Catarina's World

The day I stop learning I’m dead. And even when that day comes I will not know everything there is to know.

The day I stop learning I’m dead.

Nobody does, even Einstein said he is not an expert on anything, merely curious. Did you for instance know that sweating leaves produce electricity? Neither did I until I came across that revelation.

Learning is fascinating. Some days what we learn have a fundamental impact on our lives, some days it’s just minor things and sometimes we are forced to learn lessons we really could do without. But regardless, the important thing is that we learn and develop. If not, how can improvement take place? How boring life would be without constant learning and development. Imagine how inflexible people would be..

Ever met a person who has never had a problem?

Everybody has problems, the richest man in the world as well as the poorest. It’s just a question of what problems. The important thing though is what we learn from them. The easiest is to blame everybody else but that approach will just assure that the same problem happens over and over again. The smart, and interesting, way is to take responsibility for what happened, learn and move on.

Almost every day something new happens

In Saudi Arabia you learn a lot. KSA is, in my opinion, the most interesting country in the world because almost every day something happens that you have never experienced before. Life in the kingdom hence enriches you enormously, provided of course, that you are not stuck in your ways or intolerant. We are all different, and that’s what makes life beautiful. How boring it would be if we were all alike.

If you have a curious mind and constantly learn you can succeed with anything. Don’t know how many times I have been asked to do something I have never done before in different parts of the world. So I just found out, learnt and did it.

Life has no guarantees

Sometimes I think people are afraid of learning and developing. It’s not only laziness but also easier to take the option of doing nothing since, they could, after all, fail. And society sometimes reward people for towing the line as opposed to learning and developing. It’s not unusual that even top positions are filled with executives who will just preserve the status quo. That’s all very well, but how will companies develop with that kind of mind-set? Sure control is important but surely not at the expense of the company learning, developing and improving results? And how can they do that unless they start looking at new and different options? Besides I don’t understand the contradiction since I have always followed company policy and at the same time learnt, developed and improved results.

For me acquiring new knowledge, behaviors, skills, values, preferences and understanding is vital. To be broad-minded and curious is probably one of the key, if not the key, aspect of life. And how would that be possible without constantly learning? I know more today than I did yesterday and will continue to do so for the rest of my life. I really enjoy living and am not afraid of dying but anything in between I’m simply not interested in. And isn’t that how we end up leading our lives if we stop learning with all that entails? Or maybe Oscar Wilde had a point when he said: “Everybody who is incapable of learning has taken to teaching”? Joke aside, at least that’s how we sometimes felt when we were at school.

(Photo: PhotoXpress giuseppe porzani)

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.

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.

(photo: flickr – Lars Plougmann)

Saudi Arabian businesswoman Lubna Olayan has been on Fortune magazine’s “Global Power 50 Women” list from 2004 to 2009. Forbes included her on its “World’s Most Powerful Women” lists in 2005, 2006 and 2007, and Time Magazine listed her amongst the “Top 100 Most Influential People in the World” in 2005.

Saudi Arabian businesswoman Lubna Olayan (in the middle) debating at The World Economic Forum in Davos last year.

Several Saudi women are executives at Prince Alwaleed’s Kingdom Holding Company. The Prince has long been a champion of Saudi Arabian women and even has a female Saudi pilot.

Lubna Olayan and the Saudi Arabian women who work for Prince Alwaleed are just a few examples of capable and successful women in the Kingdom. There are more of them but they usually keep a low profile.

Saudi women sitting on $11,9 billion

A large portion of the Kingdom’s wealth belong to its women who are believed to be sitting on cash totaling $11.9 billion. They are in other words controlling a substantial portion of the country’s wealth.

Women constitute almost 45 percent of the population and have a literacy rate of 79 percent. But only 65 percent of them are employed, despite the fact that 78.3 percent of unemployed women are university graduates.

Women in Saudi Arabia hence account for a substantial pool of human and financial capital with the power and ability to bring about significant social and economic change. It is hence beneficial to the kingdom to give them the same opportunities their sisters enjoy in other Arab nations, which is currently taking place.

King Abdullah championing women’s rights

“We are witnessing a rapid and increased investment in our country’s human resources and economic development,” says Princess Adelah bint Abdullah, King Abdullah’s daughter. “Fundamental to this is regulations that encourage greater involvement of women in our work force. The impact of this support can be seen through the growth, productivity and innovation of Saudi Arabia’s women-owned businesses.

The princess explains that Saudi law already permits women to run a business without the guardianship of a man, but added, “Often this law is not enforced. Some people in the government prevent its implementation. They either do not know about it or are opposed to it.

On the mixing of men and women, Princess Adelah added: “I do not see why men and women should not maintain respectful relations in the workplace, as they do in hospitals or during pilgrimage to Mecca. It will come gradually, once people become accustomed to it and laws against harassment are passed.”

Female entrepreneurs on the rise

Women in Sweden are still not being paid as much as a man carrying out the same job ,despite the fact that women have been allowed to vote since 1919. So things are actually moving faster for Saudi women at the moment. Considering that I’m the only Western woman ever who have held a senior management position in a 100% Saudi owned company in Riyadh, I feel a bit like I paved the way for the future, almost like“a Mrs Pankhurst of Saudi Arabia”. Would be delighted to see more female Saudi entrepreneurs build up successful companies and get executive positions of their choice.

Know a lot of capable Saudi women, not least my friend Lubna Hussain that had her own talk show on Saudi Television already in 2008. Should be noted here that in the US Barbara Walters wasn’t allowed to be more than a co-host of a TV show until the 1980s.

Positive changes are coming for Saudi women and it will not take as long as it did in the West. There are plenty of capable women in the Kingdom and they will make a positive contribution to the development and diversification of Saudi Arabia. Not only will they work very well, channeling their huge funds into enterprises and investment activities will earn profitable returns as well as boost money supply.

King Abdullah wants to expand women’s role as active members of society and workforce. So let’s see how long it takes for Saudi women as a whole to personify the King’s vision of capable women bringing honor to the family? How long do you believe it will take? Will we see more women, like Lubna Olayan, leading Saudi businesses say, ten years from now? Or do you believe it will take longer?

(photo: World Economic Forum – Flickr)

Yes, that’s right, wealthy donors from developing countries, notably China and India.They are increasingly giving, donating, caring and sympathizing. Not, as some of you may think, just sell and take. And it’s not only a new phenomena. Saudi Arabia and the Gulf states have actually been quiet donors for decades.

Jet Li, Chinese actor, philanthropist and founder of the Jet Li One Foundation. Should not he get the same kind of recognition as Western philanthropists?

With Saudi Arabia and Iran battling each other for influence in the cartel, is OPEC still able to control oil prices? Doubtful, not least since it’s more important to watch what Saudi Arabia does than what OPEC says.

Will Saudi Arabian oil diplomacy be a gift to the world by delivering what the West has so far failed to do?

The Kingdom exports 6.2 million bpd, making it the world’s largest oil exporter, and controls 70% of the world’s spare capacity.

Will Saudi diplomacy work?

Through oil diplomacy, Saudi Arabia hopes to sap Iran of important regional partners, a diplomatic coup the US and other western nations have so far failed to achieve

Consequently the Saudi Minister of Petroleum, Ali Al Naimi, vowed to meet increasing world demand after the last OPEC meeting where members failed to reach an agreement. Or as its secretary-general Abdalla el-Badri put it were “unable to reach a consensus” between countries wanting a production increase and those happy to do nothing. In other words those agreeing with Saudi Arabia versus those siding with Iran.

Oil as a weapon

Already before the meeting Saudi Arabia had actually agreed to double its crude oil exports to India in order to reduce the Asian country’s dependence on Iranian crude.

Interesting and clever move. Have always wondered why the Saudis didn’t use oil as a weapon to, for instance, help the Palestinians. But better late than never to start using it in order to instead contain the mullahs.

Remember Ali Al Naimi telling me how strongly he felt that Saudi oil should be used for the good of the people of the Kingdom. Maybe their oil is now going to benefit not just the Saudi people but the citizens of the world?

If Riyadh can weaken Iran by supplying oil to countries, like India, that would otherwise need to get it from Iran, that’s really a good start.

Riyadh versus Teheran

OPEC now consists of two camps, those with spare capacity headed by Saudi Arabia and those who cannot pump any more oil, led by Iran.

In the first group, the Gulf states and the Kingdom believe that a high oil price is damaging to the world economy. Iran and its allies, on the other hand, are keen on a high oil price and hence don’t want more oil to get onto the market.

Riyadh has already pledged to fill the gap of Libya disappearing from the market. And my guess is that they will go it alone and keep prices in check. In particular if it works against Iran.

The deep divisions within OPEC, particularly between Saudi Arabia and Iran, appear to have become so poisonous that this organisation is incapable of taking any substantive decision.

So maybe it’s time for Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf States to join forces against Iran and through diplomatic efforts achieve what the West has so far failed to do.

Saudi moves behind the scenes

Not sure exactly what was said but I have inside information that King Abdullah sent Prince Bandar to Teheran in 2006 and told the Iranians to tell Hezbollah to stop waging war in Lebanon. And they did. Not sure what leverage the Saudis had against Iran but something made the Iranians listen. Maybe it was about oil?

Personally believe that the Saudis now are really motivated to act against Iran. Knew years ago that King Abdullah told George W Bush what would happen if the US invaded Iraq but was ignored. Saudi Arabia knows it can no longer rely on America to look after its interests so they will go it alone. And their oil is a potent weapon. If Saudi diplomacy against Iran works they will, in my opinion, be doing the world a favour. What do you think? Has OPEC outlived its purpose? Is it a good idea for the Saudis to carry out oil diplomacy against Iran? Will they succeed where the West failed? Or should it be left to the West to contain Iran? Can you think of any other way to stop Iran from creating problems and trying to take advantage of the Arab Spring? Or maybe you believe Iran should be left to their own devices?

Photo: The White House – Flickr

Can’t help wondering why two UN Human Rights watchdogs and the Archbishop of Canterbury seem to believe the world would have been a better place if “Geronimo” had been captured alive?

Would it have been possible to treat Osama bin Laden the same way as any other human being and consider him innocent until proven guilty?

Would it? In theory, yes. We all agree that all human beings deserve a fair trial and should be presumed innocent until proven guilty. If it had been a minor Al Queda leader most likely he would have been captured alive. But there’s an exception to every rule, and to this one Osama bin Laden probably is.

Are you presumed innocent after repeatedly pleading guilty?

He has voluntarily declared himself guilty numerous times, not only to 9/11 but several other terrorist attacks around the world. Can he then be presumed innocent? He was even proud of what he had done and boasted about it. In fact, even encouraged his followers to kill innocent people to further his own interest.

Would he have allowed the Americans to capture him alive?

Bin Laden was an intelligent man. So clever he was able to be in hiding for at least five years in a house 500 meters from Pakistan’s military academy. Have actually been to Abbottabad and it seems to me the place was chosen since it’s next to Kashmir and India, which could have come in handy for him.

Seriously doubt a man as proud and vain as he was would have allowed himself to be captured and become a trophy for the hated Americans. He carefully created his image and I seriously doubt that’s the way he intended to end his life. In the presumable absence of a cyanide capsule, he knew that just one threatening gesture would have made the Navy Seals kill him.

Where would the trial have taken place?

Where could Osama bin Laden have been held awaiting trial? A whole army of suicide bombers would have volunteered to take revenge and thousands and thousands of innocent people would have died as a result.

Am sure the Americans decided against having the trial in the US for security reasons and he could not have been tried in the International Criminal Court in the Hague since its jurisdiction only runs from 2002. And trying him before a military commission in Guantanamo would render the validity dubious.

So where could the trial have taken place in order to please both Western civilians and adherents of Sharia law?

Who would have been prepared to work on his trial?

The prosecutor, judge and jury’s days would be numbered. They and their families would never be safe again and need to be provided with fake identities. So it would have had to be people willing to risk their lives, or die, in order to convict “Geronimo”.

And they would all have had to be men since religious fanatics like Osama bin Laden refuse to be anywhere near women who are not family. The joke in Saudi Arabia was that it was a good idea to marry such a man since he wouldn’t even look at another woman.

Why would Osama have spilled his guts?

It would definitely have been interesting if “Geronimo” had been put on trial and told the truth under oath.

But would he have done that? Definitely not. He would not have given away any information worth having. Probably instead gone on a hunger strike and done everything in his power to convey a picture of him as a martyr and further his cause as much as possible. The information gathered during the raid is probably of more interest than what he would have revealed in a trial.

Would a civilian US court have found him guilty?

If he had been found guilty he would have faced the death penalty. If so he would instead of being shot have been given a lethal injection.

But would he have been found guilty? It would have been difficult for a civilian court to reach a verdict that he was guilty beyond reasonable doubt. The fact that he, and his followers know he is and that he has actually pleaded guilty may not have been enough to reach such a verdict. A clever lawyer would probably have been able to work wonders for him.

Putting him on trial would have given Al Queda the enormous boost it needs. After all its followers are supporters of Osama bin Laden’s and not the network as such. And what would the world have gained from strengthening Al Queda?

Am against the death penalty, but when I lived in Riyadh I understood that the ways the Saudis deal with terrorist is the only way to handle such fanatics. They will never walk the streets again unless they are reformed. And they know that if they are up to no good again they will follow convicted terrorists to chop-chop square. It’s interesting to note that the Saudis are actually successful in making followers of Osama bin Laden’s see their errors and change for good.

We don’t need a revived Al Queda

Putting him on trial would have made him even more of a martyr than he already is to his followers. And Al Queda would have been strengthened. It’s bad enough that they have stated they will avenge his death. But the carnage would have been much greater if he had become a cult figure awaiting trial. Thousands and thousands of innocent people would have died as a result of giving him a fair Western trial.

Am against targeted killings. But was there really much of a choice in the case of Osama bin Laden? What do you think? Would bin Laden have allowed the Americans to capture him alive? Where could his trial have taken place? Is it likely that he would have told the truth under oath? Would he have been found guilty in a civilian US court? How many innocent people would have died as a result of trying him? Would Al Queda have been given a huge boost by a bin Laden trial? Or should he simply have been left in peace in Abbottabad planning further terrorist attacks? Would anything positive really have come out of capturing him alive? And would it have made the world a better place place for all, not just for Al Queda?

(photo: Flickr – Adam Jones, Ph.D.)

Just days after President Barack Obama voiced willingness to talk to Iran, Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad claimed 9/11 had been trumped up as an excuse for the United States to invade Afghanistan and Iraq.

If necessary, could the Saudis, again, in the interest of the world succeed in making Teheran opt for peace?

He said there was no evidence that the death toll at New York’s World Trade Center, destroyed in the attacks, was as high as reported. “They created and prepared public opinion so that everyone considered an attack on Afghanistan and Iraq as (their) right,” he said in a televised speech.

No “Zionists” were killed in the World Trade Center, according to him, because “one day earlier they were told not go to their workplace.” That there is a published list of Sept. 11 dead from more than 90 countries available online, was conveniently ignored.

Ahmadinejad accused the US government of exercising more media censorship than anywhere in the world. And, again, talked about the Holocaust never happening. Obviously having a go at Israel again.

The Iranian president leaves a lot to be desired but no matter how much we disapprove of him he is not an idiot. If he was, he wouldn’t have succeeded to get elected the first time (unlike the last election which was obviously rigged). He knows what he is doing and he has the Mullahs approval. Considering that Iranian elections are rigged they don’t need to show Iranians that he is capable of standing up to the West. They already know that.

What does the Iranian regime gain from sable rattling?

Begs the question of why they keep on provoking Israel and the US with his statements? Maybe the timing is not a coincidence since only 50,000 US soldiers will soon be left in Iraq? The current Israeli government is also more likely to be provoked to strike Iran than the previous one. Maybe he and the Mullahs would like that to happen to give them an excuse to strike back? Or worse, start a war with Iraq that could lead to an all out war in the Middle East? The Mullahs would love to control Makkah and Medina and Iran has caused trouble there in the past which the Saudis luckily managed to handle.

Tehran says it is refining uranium only for electricity and medical treatments. But it’s not out of the question that they already have been supplied with enough uranium for a few missiles from North Korea or Pakistan? Whatever their reason they are hiding something when it comes to their nuclear capacity.

Iran has already caused enough problems in Iraq, Lebanon, Palestine and Afghanistan. That the current regime would like to be more prominent in the Middle East is no secret. So is Ahmadinejad, just like he accused the US of doing, trumping up an excuse to invade Iraq or attack Israel? After all the best thing an unpopular regime can do is unite the people behind an outside enemy.

Doubt that Teheran would attack Iraq unless the US were involved in a strike against them. But then again Israel would be using US equipment and that might be enough of a provocation?Do believe that it’s questionable if the Iranian regime would dare to attack Israel or Iraq without having an excuse to do so. So hopefully no strike on Iran will take place?

Saudi Arabia and the other Gulf states have for years been worried about Iran’s behavior because a strike against Iranian nuclear sites would spread radiation across the whole region. Or worse lead to an all out war in the Gulf between Shias and Sunnis. Don’t need to tell you what that would do not only to the region but the world economy.

So maybe it’s time for the Saudis to, again, make Teheran opt for peace? King Abdullah sent Prince Bandar to Teheran in 2006. The result was that Teheran ordered Hezbollah to stop fighting Israel in Lebanon, which effectively ended that war. Considering King Abdullah’s effort recently regarding Lebanon, maybe it’s no coincidence that the Hezbollah isn’t yet playing an active part in the border incidents?

When it comes to Iran the US, Saudi Arabia, Israel and, most likely, the majority of the Iranian population are on the same side. Actually most of the citizens of the world is. If we all need to unite against Ahmadinejad and the Mullhas probably depends on how badly the Mullas and Ahmadinejad need to unite the Iranians against an outside enemy. Hopefully it will not come to that, but if it does it wouldn’t be the first time the West has been wrong about Iranian intentions.

(photo: The White House – Flickr)

It’s not a coincidence that most successful Western corporations were founded last century. Then it was still possible to build up a highly profitable company in the West. Nowadays however, that’s easier said than done. Western tax authorities, led by Sweden followed by America, are tightening any loopholes there are.

Multinational corporations have already made arrangements to pay as little as possible to the taxman in the West. So they will not be much, if at all, affected by this. However the vast majority of companies are small and medium sized. And for them it isn't always possible to do what the big players do.

In the developing world however, companies can still do what used to be done here which gives them the upper hand. Cannot understand how tax authorities have been allowed, actually instructed, by politicians to hand out all the aces to competitors overseas? You have to play with the cards you have and with the odds stacked against them, Western companies have their hands tied.

Private sector companies generate the main part of taxes and fees that pay for government and the public sector. Hence cannot understand how Western governments can implement taxation laws that slowly but surely make Western corporations unable to compete on the global market? Where is the money going to come from to fund Western authorities? Obviously the problem is that politicians main priority is to be re-elected. They hence take opportunistic decisions to gain short term benefits. But how about keeping the West competitive in the long run? A lot of famous Western brands, such as Volvo, Rolls Royce and Range Rover, have already been sold to the developing world.

Where is the money going to come from to keep the West wealthy when companies are being taxed out of business? Tax authorities in the West are getting more and more militant and EU and US politicians are cooperating to make sure they squeeze as much taxes as possible out of companies. The justice system in Sweden is hence so twisted you are actually better of murdering someone than committing severe economic crimes since your jail sentence will be shorter.

The jobless recovery illustrates the tax problem very well. Many jobs lost will not be replaced, more likely outsourced or moved overseas. Most manufacturing has already moved to the developing world, not because companies wanted to move, but had to in order to be competitive. Fair enough since most Americans and Europeans are not keen on such jobs anyway. Catch is that all countries have a population of everything from brilliant to stupid people. What are Westerners with a low IQ going to do in the future? Non-skilled jobs are in the developing world but how many labourers in the West are prepared to start working in, say, a factory in China? Or Africa for that matter, because some experts believe manufacturing will start moving there since they provide cheaper labour than Asia.

Multinational corporations have already made arrangements to pay as little as possible to the taxman in the West. So they will not be much, if at all, affected by this. However the vast majority of companies are small and medium sized. And for them it isn’t always possible to do what the big players do. So weather they like it or not, they have to start thinking about moving their company head quarters to other parts of the world. Or, like IKEA, transfer ownership to a trust abroad.

Unfortunately politicians are not the do-gooders they ideally should be. Politics is a profession. And like the corporate world they are looking for short term gains. That companies do is one thing, but surely US and European politicians should have the long term welfare of their own countries at heart? Throughout history empires come and go. And the US and European empires are no exceptions. We all know that China, India and Saudi Arabia/the Gulf will take over. But what I cannot understand is why Western politicians are actually speeding up the end of their empires? Wouldn’t it be better to try to remain the leading powers for as long as possible by keeping the good cards? Apparently not since the West seems to be undermining its strenght from within without taking into account what this will do to future generations.

(photo: 427 – flickr)

Am pleased to note that Saudi Arabia and Qatar are likely to lead recovery in the Gulf. Their proactive government support and spending have been instrumental in helping banks maintain relative stability. Can’t help reflecting how interconnected the world is.

We all know how the markets work, but isn't it incredible that Saudi Arabia on the other side of the world got hit by a global crisis made in the US? Shows how interconnected the world is, doesn't it?

Understand how the markets work, but isn’t it incredible that a financial crisis made in America can even hit Saudi Arabia. Not only is the kingdom on the other side of the globe, it also has more money than any other country in the world. Actually the Gulf banking sector as a whole faced a challenging 2009 with most countries facing limited or negative GDP growth, reduced liquidity, lower business volume, and a drop in asset values, representing a significant deterioration in banks’ operating environments. Mainly because of what started far away in the United States.

We are so interconnected what happens is sometimes crazy. Another example is the Swedish currency being hit by the problems in the Euro zone, despite the fact that Sweden’s budget deficit is next to none. At the same time foreigners investors have since the beginning of the year moved $21 billion into Swedish government bonds. And let’s not forget how North Korean sable rattling negatively impact markets world-wide.

Understand perfectly well that almost anything that happens can have an impact on the financial markets. However, what happens as a result is sometimes ludicrous. Where is the logic in Kim Jong-il being allowed to have a negative impact on anything, let alone the markets, outside of North Korea? The fact that he has gives him power he shouldn’t have. What are the chances of China lining up behind Pyongyang to start World War III? But financial markets all over the world still worry about it, which only plays into the hands of the little North Korean dictator.

For global markets, the renewed military tension on the Korean peninsula apparently came at a particularly sensitive time. The threat to South Korea’s fairly big economy — its GDP is four times larger than Greece’s — adds to the markets getting the impression of a world out of control. But why? Sincerely, there have been wars throughout history and we will have wars until the end of time, unfortunately. So why do the markets have to panic because of Pyongyang threatening to start another one? It’s all out of proportions. Not least since although the South Korean economy is bigger than Greece’s, it just accounts for 1,5 percent of global GDP. Europe on the other hand contributes 22 percent.

Maybe the markets impression that the world is out of control isn’t so far fetched? I’m truly international and would like to see the whole world becoming much more global than it is. But some of the negative effects are alarming. Thankfully Wall Street will now be regulated, but if the rest of the world doesn’t follow suit they will just start handling derivatives and other high risk financial products from offices elsewhere in the world.

Just read that until a few months ago, the governments, which had responded so powerfully to the financial crisis, were a comfort to the markets. But weak and wild policies around the globe are now suddenly undermining their conviction. Simply cannot comprehend how the markets could be unaware of the huge government budget deficits? Even I was aware of that escalating problem not only in Europe but also in the United States. How come the markets closed their eyes? And on top of it they suddenly decided it was a problem which wiped a few billion off the markets.

That the Euro slides against the dollar and investors head for the safety of gold makes perfect sense. But that while the Euro goes down European shares rebound sharply doesn’t make sense. Seriously I know this is how the markets work, but it’s crazy. The markets really are out of control. Or is it the whole world?

Photo: Patrick Q – Flickr

Progress is defined as generally moving forward and if we look at it in that sense it’s interesting to ponder upon where in the world progress is taking place?

My friend Lubna Hussain has her own chat show on Saudi Television.

Sometimes it seems to me that Europe’s “getting old” and many people have stopped trying because they are content with the way things are. The welfare state plays a big role in the lazyness that has set in.

Am not a feminist, but after realizing that women in the EU, even in Sweden, are paid less then men for the same job, I am frankly stunned that more progress hasn’t been made during the last twenty years. Have told people all over the world numerous times that in Sweden there is complete equality between men and women. But men in the EU are still on average paid 15 percent more than women for exactly the same job. And these differences still exist even in public sector jobs, such as teachers. What we are looking at here is actually stagnation, which is the opposite of progress.

In Sweden the highest pay gap is in the finance sector where women are actually paid 18 percent less and with only 1,7 percent difference female staff working in architectural firms seems to have made the best choice. Most likely the lack of progress in this respect has been helped by the fact that people in general don’t talk about how much they earn? But the main reason is that people are too content and lazy to make an effort.

The Arab world on the other hand is making progress when it comes to equality between men and women:

Amal Soliman, Egypt’s first female marriage officer was appointed last year and the UAE followed suit and appointed Fatima Said Obeid as their first female marriage officer

Eva Habil is Egypt’s first female mayor for Komboha in the south

Egypt has 31 female judges

Kuwait has female members of parliament

My friend Lubna Hussain has her own talk show on Saudi television

Barbara Walters in the US actually wasn’t allowed to more than co-host a TV show until about ten years ago.  How many Americans would have thought that  Saudi Arabia would follow suit that swiftly?

Prince Alwaleed bin Talal is appointing Saudi women to top positions and even has a female Saudi pilot. And there is an increasing number of work places in KSA that are mixed.

These are just some examples of progress has taken place within the last few years in the Middle East. But in Europe nothing much has been happening for the last twenty years or so.

Constant progress is, in my opinion, essential for development and I believe that the future belongs to the parts of this world that are still trying and hence making progress.

Or as Einstein put it: “Life is like riding a bicycle. To keep your balance you must keep moving”. Is the balance in this world moving towards the Middle East and Asia? Most likely because having a dream facilitates progress. In the Middle East and Asia more people are dreaming and making an effort to make their dreams come true. Equality between men and women is just one example. Or as Eleanor Roosevelt once put it: “the future belongs to those who have a dream”.

(Re-published on popular demand)