Competition for Russia's Gazprom in Natural Gas

A February 1 article investigates Mr. Reinhard Mitschek’s plan to connect a gas pipeline from the Caspian area to Western Europe. This would weaken the monopoly that Russia has in natural gas. The building of the pipeline is scheduled to begin in 2011; however, deciding who will provide the needed capital of €7.9 billion ($11.03 billion) to fund the project is still in question. But Mr. Mitschek is optimistic that many financiers will be willing to fund the long-term initiative rather than investing in volatile short-term ventures.

U.S. Leadership Is Essential

This is a preview of my new book, Global Business: Positioning Ventures Ahead to appear with Taylor and Francis in June of 2010. I will be posting little snippets from the book every once in a while. I encourage you to read, comment, share, and your thoughts to the comment section. And look for the book in June.
---
As we write this, governments worldwide are working to counteract the 2009 economic crisis by developing stimulus plans. The efforts of any one nation will have an impact globally because national economies are intertwined, but economic activity is highly concentrated among a few players – the U.S., European Union, Japan, China and Canada – who account for more than 75 percent of the world’s economy. That clout makes it critical for U.S. companies to become more involved in international marketing, whether it is export-import trade, licensing, joint ventures, wholly-owned subsidiaries, turnkey operations, or management contracts.

Please Comment:  Do you think the protectionist measures that are being enacted as a part of the stimulus plans will help or hurt domestic economic recovery?  What is the best way for governments to react to the recession?  Do you think that a global outlook is key to recovery?

EU Needs To Allow Worker Relocation

In light of high unemployment rates, many politicians in Europe continue to fear that workers from low-income nations within the expanded European Union could come to steal the few menial jobs now still held precariously by locals. Immigrants may take advantage of generous health care, unemployment or welfare systems. And they’ll never go home once they discover the burial benefits.

Europe is different from the United States, but some post World War II U.S. experience can offer insights: Year after year, U.S. movers to a different state almost reach 3 percent of the population. That is the equivalent of the entire U.S. population transiting to a new home state in little more than one generation. 

All this mobility has maintained a sense of adventure in America. It has retained a spirit of flexibility and exploration. If there are no new jobs in Illinois but lots of new opportunities in Arizona, then that’s where people go. There has been the creation of entirely new regional industry and service clusters, the absorption of many immigrants into the economy and relatively low long term unemployment. There remains strong local pride of place yet there is little xenophobic fear from out of state migrants. 

What does all this mean for the new Europe? Even large increases in mobility would only represent a small population flow (which is now less than one half of one percent). Europe needs new approaches and perspectives. People deserve to explore new options. New moves may well become an action signal for the European economy and way of thinking. This is a key opportunity to enrich the quality of life of regions and individuals. Opening up to others should bring the reward of growing flexibility, better understanding, and rising tolerance levels. Mobility has brought the power of improvisation and adjustment to the United States. Today’s world needs a Europe of courage, innovation and a willingness to take risks, with citizens that want all members to be part of rather than apart from them.