Distinguished participants,
Ladies and Gentlemen,
Dear friends,

The topic of this session is "Longing for a Cold War". I have to admit that the title surprised me. Can we talk about a Cold War in a time when there are so many open and hot conflicts around us?

Let me remind you that during the Cold War, there was order and stability maintained by balancing the fear between the two ideologically confronted parties.

In 1989, old regimes in Central and Eastern Europe fell together with the Berlin Wall. The end of the Cold War brought about the hope for a more peaceful, safe and better life. With the win of liberal democracy, Fukuyama's theory on the end of the history of ideas appeared.

However, euphoria was followed by a reality check. Triumphalism was short-lived and collapsed after only a decade. History repeated with all its force.

It is true that today, there are frosty relations between some of the key global actors. And it is true that part of the rhetoric used reminds us of the Cold War. However, it is not the same phenomenon because there are some substantial differences.

Distinguished participants,

During the bloc division, there were two key global state actors. Today, in our multipolar world, there are many more global actors, both state and non state.

If during the Cold War, the balance of fear used to contribute to some kind of stability, today, intimidation by non state actors such as transnational terrorism, violent extremism and organized crime introduce an even greater instability.

Instead of international order, today we have a global disorder. Instead of peace, stability, development, prosperity and justice for all that were expected after the end of the Cold War, the fear of others and xenophobia reappeared, and crisis areas in the Middle East, Northern Africa but also in Europe are once again inflamed.

We are witnessing the fact that chaos cannot be controlled and channeled. An example of this is the conflict in Syria that started as an ideological civil war, then morphed into an internal ethno-religious clash, and finally became a wider regional confrontation where global actors also got involved. At first glance, the situation is similar to what Hobbes once described as a war of all against all.

Instead of calming down, it might even be possible to witness an expansion of conflict areas and creation of a global strip of instability which might in turn provoke continuous migration waves. Those grey conflict zones are a fertile soil for the evil of transnational terrorism that installs fear, as well as for organized crime networks that make billions of dollars from trading with human destinies.

Therefore, if we speak about a new Cold War, it would mean that we are just slaves to images created for some other, long gone times. Something much greater is on the horizon. We are witnessing a process of fundamental transformation of international order into a world order, in which non-state actors will become more active. Apart from the confrontation between states or alliance of states, there is another one.

Distinguished participants,

If, a quarter century ago, we were able to discuss the Cold War as a clash of ideologies, today we can only talk about a clash of two paradigms, or two worlds.

Power in the 20th century was concentrated in the proactive centers of the global North. In the 21st century, global South rose up. The developed is paying the price of exclusion. Some communities and peoples from the third, non-developed world, who were excluded and marginalized in the past, are today at the top of the agendas of developed countries.

A new force awakens – global citizenship – global demos. This new force demands attention and respect for the opportunities it holds, in a world that is still suffering from the wounds inflicted by all dominations in the past centuries - imperial, colonial and finally, neo-colonial.

Opposite the concept of Lebensraum as the world of order, is what Habermas named Lebenswelt, the world of life.

Let me give you an illustration.

Only three weeks ago, on March 14, a serious incident happened at our southern border, near the village of Idomeni, when 2445 migrants illegally entered Macedonian territory. Among them were 74 journalists, activists, members of NGOs and volunteers from 5 continents. They not only helped the migrants cross the border, but they also directly broadcasted the entire event through world media and social networks, just like a reality show.

Idomeni was the place where the world of states and the world of non-state actors clashed. States establish and defend borders, and the world demands that those border be opened. This is why, just as Hobsbaum said, this is a time of extremes.

This is an illustration of massive global activism. With the help of social networks and media, non-state actors try to exercise pressure and influence state policies. Sometimes, with their activities, they enable greater visibility of the needs of people and provide a voice to the voiceless.

What is the idea that unites them? They are united by the idea of a world in which real life borders would disappear just like the borders in the virtual world.

Why am I saying all of this? Every age has its needs. In the Medieval times, it was the feudal system with servants. When social development went beyond the limits of feudal communities, the concept of nation state was created in Westphalia, with a view to answer the new needs.

We are living in times when the shape of nation state is too tight to realize the globalized needs of our societies - both positive and negative. The lack of functionality of current international organizations creates a need for functional global institutions and mechanisms that will create applicable global norms. The failure to build such functional institutions might take us back towards a new feudalism.

In this sense, this is a possibility to discover the contours of an emerging world. Just like in Ancient times, the polis transformed into a cosmopolis, today, the order of states is transformed into an order of the world.

Thank you.