This year’s annual meeting of the World Economic Forum (WEF) in Davos has once again attracted the global political spotlight as a gathering of heads of state and government and business leaders met to discuss the most pressing issues of the day. Under the motto ‘Collaboration for the Intelligent Age’, numerous speeches were delivered and solutions were offered for the challenges of the globalised world. But with all the glamour and grandiose visions that this event has to offer, critical questions arise again and again about the actual significance of these initiatives and the true agenda behind the scenes.
Constructive Optimism: A token demand or a serious approach?
Klaus Schwab, the founder of the WEF, called for ‘constructive optimism’ and presented the ‘intelligent age’ as the solution to the profound global crises. In his speech, he spoke of the ‘unprecedented risks’ of the transition from the industrial age, but also of the ‘significant opportunities’ that this change brings for humanity. A grand but empty-sounding promise that does not really address the dramatic uncertainty that characterises world politics. While Schwab presents change as a gateway to a ‘new renaissance’, one might ask to what extent this optimism is realistic in the face of growing geopolitical tensions and social inequality. Is ‘constructive optimism’ really a sincere call for change, or is it rather a rhetorical device to avoid uncomfortable questions and promote an agenda that primarily serves the interests of global elites?
European ambitions and geostrategic adjustments: a question of credibility
Political optimism was also evident in the speeches of European leaders such as Ursula von der Leyen and Olaf Scholz. Von der Leyen spoke of ‘fierce geostrategic competition’ and the need to increase Europe’s competitiveness in order to avoid falling behind in the global economic system. While these goals seem understandable from a European perspective, the question remains as to how seriously these ambitions can be implemented with the existing internal contradictions in the EU and the global distribution of wealth and power. Is Europe really ready to ‘go beyond blocs and taboos’ or will it remain trapped in a constant self-undermining through political divisions and economic inequality?
Olaf Scholz, the German Chancellor, also emphasised the need for partnerships as an ‘engine for successful economic development’. However, while he addressed the geopolitical challenges and uncertainties regarding the new administration in the US, he overlooked not only the growing gap between rich and poor countries, but also the deep disregard for democracy and human rights that many of his partner countries practice. Can Germany, which plays a key role in the EU, really uphold the values of democracy and human rights when authoritarian regimes and economic inequality are simultaneously supported by the same partnerships?
Global cooperation or geopolitical calculations?
Another key point of the meeting was the call for global cooperation to meet the challenges of climate change, economic inequality and technological change. Particularly noteworthy was the contribution of Chinese Vice Premier Ding Xuexiang, who warned of the dangers of protectionism and called for greater cooperation in scientific and technological innovation. However, his statements on open globalisation and China’s economic growth remain problematic in a context of growing political control and restriction of freedom of expression within China. Can a country that is increasingly adopting an authoritarian course really be considered a pioneer for a fairer and more inclusive future? The call for a global consensus on sustainable development, while at the same time expanding one’s own position of power and economic interests, is difficult to reconcile with actual geopolitical actions.
Africa and the Global South: Another Promise Without Real Prospects for Action?
South African President Cyril Ramaphosa emphasised the importance of solidarity and sustainable development when he presented Africa’s agenda at the 2025 G20 summit in Johannesburg. These words may sound promising at first, but the historical inequality imposed on Africa in its role in the global economy remains an unresolved issue. The call for cooperation for ‘mutual benefit’ is in stark contrast to the ongoing exploitative structures imposed on the Global South by the leading economic nations. Will international cooperation really change, or will rich countries continue to rely on the exploitation of resources and the enforcement of their own economic interests?
Final thoughts: an era of dialogue or a meeting of the elites?
Despite the impressive speeches and lofty visions, the WEF 2025 essentially remains a meeting of leaders whose prosperity and power often benefit from the current global imbalances. While the topics of innovation, sustainability and cooperation for the ‘intelligent age’ represent commendable goals, the question remains to what extent these will actually be implemented if the political and economic structures that perpetuate these imbalances remain in place.
Ultimately, the question is whether the WEF 2025 can truly mark the beginning of real change – or whether it will be just another moment in which global elites consolidate their positions while the most pressing issues remain unresolved. In a world where rhetoric is often overtaken by reality, it remains to be seen whether the ambitions expressed at this meeting can be translated into sustainable and just action.