Dispatch from Davos

Dispatch from Davos
Dispatch from Davos

Economic Forum (WEF). This is the first time the annual gathering of world leaders, CEOs, and public figures takes place in the spring (no snow boots!), courtesy of Omicron. It’s also the first in-person forum since the pandemic hit in January 2020, and it couldn’t be happening at a more critical moment for the world.

Indeed, the theme of this year’s meeting is “History at a Turning Point,” and what a turning point it is. From Covid-19, climate change, digitalization, and deglobalization to the war in Ukraine, slowing global growth, surging energy prices, and a looming food crisis, this is the most crisis-rich backdrop to a World Economic Forum I’ve ever seen.

Want to understand the world a little better? Subscribe to GZERO Daily by Ian Bremmer for free and get new posts delivered to your inbox every week.

Me moderating a panel titled "Russia: What's Next?"Source: World Economic Forum/Sikarin Fon Thanachaiary.

Why are we seeing so many converging crises at the same time?

Largely, I think it’s because we are in a geopolitical recession—a moment in history when nobody (not the U.S., not the G7, not the G20) is driving the bus—where many of the reigning global institutions are increasingly not aligned with the geopolitical balance of power. The United Nations Security Council, NATO, the World Trade Organization, the World Bank, the International Monetary Fund—all of these institutions were the product of a bipolar world forged atop the ashes of World War II.

The balance of power has shifted since—from the collapse of the Soviet Union and the rise of China to the end of the U.S.-led order—but institutions haven’t adapted. That’s why Germany and Japan, two wealthy, dynamic, free-market democracies with governments strongly committed to multilateralism and the rule of law, don’t have seats at the UN Security Council...while Russia does.

As a result of this vacuum of leadership and growing misalignment, the global architecture is no longer fit for purpose, and instead of global cooperation, we get every nation for itself. That makes crises more likely to emerge and the world less capable of responding to them.

Of all the Davos gatherings I’ve attended—and I’ve been coming since 2008—this is by far the one that is most being driven by geopolitics. Helle Thorning-Schmidt, former Prime Minister of Denmark, echoed this feeling during a Global Stage livestream conversation hosted on Monday by GZERO Media and Microsoft. Business leaders are starting to realize that they have no choice but “to engage in geopolitics,” she rightly noted.

Back in 2009, the first or second time I came to Davos, there was a massive sense of crisis, too. But everyone attending at least felt like they understood the playbook, the tools we had to respond to it. This time is different. People know there are massive crises brewing, but they don’t really know what the second- and third-order consequences will be, and they sure don’t know how to deal with them.

At the top of the agenda this year is the war in Ukraine and its many cascading effects. Everyone at Davos is worried about it, and for once, most everyone at Davos (though certainly not globally) is on the same side of the conflict. There’s a lot of consensus around Putin needing to be stopped and Ukrainians deserving all the help we can give them. But that’s where the unity ends. How does the conflict end? Can the Ukrainians actually win? Does that require humiliating the Russians? Or does Putin need to be offered an off-ramp? On those questions, there’s no agreement whatsoever.

Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky addresses Davos via video.Source: World Economic Forum/Sikarin Fon Thanachaiary.

As for the outlook for the conflict, the pessimists (like me, on this one) think the fighting will continue, albeit at lower levels of intensity than we’re seeing now. The optimists think the fighting can stop, albeit not definitively. Either way, everyone agrees on at least three things: (1) a negotiated settlement is a remote possibility, (2) there’s no stable equilibrium in sight, and (3) the United States and its advanced industrial allies are in a cold war with Russia (veering on hot, if you count cyber, disinformation, and espionage).

This decoupled environment is far from the globalist ideal the World Economic Forum has been committed to for 50 years. A case in point is the fact that there are no Russians in attendance at Davos: no business leaders, no delegates, no government officials. The “Russia House,” a building in this mountain town that used to serve as an outpost for Russian oligarchs and officials, has been turned into the “Russian War Crimes House,” an exhibit of images depicting the atrocities committed by Russian forces against Ukrainian civilians.

🔔 And if you haven't already, don't forget to subscribe to my free newsletter, GZERO Daily by Ian Bremmer, to get new posts delivered to your inbox.

More from GZERO Media

Staff remove bottles of US alcohol from the shelves of a Liquor Control Board of Ontario store as part of retaliatory moves against tariffs announced by President Donald Trump, in Toronto, Canada, on March 4, 2025.
REUTERS/Arlyn McAdorey

On Tuesday, Washington imposed tariffs of 10% on energy and 25% on all goods imported from Canada and Mexico and doubled its existing tariffs on Chinese imports from 10 to 20%. All three countries responded with harsh words and retaliatory measures. Will Donald Trump stay the course or backtrack in the days ahead?

A high-stakes race is underway to determine which country will supply the technology that powers the world’s emerging AI economy. While the US has the opportunity to lead, a last-minute Biden administration regulation – the AI DiffusionRule – risks undermining America’s ability to compete. By capping the export of essential AI components to key allies and partners, the rule could unintentionally push countries toward China’s rapidly expanding AI sector. @Microsoft supports strong national security protections, including ensuring AI technology is deployed in secure, trusted data centers. But the rule’s broad restrictions put vital markets – including Switzerland, Poland, Singapore, India, and Israel – at a disadvantage, limiting their access to American AI infrastructure and stalling economic growth. The Trump administration now has an opportunity to refine the rule – simplifying it, strengthening enforcement, and eliminating restrictions that hurt American innovation and exports. The race for AI dominance starts at home, and the US must empower its tech sector to compete on the global stage. Read the full blog to learn more here.

- YouTube

Does Trump's relationship with Putin isolate or concern China? What does the resignation of Iran's Vice President Zarif signal about tensions in the country? What's next for the Israel-Hamas ceasefire as the first phase comes to an end? Ian Bremmer shares his insights on global politics this week on World In :60.

Midjourney

Microsoft has joined a growing revolt against Biden-era chip export controls that tech companies claim will hurt American competitiveness. On Feb. 27, Microsoft publicly urged the Trump administration to roll back one specific set of restrictions on advanced AI chips imposed during Biden’s final days in office.

Viewpoint: China’s annual NPC meeting to address lackluster economy and Trump threat
VCG via Reuters Connect

Beijing is warning top artificial intelligence leaders – including researchers and corporate leaders – to avoid traveling to the United States owing to security concerns, according to a report published Saturday by the Wall Street Journal.

Elon Musk listens as President Donald Trump speaks in the Oval Office of the White House in Washington, DC, on Feb. 11, 2025.
REUTERS/Kevin Lamarque

Donald Trump’s administration laid off 170 employees at the National Science Foundation in February as part of a government-wide staff reduction. Critics say the cuts, which included artificial intelligence specialists, could hurt American competitiveness in AI research. While the agency said Monday it will reinstate 84 workers following a court ruling on March 3, experts warn the cuts, combined with looming government-wide staff reductions, could severely hamper the agency.