history of the civil rights movement and human rights.

Americans still remember the message of Dr. King, even after all this time. They did not remember other people who fought against racism, nor black statesmen who reached the highest levels of responsibility, such as President Obama. Instead, they remembered a brilliant man who gave people in their time something to believe in.

On August 28, 1963, 250,000 people from all over the United States gathered in the National Mall in Washington, D.C. to hear Dr. King’s “I Have a Dream” speech. There was no internet at the time, and Dr. King’s followers did not send out 250,000 invitations. Instead, this gifted man was able to rally all of these people to a specific place and time because he was inspiring and trusted by everyone.

Sixty years ago, Reverend King delivered his famous “I Have a Dream” speech, in which he expressed his desire to see a bright future where blacks and whites would coexist freely and equally. His speech was a rallying cry that accompanied the struggle of African Americans for their rights during the turbulent sixties, which were marked by the Vietnam War, the assassinations of John F. Kennedy and Martin Luther King himself in April 1968.

Reverend King was a gifted orator. He spoke about the ideas he believed in in a clear and concise way, using carefully chosen words that hit the nail on the head: “I have a dream… I have a dream… I have a dream.” He made others say to themselves: “We believe… We believe… We believe.”

In his speech, Dr. King said: “There are two types of laws: just laws and unjust laws. A just law is a man-made code that squares with the moral law or the law of God. An unjust law is a code that is out of harmony with the moral law. … Any law that uplifts human personality is just. Any law that degrades human personality is unjust. All segregation statutes are unjust, because segregation distorts the soul and damages the personality.”

His words were a summary of the civil rights that were brought by all international declarations in the field of human rights. They addressed whites and blacks alike. And whoever attended his speech or heard it later could not help but find in it ideas that he or she must believe in, so it was a means of reminding and awakening instincts. He delivered a “I Have a Dream” speech, not a “I Have a Plan” speech.

People heard King’s words and they touched their hearts. The audience adopted them and loved them because they believed in them, and they passed them on to everyone, so they became national.

But did King’s dream come true? No! His dream is still out of reach, even after sixty years since his speech. It is enough to point to a report published by Citigroup a while ago to see how this discrimination between whites and blacks is still rooted in American society, and how racist policies have become an obstacle to the growth of the American economy, wasting trillions of dollars in the last two decades. Previous studies published by McKinsey Consulting have shown that “the African American earns a million dollars less than the white citizen over his lifetime.” Citigroup economists, after studying data from the Federal Reserve and the Census Bureau, noted that wage gaps “have not narrowed since the early 2000s.” The report also found that the failure of policies to combat discrimination in the workplace, over the past 20 years, has resulted in the loss of “a very large amount of $2.7 trillion that could have been added to GDP if there were no wage gaps.” I am sure that this is a lot of money that could have been, in part, used to stimulate consumption or to invest in businesses or real estate.

Economists at this banking group regret that “the United States is deprived from achieving a 0.2 percent increase in the current growth rate due to discriminatory income distribution policies.”

One of the main components of American wealth comes from the value of their homes. In this regard, discrimination is very blatant. If banks are reluctant to grant mortgage loans, they are even more cautious in financing business projects and creating companies for ethnic minorities.

The American Bank estimates that if financial institutions had “dealt fairly and equitably” with African American entrepreneurs who came to ask for money to start their businesses, “this could have led to the generation of $13 trillion in additional revenue for the US economy and the creation of about 6 million jobs over the past 20 years.”

In United States, we often see massive protests sparked by the death of some African Americans, such as the death of George Floyd, the unarmed citizen who died of asphyxiation under the knee of a white police officer during his arrest in Minneapolis. This always brings up the issue of racism that is deeply rooted in the country and revives the sensitive debate about the country’s legacy of slavery, which is embodied in monuments that glorify the Confederate Army and are demanded by many to be removed.

When you follow such events and when you read such reports prepared by banks and serious institutions, you come to the conclusion that racism is something that is deeply rooted in American society and that these disparities based on race and color exist and will be suffered by several generations.

Migration Trends Across the Mediterranean & the Bitter Reality

The United Nations indicates that there are more than 258 million migrants around the world, which represents 3.4 percent of the world’s total population, and their financial remittances represent about $450 billion, which is about 9 percent of the global gross product. The issue of migration comprises one of the largest areas of concern to both the private and public interests. Public policies are drawn to it, and huge budgets are spent on this file. Unfortunately, some international waters, such as the Mediterranean, have become a graveyard for hundreds of migrants who are transported by death boats from the southern bank to the northern Mediterranean, fleeing poverty or wars and in search of a decent life.

There are bitter facts and frightening numbers provided from time to time by recent United Nations reports regarding the movement of illegal migrants and refugees across the Mediterranean. All of these numbers suggest a tragic increase in the number of deaths, meaning that Mediterranean waters constitute a real cemetery for immigrants coming from Africa, Arab countries, and the Middle East. Migrants who attempt to cross the Mediterranean Sea through countries such as Libya are exposed to various methods of violence, such as kidnapping, torture, and extortion.

To make matters worse, European countries are putting in place a series of endless laws and various strict measures to prevent migrants from arriving in Europe or to expel them, if they ever make it there. Italy adopted a law early February 2023 that restricts the work of humanitarian rescue ships by assisting dilapidated migrant boats in the Mediterranean. The EU countries have begun to use drones, underwater surveillance devices, three-dimensional radars, and advanced sensors to raise the level of security on their external borders, but all of this makes the border areas more dangerous for people. It also exacerbates violence and gives border guards great power.

Many European countries are also trying to develop artificial intelligence (AI) for arrests of illegal migrants on their borders; however, international experts warn that this approach poses the risk of violating international humanitarian laws, such as violating private life, and could result in malfunctions in algorithms and others, in addition to “a lack of clarity on the level of responsibility.” It is also capable of dramatically increasing risks to security and safety, violating civil rights, sowing suspicion and leading to the loss of confidence among the public, not to mention spreading of misleading news that may cause all kinds of strife.

The biggest issue today is that European countries do not agree on mechanisms to rescue migrants across the sea and ensure their arrival on land. We know that it is necessary to rescue people in danger at sea without delay. This is a basic rule taught to students of international maritime law. But the concern of every country is to militarize its borders, whether on land or at sea, to prevent the arrival of illegal immigrants. Every country is creative in setting strict laws and procedures to stop the advance of unwanted immigrants … and I say “undesirables” here because when some areas experience a shortage of competencies, the immigrants here become desirable, as is the case with the health sector.

For example, there is a trend in the French government that aims to facilitate the arrival of foreign doctors by granting them a residence card. This measure increases the fears of the Maghreb and Francophone African countries, which supply French hospitals with workers in the health sector, of a widespread “plunder” of their educated and skilled class in this sector. These countries invested seven to ten years on health workers in universities and hospitals in teaching and training to eventually become vulnerable to the “desired” migration. In the United Kingdom, one in every three doctors working in public hospitals is a foreign doctor, most of whom come from India, Egypt and Nigeria.

Logic requires that countries in the northern Mediterranean adopt mechanisms that contribute to the humanization of migration by facilitating the transfer of information, assimilating migrants and exchanging experiences, reducing the negative factors that prevent citizens from living decently in their countries of origin, and creating conditions that enable all migrants to enrich societies through their human and economic and social capabilities, and integrating them to drive development at the local, national, regional and global levels.

But the measures these countries are taking to manage migration, control the flows of asylum seekers, limit the arrival of “unwanted” migrants, and encourage those who are desired to ensure the continuation of their health systems or engineering and research capabilities that suffer from structural problems. It is a very serious issue and undermines the humanizing immigration that International conventions call for. Immigration must be a means; to achieve development in the countries of the South and not a reason to deplete their capabilities … such measures will lead to a mass migration of doctors, pharmacists, engineers, and prominent professors from the southern Mediterranean countries; to reduce the opportunities of the residents of some Maghreb countries and Sub-Saharan Africa to obtain treatment, and to tiptoe a formed and educated elite that these countries need in development processes.

Youth’s Call for Investment in The Future

The Chair of the Alliance of Civilizations, that I have the honor to preside, and which was established in cooperation with the United Nations Alliance of Civilizations, organized a study day at the headquarters of the Moroccan Parliament in February 2024. It brought together students from more than thirty countries in The First African and Euro-Mediterranean Youth Summit on the topic of “Euro-Mediterranean and Transatlantic Partnership: Meeting Tomorrow’s Challenges Together.” This meeting was held in parallel with the 8^th Summit of Speakers of Parliaments and the 17^th Session of the Union for the Mediterranean Parliamentarians. It was an opportunity for these young people to read the “Call for Investment in the Future” that they drafted and to ask the statesmen and parliamentarians present
to adopt it.

The idea for this meeting came from our conviction that Africa and the Euro-Mediterranean region need these young people. They are the leaders of the future, and they have ideas and visions that no one else has. We must listen to the voices of the youth and give them the opportunity to speak with decision-makers in a world that is characterized by volatility, ambiguity, uncertainty and unpredictability.

These young people surprised the audience when they addressed topics to which the experts thought they alone had the keys. They diagnosed the problems and gave solutions that are superior to what is currently being proposed, thereby challenging established norms. If they are crystallized into public policies, they will bring about change in the economic and development fields.

It suffices to say that these young people gave lessons to the audience in the field of international relations and political science when they emphasized that Africa has changed and that it does not need those who dictate rules and orders to it, but rather those who cooperate with it in a framework of parity and win-win.

In this meeting, I gave examples from the Chinese and Moroccan experiences. China was able to understand globalization and integrate into its structures with intelligence and success. The state is not a “preaching” state that seeks to export its historical model, as Western countries such as the United States and France do.

These countries seek to export the Western model, claiming that no success can be achieved without adopting their intellectual, social, cultural, economic, and political model. For example, China, as long as its territory and sovereign interests are not harmed, has always based its foreign policy on non-interference and working quietly without stirring up problems. At the same time, it has been highly successful in achieving economic revolution and gaining dominance in the economic field based on rules that many Western countries have yet to understand.

One of these rules is the certainty that any economic success achieved by a country does not necessarily mean the failure of another country within a zero sum  framework.

This explains the secret of China’s success, and the success of other countries such as Morocco, which was able to understand the foundations on which alliances, the new world order, and the rules of globalization should be based.

The future of international relations no longer lies exclusively in the relative partnership of “North-South,” but also in the promising and rich prospects of “South-South” cooperation. All the industrial and commercial agreements, which exceed a thousand, between Morocco and the countries of the African continent are based on a new concept of cooperation based on a partnership that is profitable for all.

This perspective is also what characterizes Morocco’s relationship with the European Union and the Arab countries.

In this regard, the students referred to the Nigeria-Morocco gas pipeline project as a pioneering one that will pass through a number of sub-Saharan countries. It is part of the Kingdom’s ongoing efforts for a prosperous Africa, within the framework of pioneering initiatives that provide unprecedented opportunities to promote regional integration and cooperation, and the structural transformation of the economies of the region.

The students also praised the Atlantic-African projects, as they will provide a safe path for joint economic takeoff and encourage the dynamics of development and regional integration based on universal values such as solidarity, mutual support, and openness in order to achieve everything that the African continent awaits. They also considered facilitating access for the Sahel countries to the Atlantic Ocean to be a wise strategy that has the necessary capabilities to liberate the enormous potential of the Sahel partners, and to accelerate growth and sustainable and inclusive development of the economies of the region.

These young people called for the need to create a Marshall Plan in Africa to invest in human capital, encourage scientific research and innovation, engage in the knowledge and communication economy and society, and revitalize the scientific and technical research system in Africa in cooperation with the Euro-Mediterranean space.

This will inevitably allow for a break with poverty, terrorism, and illegal immigration, which cannot be stopped by any security policies, but only through pioneering development policies in the Euro-Mediterranean region and in Africa that achieve a safe life for all, shared prosperity, and guarantee the future of young people.

In order to mobilize and raise the awareness of various actors and specialists, these young people addressed other topics such as the negative effects of climate change, which have direct consequences particularly on agriculture, river navigation, and food security, and the high poverty rate, especially in African countries.

They also talked about sustainable development models, systemic thinking and climate change, the local circular economy and regional economic integration, transport and sustainability, African green innovation, energy ethics, food sovereignty and other topics.

In my guidance for the outcomes of this summit and these meetings, I said that in addition to the necessity of making the voices of these young people heard, they must also be involved in the practice of responsibilities.

This approach is both a means and an end. It is a means because it allows members of society, especially young people, to learn about the mechanisms of public policy practice and how to participate effectively in communities, which contributes to building their personalities and culture more and more, and develops their behavior patterns.

It is also an end, because it works to instill in young people a number of positive attitudes, corrects negative attitudes, strengthens their loyalty and belonging to their communities, and increases their ability to think objectively, analyze and criticize constructively, and thus helps them to acquire many new skills and experiences that ultimately serve the development of their countries.

Davos Forum & Rebuilding Trust

The World Economic Forum, which is organized in the snow-covered city of Davos, and which has met annually for more than half a century, is a forum for dialogue and exchange of views on common global challenges. More than 300 public figures participated in 2024, including more than 60 heads of state and government. It also brought together representatives from various sectors.

More than 1,600 business leaders participated in the conference, including 800 senior CEOs, and were joined by 150 global innovators and technology pioneers who are at the forefront of manufacturing industries. They discussed several topics, including the topic of artificial intelligence, which promises a real revolution and multiple uses.

However, experts warn that it also poses risks such as violating private life, defects in algorithms, and others that require regulating this sector, but this is difficult to do in light of the rapid development of these technologies. Dozens of leading countries in the field of artificial intelligence are trying to establish regulations for the development of artificial intelligence and its use in several fields, including the military field, warning of “unwanted consequences,” such as concerns related to “the issue of human involvement,” in addition to the “lack of clarity at the level of responsibility.”

This year’s meetings were organized in a world characterized by the four characteristics of volatility, ambiguity, uncertainty and unpredictability. There is a serious and unprecedented defect in the international system, and volcanic clouds fill its atmosphere, and its darkness is today a set of proverbs in the east and west of the earth, and its negatives have begun to eat away at its roots, and there is a state of worrying anticipation, and anticipation in the field of international relations often creates political confusion and confusion in priorities, and turmoil in multilateral relations, and the restriction of a realistic view and movement … and anticipation creates chaos and insecurity, and generates situations of confusion and ambiguity, not to mention that it sometimes generates improvisation in analysis and taking appropriate decisions.

That is why the organizers of the Davos Forum tried to hold the meetings under the slogan “rebuilding Trust.” This trust is the main rule not only in building the global system, but also in building societies and nations economically and politically. Do not think that I am talking here about our Arab societies, but rather about Western societies whose citizens no longer trust the parties or the representative democracy they used to know. If you take the example of the French, and many other Westerners, they no longer have trust, not only in the traditional parties of the right and left, but in all parties, and this has more than a hundred implications in the sociology of political science with regard to the general political sphere, party ideology, and political action. The issue of trust between the ruler and the ruled, public policies, and so on.

The message that reached everyone is that the impatience of the middle and poor classes in democratic industrial societies may cause an earthquake that will make it difficult to find solutions. Neither the European nor the global economic situation can satisfy the desires of large segments of societies.

Moreover, with the loss of the legitimacy of the parties and their representatives, every solution or solutions that will be presented will be rejected. France, for example, is a country of institutions, and this explains that many of the protests that the town has witnessed for years did not cause a complete earthquake, but for how long? All the strategic and economic experts say that the country is suffering from a crisis of trust between the citizen and the state and that this stage of social and political unrest will have a severe impact on France, and even on many European countries, and French society will undergo a process of transformation with the cancellation of many of the democratic and economic gains it has accumulated through the centuries.

There are now two equations: the equation of social actors and the equation of political actors, but the problem is that all societal and political actors are neither in the correct societal nor political movement, and they are all drowned either in impossible demands or in the quagmire of circumstantial self-defense, and here is the great rub.

The issue of restoring trust also brings us to a question posed by economists: What should we do in the face of a school that continues to defend liberalism and another that defends protectionism? What impact will there be on investments in light of fears of instability? As we ask these two questions, we remember how countries like the United States transformed overnight from endless liberalism to interventionism and protectionism in order to preserve state institutions from collapse, which led to a change in international economic and financial mechanisms. For example, the financial crisis that the world experienced in 2008, which became an economic crisis, is not the first in history, but rather it is the first that can be considered global, and one of its causes was a lack of trust.

In the early winter of 2006, many of the poorest American families who were offered subprime mortgages found themselves unable to repay their debts. Banks began to confiscate properties, and owners burdened with debt in an atmosphere of lack of trust began to sell their properties before the banks confiscated them, which led to an imbalance between supply and demand in the real estate market and a decline in prices. Thus, banks and their “suicidal” speculators found themselves with confiscated and unsaleable housing, worthless investments and liquidity problems. At the beginning of September 2008, the mortgage crisis turned into a banking crisis.

The US financial system was on the verge of collapse in October 2008 due to lack of liquidity and lack of trust. American banks and insurance companies were saved by naturalization and the promise of non-existent public money, and private debt became public. The crisis crossed from the United States to reach European banks, which made all countries, without exception, ignore their liberal policies and impose protectionist rules to create the trust necessary to save their economies.

The End of the Kissinger Era and the Endurance of Political Realism

Henry Kissinger, a notable figure in the implementation and theory of political realism within the United States, was renowned for his extraordinary intelligence, geopolitical forecasting, diplomatic evasions, and extensive knowledge. He was often described as a ‘fox’ and a ‘wizard.’ His policies and diplomatic maneuvers influenced various international events, including those in Vietnam, the Soviet Union, and the Arab-Israeli conflict.

Kissinger’s prominence did not diminish when he ceased to be the chief diplomat after the Nixon and Ford administrations. On the contrary, he became an advisor, both officially and unofficially, to all subsequent American administrations, acting as one of their ambassadors and theorists in perpetuating American dominance and promoting its policies.

I had once invited him, along with Mr. David Rockefeller, to participate in one of the international symposiums on the Mediterranean region that I had organized more than a decade ago. Kissinger is a man who impresses you when he speaks, due to his vast knowledge and his boundless confidence, presented in an accessible style. This is because he has experienced the world of academia and mastered the art of lecturing and disseminating information to students. I believe that his academic and university background primarily enhanced his governmental and advisory positions.

He began his career as an academic, graduating from Harvard University. He joined its faculty, where he honed his intellectual and scientific personality. Starting in the early 1950s, he established the International Seminar at Harvard, bringing together dozens of prominent foreign personalities every summer to participate in training programs, meticulous lectures, and prolonged discussions. This enabled him to form a network of relationships that spanned continents.

He served as the Director of Harvard’s Program for Defense Studies and as a security consultant for various American agencies. In December 1968, he was appointed Assistant to President Richard Nixon for National Security Affairs. He later held the position of Chairman of the National Security Council between 1969 and 1975 and served as Secretary of State between 1973 and 1977. He was the first naturalized citizen to serve as Secretary of State and the first person to hold both positions. In 1982, he founded “Kissinger Associates,” a consulting firm whose expertise is sought after by numerous global institutions and countries.

His academic training and professorship, combined with his extraordinary intelligence—acknowledged by everyone who studied with him or was mentored by him—contributed to his roles in these positions, the renown of his consulting company, and his collection of works in the fields of strategy and international relations.

His political realism enabled him to institutionalize secret diplomacy and become a man of secret communication. His efforts resulted in the American opening to China and the normalization of relations between the two countries following his two secret trips in 1971, paving the way for Nixon’s visit in 1972. He believed that further isolating the Soviet Union was possible through integrating China into the international economy, rather than isolating it from the global system.

His political realism and policy of détente helped in reducing tensions between America and the Soviet Union and led to the signing of several arms reduction agreements. However, this political realism often placed the interests of America and global powers above democracy, international law, and human rights. He faced accusations of being a “war criminal” and calls for his trial increased due to his involvement in the wars in Vietnam and Cambodia, and his conspiracy in several Latin American countries in the 1970s with the Central Intelligence Agency (CIA) to overthrow Salvador Allende, the Marxist elected president of Chile, supporting military dictator Pinochet, backing the military coup in Argentina in 1976, and the invasion of East Timor in 1975. These issues and others are documented in the U.S. National Archives and recorded in Christopher Hitchens’ book The Trial of Henry Kissinger, published in 2011 (Ed. Saint-Simon).

Dr. Kissinger’s approach involved shuttle diplomacy in the Middle East to stop the October 6, 1973 war between the Arabs and Israel. However, it was not driven by a love of peace, but rather by a desire to defend and save Israel through material, logistical, and international support, and by enabling it to adjust the balance of power in its favor. He successfully convinced President Nixon and Defense Secretary James Schlesinger to establish an air bridge to supply Israel with weapons and equipment, and he prevented a Security Council session from declaring a ceasefire. According to his doctrine, as he wrote in his memoirs, he could not accept Israel’s defeat, even if it meant American intervention, even if it contravened the principles of international law. This doctrine explains what is happening today in the region and the astonishing policy of dual standards, which, even if not openly written in the alphabets of American political realism, is an integral part of it.

We recall that when the Bush Junior administration wanted to intervene in Iraq in 2003, most Western countries opposed it in the name of legal and international legitimacy and the philosophy that should guide countries in a military attack with unknown dimensions on a sovereign state. Dick Cheney, Donald Rumsfeld, and Colin Powell all made shuttle trips to European capitals (except Britain, which was supportive and allied with the White House) to convince their leaders, but to no avail.

This vast gap between the purely legal-philosophical doctrinal direction and the strategic direction, or in other words, between maintaining international legal legitimacy and eliminating Saddam Hussein’s regime and his people, tore apart the rules of understanding around the determinants of the world system led by the United States to the extent that Dick Cheney described Western Europe as “old Europe” in contrast to Eastern European countries that supported military intervention.

Through his words, Cheney meant that the predominance of French and Western legal and philosophical superstitions outweighed the priorities of the stage in international relations that impose dual standards and non-legal strategic realism with a semi-legal and semi-satisfactory cover. The American-British military intervention occurred despite French-Western refusal and legal obstacles at the United Nations, and the rest is known.

The Temptation of Power

In his latest and special book The Temptation of Power, published by Fayard, Ghassan Salame take us to a trip to the limitless world of conflicts and disputes in six chapters and a conclusion. The literary translation of the book’s title is The Temptation of Mars. He uses the reference of Mars as a symbol and the mythical god of power, and war in Greek and Roman mythology.

Regarding the subtitle of the book, it is War and Peace in the 21^st Century and refers to the iconic French philosopher and thinker Raymond Aron’s Peace and War: A Theory of International Relations. This book I consider to be a significant edition that all our students in universities should read in the fields of wars and peace.

Ghassan Salame is an experienced diplomat who bore responsibilities within the framework of the United Nations. Before having a UN-framed career, he was a university professor who had experience in teaching, writing, and discussing student dissertations. His popularity started in France in 1996 with headlining of a book with a group of authors, entitled: Democracy Without Democrats: Politics of Openness in the Arab-Islamic World.

At the University, he managed to strengthen and enhance himself and his time in Paris helped him to be in contact with international intellectual figures and create a diverse network of relationships.Lately, he was appointed a member of the Academy of the Kingdom of Morocco.

This background and career led him to produce a unique perspective in his book because it combines the academic background of the author and his experience.

In the writer’s point of view, there is a violation of the rules of using weapons, during the period the book studies. Following up this case shows that there was a great deal of respect for international treaties and laws in the first phase of the past third of the century, and a disregard for them starting in 2003 with the War in Iraq.

After that, he found out that there are multiple sources and centres of power, which means the presence of various parties, but they are not balanced. There are countries that have begun to be key players, such as China, India, or other countries, but the United States is still above them all. The US still is theoretically, the biggest and mightiest force, but it is no longer the only one.

If we want to understand this issue well and from a critical angle, we can realize that there are five generations of war after deeply studying the wars and conflicts through of history. The various generations of wars reflect the development of humanity and how states, the international system, alliances are built.

About the first generation of wars, we can date them from 1803 to 1815, this era depended on human power, such as the Napoleonic War, where the armies were determined by the number of their troops. The Napoleonic Wars are used to define the series of wars that took place in Europe during the reign of Napoleon Bonaparte.

These wars were a partial extension of the revolutionary wars sparked by the French Revolution, which continued during the First French Empire. They began with the renewed declaration of war between Britain and France, after mutual accusations of violating the agreements stipulated in the Treaty of Amiens, and ended on July 18, 1815 after Napoleon’s final defeat at the Battle of Waterloo and the signing of the Second Treaty of Paris.

Regarding the second generation of wars, it is the result of the industrial revolution and the emergence of what some strategists call cannon and fire wars. The World War I is the best example of this.

Then we have the third generation wars, which are characterized by blitzkrieg, as was the case of the Germany’s victory over France in 1940.

Later, guerrilla warfare rose to prominence within the Cold War, like the Vietnamese rebellion, which is a feature of the fourth generation of wars. They are also unconventional wars. As for the fifth generation, it is represented by contemporary wars, which are hybrid wars that combine components of conventional and unconventional wars. Perhaps its most important manifestation lies in electronic warfare.

I write these words to say that the world knows a parallelism with the lack of power and the weakness of power.

The current factors of conflicts have started to change radically from what we are accustomed to and from what the great traditional or classical generation of strategists saw, such as the ancient Chinese Sun Tzu or the Prussian general Carl von Clausewitz, who described war as a duel on the largest scale and compared it to a struggle between two combatants, concluding through this that “War is an act of violence that aims to coerce the opponent to impose a certain will. Violence is the means, but the goal is to impose the will on the opponent, meaning that the goal of any military action is to defeat the enemy or disarm him. So we see him mocking the theory of war without shedding blood, saying: “Do not talk to us about leaders who win without shedding blood.”

Today, all strategists see that the contemporary international environment has changed and has become more ambiguous, complex, and mysterious. Moreover, weakness and lack of power are the two characteristics that we can use to describe this decisive stage in human history.

Power, in its classical, traditional meaning, has lost more than one meaning with the increase in actors in the international scene.

Some powerful parties, such as US, no longer have the same economic, military, protectionist, and even cultural deterrence. In addition, bipolarity or unipolarity no longer has the same meaning with the rise of the economies of Asian countries that control millions of patents, in addition to the spread of financial crises, global commercial competition, the rise in crime, the globalization of services, and the growing role of individuals in international relations.

Decisions on the Brink

When United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres visited the Egyptian side of the Rafah crossing and gave his speech of March 2024, it became clearer than ever to strategists and observers of international relations that the region and the international order are fragile. International organizations are constrained, and there are very few viable paths to ending the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The UN Secretary-General recognizes the limits of what he and the United Nations as a whole can aspire to achieve. That is why he only demanded that aid enter the Gaza Strip as soon as possible.

The UN Secretary-General understands that the region is boiling. Its wars are never-ending, and its exacerbating crises are intractable. It is home to many militias, apprehensive armies, and drones that cut across borders. This state of affairs has left many countries unstable because of fluctuating dynamics. Accurate analysis suggests that the requisites for a solution have yet to mature if they have emerged
at all.

An examination of the historical, social, economic, political, regional, and international factors at play forces us to acknowledge that this is an extremely profound crisis and that the turmoil cannot be contained. On the one hand, the traditional geopolitical maps have changed significantly. The widespread nostalgia for the old world and its conventional conflicts contained by territorial, political, or strategic rationale is misguided.

The world has become dynamic and fluid. It is shaped by elements that cut across the borders of sovereign states, and these elements are continuously reshaped by social movements and are determined by shifting attitudes on how to deal with challenges that are predominantly socio-economic.

Guterres also understands that the United Nations has a structural problem and that reforming it is a difficult or perhaps even impossible task. The five major countries have the power to veto any decision. They do so at will to serve their perceived strategic interests or even their diplomatic whims.

After the end of World War II, enough geostrategic developments to fill thousands of pages of books on international relations unfolded without any reform being undertaken. The UN was not updated in accordance with these developments, nor were any amendments made to its Charter.

Mr. Guterres is aware of the need to reform the UN, but such reforms can only be made by three major countries: the United States of America, Russia, and China.

Every Secretary-General of the UN knows that they cannot cross the red lines drawn by the international powers in reforming the role of the Secretary-General and the UN as a whole. Reforming it is difficult and the dramatic events taking place in Palestine, and indeed across the globe, are addressed by the great powers without the input of the UN. This is the truth.

However, it is difficult for our students of international relations to understand this. We teach university students the ABCs of international humanitarian law, which sets rules to contain armed conflicts and protects noncombatants or former combatants. These laws are built on several international treaties, most notably the Geneva Conventions of 1949 and their Additional Protocols, as well as a series of other conventions and protocols that cover more precise cases and instances. The students become shocked and confused when they see that the facts, statements, and double standards of international relations have contradicted international humanitarian law for decades.

The convictions of both novices and experts in international relations are reinforced by reading this paragraph in the book of former US President Jimmy Carter, Palestine: Peace, Not Apartheid:

Two other interrelated factors have contributed to the perpetuation of violence and regional upheaval: the condoning of illegal Israeli actions from a submissive White House and US Congress during recent years and the deference with which other international leaders permit this unofficial US policy in the Middle East to prevail. There are constant and vehement political and media debates in Israel concerning its policies in the West Bank, but because of powerful political, economic, and religious forces in the United States, Israeli government decisions are rarely questioned or condemned, voices from Jerusalem dominate in our media, and most American citizens are unaware of circumstances in the occupied territories. At the same time, political leaders and news media in Europe are highly critical of Israeli policies, affecting public attitudes. Americans were surprised and angered by an opinion poll, published by the International Herald Tribune in October 2003, of 7,500 citizens in fifteen European nations, indicating that Israel was considered to be the top threat to world peace, ahead of North Korea, Iran, or Afghanistan.

The 39^th president of the United States then calls, at the end of his book, for respecting international law and implementing Security Council Resolutions 242 (1967) and 338 (1973). That is, he advocates a return to the 1967 borders. After discussing the Palestinian question throughout the book, Carter denounces the logic of apartheid, which prevents the Palestinians from developing economically, makes it impossible for them to lead normal lives, takes away their land, destroys the hallmarks of their civilization and development, and obstructs their development.

Can AI Be Controlled?

Finally, the United Nations General Assembly adopted the first UN resolution on artificial intelligence (AI), which was sponsored by Morocco and the United States before receiving the support of 123 member states of the United Nations when it was adopted.

This resolution is considered a historic step towards setting clear international standards for artificial intelligence and promoting safe and reliable systems for this technology.

The terms of the UN resolution titled, “Seizing the Opportunities of Safe, Secure and Trustworthy Artificial Intelligence Systems for Sustainable Development” shed light on the course to be followed in the field of artificial intelligence so that each country can seize the opportunities offered by the technology and manage the risks it represents. The resolution also stressed the need to continue discussions on appropriate AI governance approaches that are anchored in international law.

I completely agree with the Moroccan diplomat Omar Hilale, who presented the resolution at a press conference with his American counterpart, Ambassador and the US Permanent Representative to the United Nations, Linda Thomas-Greenfield, when he said that this resolution is not an end in itself, but rather the beginning of a collective project to create safe and reliable artificial intelligence systems.

Yes, it is the beginning because the development of artificial intelligence is proceeding at a speed that surpasses imagination and exceeds all laws and limits, and its components and ramifications exceed what humans are familiar with in the field of inventions and modern technology. The decision of the British-Canadian “godfather of artificial intelligence,” Geoffrey Hinton, to resign from Google, in May 2023, was motivated by his wish to “Speak freely about the dangers of AI.”

Indeed, in his frequent media appearances, Hinton spoke about the dangers of artificial intelligence, technological unemployment, and the deliberate misuse of this innovation by parties he described as “malicious.”

He said: “I’ve come to the conclusion that the kind of intelligence we are developing is very different from the intelligence we have. We are biological systems and these are digital systems, and the big difference is that with digital systems, you have many copies of the same set of weights, the same model of the world.” “And all these copies can learn separately but share their knowledge instantly. So it’s as if you had 10,000 people and whenever one person learned something, everybody automatically knew it. And that’s how these chatbots can know so much more than any one person,” he added.

He also said that artificial intelligence “may soon surpass the information capacity of the human brain,” and described some of the risks posed by these chatbots as “very scary.”

He was right in his view, as Elon Musk, CEO of the American electric car company Tesla, and founder of the artificial intelligence research company “OpenAI,” declared in a conversation on the X platform, about developing artificial intelligence that surpasses the smartest humans, perhaps by next year or the following year in 2026.

The dangers emanating from automated software can be worsened by the ChatGPT platforms, which fall within the framework of infinite artificial intelligence and the creation of non-human minds that are smarter than us, outperform us, and replace us. Personally, as a university professor who supervises doctoral theses and final research projects at the university, I am against the development of these systems because they will contribute to creating a generation of researchers who are unable to understand, explain, theorize, and create.

For instance, a doctoral thesis writer in international relations and political science who works on the new international system or the new Russian strategic doctrine or constitutional systems in Africa, or on the issue of the sociology of international relations will place the topics on the platform and request a number of pages, and the platform will deliver a result with ready and accurate work and subject to academic and scientific rules. The same can be in the fields of medicine, biology, etc.

Even worse is the capacity of ChatGPT to be used to write computer  code without technical knowledge.

We, the supervisors, will have no choice but to accept these works because even if you search using all the information systems specialized in plagiarism, you will find these researches devoid of duplicated content as if they were written by students and researchers; the result will, of course, be devastating to societies and undermine the foundations of universities, and will stop the use of reason and diligence among millions of people, and we will bring out into the intellectual market people who have nothing to do with scientific research and will succeed easily and will eventually have diplomas that do not reflect the required conditions.

We must not forget that such platforms will increase the risk of growing electronic deception, spreading misleading information and cybercrimes, not to mention the crimes that terrorist groups can commit if robots are given the ability to carry out their goals.

This is why many countries are now trying to establish regulations for the development and use of artificial intelligence in the military field, warning of “undesirable consequences” and others related to “the issue of human involvement” in addition to “the lack of clarity regarding responsibility” and “possible unintended consequences.”

At the Euromed University of Fes, we were among the first to create advanced training courses in the field of artificial intelligence. Many engineers have graduated from these courses, some of whom are now employed at major international companies.

The creation of these courses stems from our belief that the university, even if it has multiple specializations, must succeed in positioning itself as a destination for training future generations in specializations that will benefit their countries, at the forefront of which is artificial intelligence.

However, we continue to defend a humane and civilizational axiom in these courses that powerful artificial intelligence systems should only be developed when we are confident that their effects will be positive and that their risks will be under control.

********

With the International Journal of European, Mediterranean and African Studies, our University produces a leading journal that adds to its other achievements, swiftly placing it among the highest ranks of excellence, as affirmed by several international rankings including Times Higher Education and Multirank. Thanks to numerous international awards in education and research, our university is also recognized today for its strong qualities in inclusivity, mobility, and sustainable development.

I could not end this introduction to our inaugural issue without expressing my deep gratitude to each member of the team I have surrounded myself with, who have shown dedication to the values of our Chair and our University. I also want to acknowledge how appreciative I am of the support provided by the various contributors to this journal, whose insights contribute significantly to understanding Africa, the Mediterranean, and Europe. Their contributions are crucial in advancing the movement for progress, fundamentally creating a synergy between the North and the South for the construction of a better world.

* Founding member, member of the Board of Directors of the Euromed University of Fes, UEMF, Morocco.

President of the Alliance of Civilizations Chair.