European voters are getting rid of austerity and there is civil unrest from Madrid to Athens. England and Spain are in double-dip recession. Austerity seems to be coming to and end, but is the idea of no more nation states coming to an end as well? Watch a really interesting video looking at how the idea of one world living in peace with no borders has been tried – and failed – throughout history:
Sarkozy, as we know, lost the election in France and Greece is in turmoil with the winners being the far left as well as neo Nazis. And it looks likely that Greece will leave the Euro.
Is the one world concept just a dream?
The Roman Empire, the Catholic Church, Napoleon, The British Empire, the Soviets and Americans during the Cold War and the European Union are good examples of attempts to unite the world under "one ruler".
People have dreamed about a united world for thousands of years. Probably since the beginning of time, actually. But so far, the concept has failed. Again, and again, the world has reverted to nation states.
Western idealists breathed new life into the European Union when the Berlin Wall fell. We were all pro uniting Eastern and Western Europe under one entity. To European free trade was added open borders and a single currency. Simultaneously the Americans got rid of a lot of protectionism. It all looked set for finally achieving a one world free trade market area. Free movement of labour was considered essential since the market would regulate everything. But it didn't quite work out that way, did it?
Do you believe libertarianism with the whole world united under one ruler, be it Napoleon, Hitler, the Pope or multinationals is now dead as a concept? Do we need to start dismantling everything that has been built up during the last 30 years in the name of libertarianism and go back to the way it used to be? Or do you believe we will be able to finally create a world in peace without borders? Maybe another option is that uniting the world has failed again but someone, somewhere will again in the future have a go at succeeding? Most likely, since conquering the world and be its ruler is probably the most intoxicating ego trip there is. But is it a realistic concept? It's all very well when things are working according to plan. But are people of different nationalities interested in showing solidarity with other countries in trouble? Doesn't seem to be the case in Europe at the moment.
A multitude of people are going through a tough time at the moment. Even millions of Europeans who have been spared for decades. When feeling hopeless, it's important to remember that what's not possible today may be possible tomorrow. Winston Churchill understood that nothing is impossible – the impossible only takes longer. He rallied the British people behind him, they went through hardship together but eventually succeeded:
The spirit of Churchill is well described in a book I came across by Robert H. Schuller with the title “Tough times never last – But tough people do” years ago in a bookstore in the United Arab Emirates. Loved the title so much I bought it. Unfortunately the book didn't live up to its wonderful title. But "Tough times never last, but tough people do" – that 's how life works, isn't it? No matter what happens you must never give up but keep on trying until you succeed. If not, you are doomed. You must build new bridges and move on. And that's simply not possible if you start feeling sorry for yourself. Be strong, positive, innovative and courageous and it's just a question of how long it takes before you achieve what you are aiming for.
Rome wasn't built in a day
But Rome wasn't built in a days, so don't expect results overnight. An Indian woman I knew in Dubai had a note by her desk saying “God's delays are not God's denials”, and that's so true. Sometimes it is as if life is testing you to see if you really have what it takes to succeed. If you give up whenever there's a set-back you will never succeed. And set-backs there will be, no matter what you try to achieve. It's just a question of constantly finding solutions.
Yes, it's boring I know. But what's the alternative? Everybody would like plain sailing but things are never as easy as they seem, unfortunately. So you have to have faith in yourself and your ability to succeed. If you don't have, why should anybody else?
Nothing is impossible – the impossible only takes longer
Nothing is impossible, the impossible only takes longer, as Churchill said. Now is the time for you to aim for the impossible. Because what's worthwhile many times seem impossible until you have succeeded. What's the point in aiming for something you are not passionate about? If you are not really determined to get what you aim for you will never succeed anyway but give up at the smallest adversity. And in times like these when things are really changing the odds of going for the impossible and succeed are even higher.
Be flexible and open to new possibilities
So set your goal, make a plan and start taking action to get there step by step. And be flexible since once you know what you want you will find new ways that will be milestones on your road to success.
Whenever I really want something I always succeed. It's just a question of how long it takes. Sometimes I even succeed way beyond expectations. The first time I was in Saudi Arabia on a short assignment for a business magazine I found it so interesting I wanted to spend more time there. So I made up my mind I was going to do that. Little did I think that once I was there again working for another publication I would be headhunted and become the only Western woman ever to have held a senior management position in a one hundred percent Saudi owned company in Riyadh. And not just a small company but a diversified conglomerate with 10,000 employees. Didn't even think that was possible.
Think big
Think big, aim for the stars! It doesn't matter if it's for your company, career or whatever, set your goals high. What's the point in using up the energy it takes to just achieve something mediocre? Dare, try, take a risk, learn and be determined. And don't count your chickens before they hatch. Keep your goals to yourself and just do it. When the road turns, turn or you will end up by the side of the road. Broadcasting what you are going to do to all and sundry isn't always a good idea. Not least since some will try to talk you out of it. What do you, for instance, think people would have told Obama ten years ago if he had told them he was going to be president of the United States?
You will be hit in the head a few times until you get reach your goals. But remember, the person who experiences most wins. All serious daring starts from within so make sure you are physically and mentally fit since not only does it make you happier, think better but it also gives you the energy to succeed, even when you have set-backs. Don't forget that people who have really achieved something big in this world have, on average, lost everything they had 3,1 times. Life isn't easy, but to make the most out of it is entirely up to you.
Criminal syndicates are increasingly turning from smuggling drugs to human cargo, and governments and law-enforcement agencies are, despite huge efforts, not able to do much about it. Watch Angelina Jolie talk about the desperation of refugees that make them turn to people smugglers:
Unfortunately it's not just between Africa and the Arabian peninsula people are being smuggled. And lamentably there is only so much humanitarian organisations can do to alleviate suffering.
Who benefits apart from the smugglers?
Frequently Africans are then smuggled from the Middle East to Europe at the cost of approximately $10,000 per person. The most popular destinations are Scandinavia and Britain. But once there some immigrants fail to integrate into society because they they really do not want to be in Europe, but because they can't make a living back home they felt they had no choice. Can't help thinking that all this is so unnecessary and the only ones benefiting are some vested interests and the gangsters making money smuggling them. The latter charge hefty fees of $10,000 per person but many migrants still die en route. Or remain in debt to the people smugglers with all that entails.
So how can we enable poor people to support themselves in their home countries hence depriving people smugglers of their lucrative income? Aid doesn't seem to do the trick, at least not so far. So why should more foreign aid suddenly be able to remedy the current situation?
Trade instead of aid
Am a firm believer of replacing aid with trade by helping developing countries trade themselves out of poverty. And the swiftest and easiest way of doing so would be to enable them to sell their agricultural produce on the international market.
The EU spends almost two fifths of its entire budget (EU budget for 2010 around 139bn Euros) on the Common Agricultural Program, CAP, and even pay European farmers to overproduce. Those products are then dumped at ultra low prises in developing countries, whose farmers are not able to produce at such low costs. Result – poor farmers become even poorer and developing countries even more dependent on imports to feed their population.
Scrap CAP and US farm subsidies
Scrapping CAP as well as US farm subsidies would thus go a long way towards improving the lives of poor people in developing countries and hence reduce people smugglers income. But chances of that happening are slim, unfortunately, since farmers are a strong lobby group in the US and out of 27 EU member countries only four are interested in gradually getting rid of CAP.
All consumers in the world would benefit from abolition of EU & US agricultural subsidies since agricultural products would suddenly become much cheaper. Less immigrants would would be forced to use the services of people smugglers since more of them would be able to support themselves back home. Less Westerners become farmers anyway, so why don't we press fast forward and make this world a better place for all, apart from people smugglers?
What's the point in depriving developing countries of their ability to trade themselves out of poverty? The only thing Western Agricultural subsidies achieve is preserving a profession that is in decline in the West anyway? Wouldn't it be better to take a more holistic view and find solutions that are beneficial to all, instead of just a few? We also have to improve the global trade regime that has been crafted over the years by the WTO to benefit not only multinationals in the North but also the poor in the South. But abolishing Western agricultural subsidies would make an excellent start.
Successful leaders have the power to inspire, motivate, and positively influence people. Well practiced leadership contributes to job satisfaction, motivation and productivity. JFK knew how to do it. Devote 4 minutes to watching Stacey Bredhoff explaining how he thought and communicated:
John F. Kennedy was an inspiring leader who, as we have seen, knew how to communicate. Men went out of their way to please him and women fell in love with him. Forgetting about the falling in love aspect, what is special about him and other inspiring leaders?
What characterize a great leader?
A strong set of values and openness, trust and true respect for others
Genuine humility and not afraid to show vulnerability
Regularly reflect and have an unquenchable thirst for learning
Bend rules, take calculated risks and sometimes guided by gut-feelings and tolerate this in other people
A certain amount of flexibility to adapt to circumstances and make real strides forward
Accessible and informal which is a very powerful motivator for their colleagues
Not only skills and training are valued but focus is heavily on attitude, because, without the right attitude and motivation, nothing worth while will be achieved
So why do these traits produce results?
Simply because pay is only one component of job satisfaction. Other equally important factors are respect and prestige and making staff feel good about themselves, their jobs and the company they work for. In other words inspiring leadership produces results by contributing directly to fulfilling many of people's emotional needs. Consequently it’s also fundamental for a leader to have people skills and emotional intelligence.
Passion to inspire
Unless you are passionate and inspired about something you can not inspire others. But even that's not enough if you don't manage to create and convey a memorable vision that people identify with and want to be part of. A good way to make your vision memorable is to tell stories to illustrate it.
It's not about you – it's about them
Your colleagues are asking themselves what's in it for me? Answer them and don't make them guess, because if you do there could be misunderstandings. People should feel they own your vision and understand where and how they fit in.
Bring everybody into the process
Employees, customers and investors should all be part of the process of reaching the vision outlined. It's your job to solicit input, listen to feedback and incorporating what you hear into your vision. That way you make people feel important and that they are doing something meaningful.
Convey optimism and hope
Everybody wants a better future. Churchill gave people hope during the darkest days of World War II. Optimism has a ripple effect throughout an organisation so you have to use positive and optimistic language.
Encourage and praise people
Praised people flourish just as when you criticize staff they shrivel up. By encouraging you connect with them. Genuine praise diminish doubts and spirits soar. And that’s exactly the kind of people you want to surround yourself with. Happy, optimistic and ready to go the extra mile to make your vision come true.
An interesting fact is that by inspiring your people you become the kind of person they want to be around. Customers will want to do business with you, employees work with you and investors back you. And it all starts with learning how to inspire and motivate. You want a company full of positive energy and buzz where people cooperate and encourage innovation and growth because they identify with what you are trying to achieve. And don’t forget the importance of fun. In successful companies people work hard but enjoy themselves while doing so. It’s a key innovation driver and as a leader it’s your job to inspire staff to enjoy what they are doing.
Even in the West, inequality and poverty are on the rise. Poverty has, in fact, reached the levels of 1933. Devote 4 minutes to watching Thomas Pogge, professor of Yale University, talking about the current international system that allows a large part of the world's population to live in abject poverty:
The global economic downturn has been pushing millions of people into poverty, or worse, extreme poverty. Add to that the fact that people all over the world are moving into urban areas to seek their fortune and we have a danger of slums increasing tremendously.
How do we keep them safe in urban areas?
There hence is a huge need to reduce vulnerability in urban settings. Half the world's people now live in cities, a share that will rise to 70 percent by 2050.
So what are we going to do to give more people in the world a decent life? If we don't do anything the amount of people living in shantytowns will rise, everywhere. Or call them homeless, if you wish.
Extreme poverty leads to crime – or worse
Countries with a lot of poverty easily gets trapped in crime or worse, become failed states. And I don't need to tell you how easily failed states can follow in the steps of Afghanistan and Somalia, do I? So it's in the interest of all of us to start eradicating poverty in the world.
And let's not forget poverty in the developed world
Frankly find it unbelievable that child poverty is on the increase even in a country like Sweden. So is poverty in all age groups, for that matter. And the same applies to Europe as a whole and the United States. Like South Koreans a decade ago, people are starting to committ suicide in Europe due to being wiped out financially. Isn't it, like Thomas Pogge put it, a crime against humanity?
Isn't it time to put Milton Friedmans theories on the shelf and, again, start implementing what Keynes ordered? Or do we really want a world where poverty is increasing and the middle classes are in decline? By now we know the side effects of Friedman's ideas as mentioned in do you concur with Joseph Stiglitz on market fundamentalism? Just look at what has happened the last few decades in Latin America, Africa, Asia and Russia. And since 2007 the American middle class has been severely affected by the same side effects of his policies. The Euro zone is currently being hit which has an impact on Europe as a whole. China has been spared to some extent since it implemented Friedman's ideas but never completely opened up their markets. And Iraq failed miserably because the shock theraphies implemented there went too far.
Negative for much of the world's population
One hundred faculty members at University of Chicago wrote a letter of protest when university president Robert ZImmer announced the creation of a $200m Milton Friedman Institute stating that "The effects of the neoliberal global order … strongly buttressed by the Chicago School of Economics, have by no means been unequivocally positive. Many would argue that they have been negative for much of the world's population." Since the time when Reagan was president the Chicago boys have dominated not only Washington but the world, not least through the IMF. So now when the recession keeps on causing substantial increases in misery isn't it time to stop implementing policies that favour multinational companies at the expense of the majority of people in the world?
Do you agree with Pogge that many of the people who support the current international system are like passive Germans during the Nazi era? Do we really want the world's middle classes and poor to be worse off? Is it really a good idea to have more people across the globe living in shantytowns? Or being homeless? No wonder Occupy Wall Street swiftly spread to 1,500 cities all over the world. Is it the beginning of a new era where 99% of the world's population say enough is enough and demand to get a share of what now goes to the top one percent? Is equality only justified if it benefits all human beings? What's your opinion? Is it time to put market fundamentalism aside and start stimulating economies in order to grow again and give more people a decent life? The Euro zone would make a good start. Or are you of the opinion that Friedman's version of capitalism is the way forward?
America's global supremacy is over, according to Brzesinski but he adds that the US still has an extremely important twin role to play. Watch him tell Chrystia Freeland why Vladimir Putin's election will reverse political evolution in Russia and how the US should handle Syria:
Few individuals have had as much influence as Brzezinski when it comes to shaping US global policy and hence the world today. Since Jimmy Carter was president the ideas outlined in his book "The Grand Chessboard" have been like a bible for US administrations.
One nation can no longer dominate the world
The days when one nation, or even one region could dominate the world the way Rome did 2,000 years ago, the Ottoman empire 500 years ago or the British empire a century ago, are, according to long-time national security expert Zbigniew Brzezinski, over. It's simply no longer possible.
Americans have to get used to sharing power
"The world is now much more diversified", he says. "There is a new east in Asia and a global population that is awakened politically". "America have to get used to the new world, in which their relative influence may decline"
He firmly believes a strong West is needed as a counterbalance to rising developing nations. The US should, in his opinion act as "promoter and guarantor of a greater and broader West".
Enlarge the sphere of capitalist democratic nations
America should, according to Brezezinski, take a lead in enlarging the sphere of capitalist, democratic nations in North America and Europe by integrating Turkey and Russia.
Avoid conflicts with China and Iran
Brezezinski believes it is crucial that America understands that it needs to avoid conflicts with China. "We have to accept their economic and political rise and that there is nothing the US can do to stop it".
US role in Asia is, in his opinion, as a "balancer and conciliator between major powers in Asia". America should learn from Britain in the 19th century when it stood aloof from conflicts in Europe and just tried to mediate. Instead of entering into a formal alliance against any major power in Asia i.e. China, Japan, India and South Korea, the US aim should be to mitigate conflict and promote cooperation and conciliation.
Western military action against Iran would in his opinion be seen as external intrusion and a cause for war in the Middle East and should hence be avoided.
Do you agree with Brzezinski that America will no longer be the one and only super power? Should the US take a lead in developing a greater and broader West by integration Russia and Turkey? Should America mediate between Asian powers and avoid military action against Iran? Should the US listen to Turkey and Saudi Arabia when it comes to handling Syria? Or maybe you are of the opinion that he is wrong and America will remain the one and only super power?
Will Europe's economies collapse due to fiscal austerity? That's the opinion of Nobel Prize winning economist Joseph Stiglitz. Devote one minute to watching what he has to say:
Stiglitz simply cannot understand how Europe can hope to get their economies growing again with austerity, austerity and yet more austerity. Or as he put it "It reminds me of medieval medicine". Blood letting often made the patient even sicker. The response was more blood letting until the patient nearly died. "What's happening in Europe is a mutual suicide pact".
Austerity is needed when an economy is booming
When economies are waning austerity removes demand from the system as unemployment spikes. "There will not be a restoration of confidence as long as economies keep falling, and that will continue until (the politicians) change economic course. And I don't think that's likely", Stiglitz says.
Economists debating when and how the Euro will break up
"Among economists the discussion is not about if but the best way to end the Euro. It could be civilian upset that does it. Youth employment in Spain has been over 40% since 2008. How much longer will they tolerate that? The policies of the new government are more of the same medicine", he says and adds "except worse".
"The other way it may end is when the European Central Bank refuses to be the lender of last resort for some countries, precipitating a crisis. We can be sure that markets will be highly volatile and the end of the Euro will be a very severe disruption to the global economy", Stiglitz concludes
Do you agree with Joseph Stiglitz that Europe is making the same mistake as Herbert Hoover did that caused The Great Depression? Is the European austerity plan a suicide pact? Does demand in Europe need to be stimulated in order for the economies to start growing again? Will the Euro break up? Or do you believe austerity is the right way forward to make Europe grow and prosper again?
Middle class spending is crucial for economic growth. So now, with Western middle classes in debt and distress, many economists look to the new emerging-market middle class as the foundation for a new era of global prosperity. However, companies need new approaches to penetrate the developing world’s increasingly prosperous consumer markets.
The last couple of years 70 million people in developing countries joined the middle class, with incomes between $6,000 and$30,000. It is estimated that within 20 years they will surpass their Western pears when it comes to global spending power. The focus is mainly on Asia and it is estimated that in about a decade they will pick up the slack left by overspent America. Emergency market spending is in fact already bolstering the balance sheets of many Western firms.
World focusing on China and India
Needless to say the world is focusing on China and India due to its huge populations as well as rapidly rising economies and middle classes. Correct if you look at the amount of people. But by looking at the issue that way we overlook a very potent and prosperous group of people. Saudi Arabia's retail sector is actually predicted to grow by $50bn by 2014 as more international brands look to move into the kingdom that has overtaken better known retail destinations like Hong Kong, Russia and Japan when it comes to attracting brands. Only London and Dubai are attracting more retailers and shoppers.
Don't forget Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states
When it comes to per capita spending I'm certain that the middle classes in Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf countries not only earn more but also spend far more than their Asian counterparts. It's not for nothing many middle class Indians chose to work in the Gulf, despite the fact that they are paid less than the locals. Salaries are higher and you pay no income tax in the Gulf.
Shopping for entertainment
Shopping is a top leisure activity and when the weekend starts the malls are filled with people who literally shop until they drop. A woman who works in a Chanel shop in the area told me an average customer spends an absolute fortune every time they come to the shop. And the same goes for more expensive items like cars, jewellery and electronics. Considering the importance the Chinese put on saving money, I would be very surprised if middle class people in China, with the exception of some mega rich, spend that much.
Richard Branson and Martha Stewart eyes Middle East expansion
The world, certainly multinationals, are already managing the economic spending shift to Asia very well. But quite a few Western companies are forgetting about Saudi Arabia and the Gulf, which in my opinion could prove costly especially for companies selling expensive consumer goods.
So it comes as no surprise thatVirgin Mobile boss Sir Richard Branson and Qatar Telecom (Qtel) are expanding their partnership and eyeing a number of new markets in the Middle East. And US lifestyle guru Martha Stewart is extending her magazine publishing empire into the Middle East with the launch of several of her namesake titles in countries across the region
A large amount of Asian and Middle Eastern households have incomes today that position them just below the global middle class threshold and so increasingly large numbers of them are expected to become middle class in the next ten years.
Emerging middle classes have different tastes
Emerging-market leaders know that the Western system created the worldwide boom of the last quarter century that ended when Lehman Brothers collapsed. Now the boom has moved to emerging markets, and their leaders will increasingly choose to alter Western models to suit their countries. Consequently the fact that all eyes are on Asia and the Gulf is forgotten could turn out to be a fatal mistake. The new emerging middle classes are supporters of globalization but highly nationalistic. And there is a vast difference between nationalism in China and, say, Kuwait.
Kingdom to invest $100b in transport and logistics
And not only is KSA and the Gulf a key market for consumer brands. All other products and services will find that what they have to offer is in high demand. Saudi Arabia is, for instance, targeting $100 billion of investment in port, airport, rail, road and logistics centre projects over the next decade in a push to make the kingdom one of the world’s leading transport and logistics hubs by 2020.
Back to emerging middle classes in general, we can conclude that the Chinese bought more cars than Americans last couple of years, and that India has as many Internet users as the U.S. Also it is estimated that by 2030, more than nine out of every 10 mobile phones will be owned by people in the developing world. Coca-Cola actually forecasts a doubling of worldwide revenues to $200 billion over the next decade, thanks to another 1 billion people expected to join the middle class by 2020. So Western companies who haven't yet focused on developing countries' middle classes should jump on the band waggon swiftly and not overlook the Gulf.
If so, you personify the findings of Edelman's 2012 Trust Barometer. Watch Chrystia Freeland talk to Richard Edelman about the current erosion of confidence in the workplace and governments:
Respondents in 25 countries indicate trust in government have declined with nine percent and that Brazil is the country where confidence in elected officials have fallen most.
Not surprisingly the debt ceiling debacle in the US, bailouts in the European Union, corruption in Brazil and India as well as the nuclear disaster in Japan are the main reasons behind the mistrust. And it's interesting to note that Westerners have lower faith in their governments than citizens of the developing world.
Half the public distrust companies
Businesses need to be regulated according to half the participants in the survery. And they are of the opinion that governments are not doing enough to rein in immoral companies. A high number of people would also like their authorities to increase consumer protection and ensure ethical corporate behaviour. It comes as no surprise that banks and financial institutions are least trusted.
Trust in social media on the rise
Traditional media and online search engines are still the most trusted sources of news and information but social media including blogs, networking sites and content sharing sites showed the biggest increase in trust this year. Surprising, considering the amount of incorrect information circulating on such forums.
Do you agree with the findings of the 2012 Trust Barometer and what Richard Edelman had to say? Have we lost confidence in authority figures? How can they build trust again and manage their reputations?There is now an opportunity for governments and businesses to lead in ways that earn trust. How would you like to see that done? Can they convince the citizens of the world that they are not about self interest but taking their responsibilities in society? Do you agree with Richard Eberman that confidence in governments and businesses will start rising again this year?
The prospect of war with Iran is headline news. But how prepared are we for cyber threats? Or worse, the prospect of cyber space turning into a nuke? Devote four minutes to listen to what a high level delegation from Europol, Israel, NATO, the EU and US has to say on cyber security:
According to a new report on cybersecurity by Security & Defence Agenda, a think tank in Brussels, Sweden, Finland and Israel are best prepared for cyber attacks. Better even than the United States, Germany and Britain, which is alarming since the latter three are more likely to be targeted than Sweden and Finland. India, Brazil and Mexico on the other hand, rank near the bottom.
More than half the respondents believe a cyber arms race is already going on and 36% are of the opinion that cybersecurity is more important than missile defence. Nearly half said that it's as important as border securiry.
Global agreement to share information recommended
Governments and private sector companies need to cooperate better on sharing information about possible threats. The public also needs to be educated and more attention being given to secure smart phones and cloud computing.
China lagging behind
Considering how active China is reputed to be in cyber warfare, it's surprising that the report finds that they are no better equipped to defend themselves than countries like Poland and Austria. Makes you wonder if the talk about China's super elite Cyber army is exaggerated? If not, why don't they make sure they are better protected against attacks? Provided, of course that the report has the right information.
Apparently the West is so far scrambling to bolster its capabilities as I wrote about in Cyber Warfare – hackers to the rescue? six months ago. Hackers are both a concern and possible assett when it comes to defense in cyber space. A few days ago Anonymous released a recording between the FBI and UK police discussing efforts against hackers. Once again, can't avoid thinking that it would be much better if the members of Anonymous and other such groups could give governments a helping hand. Let's face it they exist and could use their skills in beneficial ways.
US warns against Iran, China and Russia
On January 31st James Clapper, US intelligence officer told the senate that Iran is accelerating its activity in cyber space and warned that China and Russia have aggressive capabilities. Iran, Russia and China on the other hand accuse the United States of being the main agressor in cyber space.
What's your opinion? Do you agree that an arms race is already going on in cyber space? Are Iran, China and Russia as active as we are led to believe by US intelligence and the news? Did you know that 1,000 attacks a minute take place world-wide? Is a full scale online war more likely than a nuclear conflict? Is enough being done to protect us against attacks in cyber space? What more could be done? Will it actually go as far as an online war? If so, will it paralyze the world and who will be the winner?
