Hi everyone. I'm Nicolola Tangian, the CEO of the Norwegian Sovereign Wealth Fund. And today I'm really excited because I'm joined by my fellow Norwegian, Burger Brenda.

And Burger, he is the president and CEO of the World Economic Forum, the organization behind the iconic divorce gatherings and that's where the world's most powerful leaders meet each year to shape the global agenda.

Um, Burger also happens to be, I think, the best connected person in the world. So, uh, Burger, pleasure to have you here.

of coming from you that means a lot um let's uh uh before we move on to the big the really big topics for listeners who uh don't know what exactly is the World Economic Forum?

So the World Economic Forum is 55 years old. It is an international organization for public private cooperation. It's based here in Geneva, Switzerland. It's not for profit and as you said we're most known for our annual meeting in Davos that bring uh brings um key people from business and governments together but we have hundreds of meetings we have hundreds of different initiatives public private uh in the field of uh fighting corruption through nature and climate uh to reviving growth and trade.

How many people work at the forum? How big an organization is it?

So altogether um around um thousand people.

How do you define success for the organization? What what is it that you want to achieve?

It is when we can get people together and we can facilitate progress.

And what's the key to that?

So um of course in today's world where we see much more fragmentations and polarization is harder than in the past uh to get people that don't even agree in the same room.

But even in the age of um nationalism and na nation states there is also overlap in interest. So what we're trying to identify uh between companies and countries if there is overlap in interest we can strike and we can maybe form an initiative we can facilitate uh the progress that I was referring to.

So for example look at cyber crime we probably lose like four five trillion US dollars a year in cyber crime. That's like three 4% of the global GDP. I think even the G2, China and the US can agree that is not a good idea.

So there we can work on rules and regulations uh on how to get rid of this um criminal use of uh cyber. I think there are also other areas like future pandemics. Um hopefully in the future we can come back again to have some more consensus on nature and climate. So these are areas and this is our kind of modus operandi uh today.

Burger um let's let's um kick off with some of these big uh big questions. Um what does it mean to operate between two world orders which I guess is what we're doing just now.

Yeah, we are we had one world order uh after uh the cold war 89. Uh that was like a win-win thinking. what is good for you is good for me and vice versa.

Uh to more of approach now that is more competitive. It's also more mercantalistic from uh the past and you know I'm not a big believer in beggar thy neighbor. I think you should rather prosper your uh neighbor but that world order uh is not there anymore.

And between world orders, it's always uh unruly times. We know that from history. Some people would say that it's like multi- polarity without multilateralism.

I would say it's more from soft power to hard power. there is tough competition and I just hope that the new world order also will uh bring with it uh some uh thinking of common rules so we don't end up in like the law of the jungle uh in the future.

I don't think we will go uh that far but it's obviously a different world order than the one we were used to.

And how far do you think this uh geopolitical fragmentation will go?

It's hard to say, but you know, world leaders also want to revive growth. U to be reelected, you need a good economy. And I think they will also see that if you go too far in n shoring, friend shoring and only trade with people uh you like and not uh where you get the best and cheapest products um part of your then as input factor will also come with um economic cost and you will see more sluggish uh growth.

So hopefully there uh will not be a full decoupling. I think there is going to be a securing of the global value chains but I don't think there will be a full decoupling.

and additionally we are in a paradigm shift with the new technologies. I guess we'll come back to that but that can also be supportive for uh economic growth and maybe it's of course um then competition but maybe also some cooperation.

So, in your mind, do you think this is a temporary situation or are we at the beginning of a of an even more significant split?

I think we're not going to see the old era back with uh the era where you had globalization and you had um like uh the UN sharper basis of the corporation, the rule of law. I think there still will be aspects of this but I think there will be more uh strong powers. It will be interest.

We will also go into a situation where uh trade will look uh differently. But hopefully it will be a real globalization and hopefully the new technologies can also play uh good factor be a good um and pass positive contributor uh to growth and not a situation where the winner takes it all.

Do you think we'll see a period of economic stagnation?

There is not that much of fiscal muscles. But at the same time I don't think we're going to see a repetition of the sluggish growth from the 1970s.

And why is that?

I think as I already mentioned the new technologies are so incredibly powerful and uh the way that trade was the engine of growth for decades grew two to three times more uh than trend growth I think uh the new technologies will be the big game changer they will increase productivity maybe with 10% in the coming decade and they can then be the factors that will still continue with growth even if there is more decoupling in the global economy and the global economy has been surprisingly resilient so far even in uh a very difficult geopolitical uh situation.

So I'm more half like half glass full than half glass empty.

Why do you think the economy and financial markets have been so resilient?

I think there uh is um we we already see uh the effect especially in the US and I think partly uh also in India uh of the new um technologies I think you're seeing productivity gains you're seeing huge investments you're going to see new breakthroughs in medicine uh in sciences that we haven't seen um in a long time. I think this is part of it.

and I think what we've seen so far on protectionist measures have not been so severe that um you have impacted uh too much uh the growth that was already there uh post uh COVID and also due to the huge stimulus.

But it is a fact that we are growing slower now uh than uh before co and for decades we had a global trend growth of close to 4%. We are no more than we're closer to 3%. And that that is not going to solve the big challenges we have globally. It's not going to lead us to meeting the sustainable development goals. It's not going to eradicate poverty in the same way as we saw in the last decades. provided that the new technologies will not bring us up closer to 4% again.

And that that is my hope. And the positive thing with the new technologies, they're not polluting. They're not building like big pipes uh uh with uh huge emissions. These are this is growth uh where it's a very different growth uh than in the past. Much more sustainable.

uh back in January um in Davos um the uh the Americans were really optimistic and very bullish about the outlook whilst Europeans uh they were kind of uh more like they were in some kind of funeral. What's been um happening in the US since and just where is where do you think where do you see the US going um in a way both both at home and also at the at the world scene?

It's hard to predict. uh there is news every day but at the same time uh the US is like 27% of the global economy with 5% of the global population they have almost 50% of the global military power a lot of the big and most innovative companies are in the US so I think there still uh is going to be uh a vibrant economy in the US.

but they're also um facing inflation and immigration. The latter is high on the administration's agenda. Uh the first one is more complicated if you are paying more for imports and you're creating also a tougher uh market at home when it comes to access to labor can lead to higher inflation.

So these were uh the two big eyes that was were promised by Trump fighting inflation and uh immigration. But overall I do think still that the US economy is uh very solid. I think it's going to continue to uh grow I believe more in the soft landing uh than in the hard landing.

Geopolitically uh of course it is um definitely a different administration uh than um in the past and the Europeans are struggling with this but at the same time uh I think the side also has changed in Europe since Davos.

In what ways?

Because uh in Davos there was like gloom and doom uh when it came to Europe. I think uh things are not as bad in Europe. Uh look at the fastest growing of all the OCD economies including American economy is Spain.

and Spain was almost written off 20 years ago at least 15 years ago they had youth unemployment of 40%. Another very fast growing economy is Greece that was definitely written off and the whole euro was written off and it's still the second most important currency in the world.

We're seeing also scientists and others coming to Europe. Europe is seen as a place uh where there is high life quality. Uh we know there is a tal talent war going on. So maybe Europe can get uh in a better shape when it comes to talent.

But red tape uh bureaucracy um and uh so far not uh the most robust followup of the draggy report is holding Europe back and also internal political uh impulses.

uh we have the AFD big party now uh in Germany but at the same time we um also see uh that some of the incubant parties are also uh doing better. So I'm more optimistic on Europe now than I was just a few months ago.

How do you read the relationship between US and China?

That relationship is the most important one uh in the world. the so-called G2 as I mentioned uh US almost 30% of the global GDP China almost 20 that's almost half of our global economy and they are definitely competing it's a big competition between these two nations and they have different interests swares and uh China uh has been also um constantly uh relying less on export to the US.

if you look Now at the Chinese export to the US, it's gone down from 20% of their export in 2013 to now I think is around 11 12%. So they're more resilient, they're more diversified.

But of course uh China is also faced with economic uh domestic challenges as uh in the US. uh there is a export-led economy when export is harder and also the demand globally is changing from manufactured goods to services and digital trade and these are area where China is now trying to pivot to worse.

but traditionally they've been the big exporter of uh manufactured goods and there we see that the demand has peaked we also know that the property prices. There is also a shrinking of the workforce. So, China is also faced with structural challenges, but they're also very good at addressing those things.

and they um are making uh changes now for example in um the community for entrepreneurs and also startups and tech companies um that um I think is well noticed by this community in China.

Just moving on to how you uh get to your priorities. You uh play a very big role um I mean you and the world economic forum in in in in shaping the global conversations. How do you how do you decide what should be on the agenda on the end agenda in Davos?

So we uh try to look at um what are the topics where we can make also progress where bringing people together at least can increase the understanding of each other's challenges and in many ways we are in the same boat and that I think we are forgetting if we are faced with transboundary challenges we cannot um solve them as uh than single nation states.

We also think that while the uh while countries are now very inepted, some countries are more indeped at any time since the Napoleonic war. So it's like serious private sector is still very vibrant. They have a lot of money to invest.

So um to work between private sector and government I think is the way forward also to then addressing and solving some of the key challenges. You need the private sector on board uh to also make uh the right changes. These are things we would like uh to discuss uh also in Davos in 20 uh 26.

What's the best way to discuss these topics? Because uh you have big uh public sessions, you have smaller invites only tracks, you have bilateral meetings, you got all kinds of all kinds of formats. uh like what do you what do you think is the most efficient way of meeting people and discussing big problems?

all the above I I think it's not either or we have to combine it a big public session with the presidents and also key fortune 50 cos uh increases uh the global attention it can also be a good input to smaller meetings where the same people can meet and discuss.

and there is then also the so-called Chattam House uh based uh meetings where uh you cannot use what is said there uh publicly that also are pretty successful and then you have bilateral meetings where people meet uh in Davos and they can discuss border conflicts they can discuss uh challenges between uh nations or companies.

So I think the whole ecosystem uh is also based on an understanding that uh in Davos you come with a mindset to find solutions not to just articulate what um what what you disagree on.

You get together the so-called global elite who are the who are the really important people in the world today.

So uh we say that we bring together uh leaders from government and leaders uh from the private sector and also leaders from universities, science, um labor unions, uh also civil society and together uh they form a unique multi- stakeholder blend where I think we can uh then uh achieve things together.

and we've seen that um In the past, for example, the whole notion of finding traffic rules uh when it comes to the new technologies that the humans should be on top of the algorithms and not the algorithms uh of the humans uh shouldn't be controversial. These are things that we are able to discuss in Davos, but we're not able to finalize of course these kind of rules. That's for um other bodies uh to do.

But the strength of a multistakeholder meeting like this is that um we can bring uh players together that uh it is necessary to bring together to see any kind of progress.

This group which you called the multistakeholder uh group uh how how has that changed over the last 10 years? What what type of people are uh coming in and who are going out?

So that's a good question. um you know that uh in the companies they we have seen a tendency of uh cos lasting shorter than in the past three four years and then some companies just change the uh co.

we also know that being in power today is tough being in government there is anti-inccubent factor for those countries at least that do have uh these kind of elections so I think we in the past could see some people come for decades. Um that's less frequent now at least uh from Europe and North America. We see uh that um the name tags are changing much more frequently.

What are the implications?

I I I think it's also a sign of um uh shortterm thinking uh in many companies and uh in many countries. It takes time uh to um really be successful in implementing a strategy. So if you're elected uh in a country, you have to really work hard the first year to implement the reforms and hopefully you will see the positive results um four years later is when the elections are there.

But you know some reforms you can only see the result of in a in a decade's uh perspective. Um and I think the same uh are in companies. some companies are more long-term and not only focused on the last quarter's results, but I think there is a tendency uh for that.

But with the new technologies with all the challenges we're faced with I I I think one um also should not forget that um we should also acknowledge the importance of being u medium long-term uh in your perspective and that should also be uh rewarded.

Is it more difficult to build trust in a world where people are changing uh more frequently?

So um it comes with its challenges but we're also been better at uh including um seuitees from companies not only the CEO and the chairperson but also other uh people in the leadership of companies and the same with countries. So we also know invite key opposition leaders from uh some countries.

So overall, I think we're still able to have uh a great uh crowd uh in and at our meetings. Uh we are for example now uh going to go to TNEN China for summer doubles in um four weeks and the sign up there is incredible. We haven't seen this kind of numbers in a long time.

So I think there is a lot of interest to also decipher what is really happening to connect the dots. So before people came also um for the initiatives and the partnerships I think that still is important but the world has become so complex that we're seeing a lot of leaders coming and say we really just need to meet to understand um what what are the possible uh prospects uh for the future? What are the scenarios out there and more focus on resilience? how to build capacity to handle the unknowns.

On a more um personal level, what's the best way to build relationships and trust because that's kind of what you do for a living, right?

I think that um you have to be an honest broker. Uh you have to not um then overpromise. uh you should all always um uh overd deliver uh instead of um of of the opposite.

Uh and you have we are a impartial organization. So we are very clear that we work as closely with the India as we do with the US, Brazil, China and we we are like a facilitator and a platform. We're not an organization that is an activist organization saying that uh we are working for this and this the the far furthest we go is to say that we're facilitators of progress.

I think that is building trust and um and over time they do see that they get uh positive results of engaging with the world economic firm.

What's the key to handling powerful people with big eos?

I I I think it's uh to have a good agenda that they feel that is worth their time and um be very serious about that. Hardworking and um we we we don't uh give in to uh all the demands for uh from all uh these um leaders. We are very open and transparent about what we can uh deliver.

and over time I I think that has been our strength and and leaders do come back and and that's a it's a big compliment in Davos this year we had more than 60 head of states and governments we had 70 out of 100 fortune 100 cos and this is not done overnight it's hard work um over years and and building that kind of trust.

uh what's the most difficult diplomatic situation you've been in? Wow.

Um, it was hard when uh I was foreign minister in Norway and we negotiated the the the peace agreement in Colombia between the FAR gerilla and President Sanchez, especially uh because it was an armed conflict that had with President Santos. It was um hard because this um kind of internal armed conflict had gone on uh for 50 years.

It was also a bit of a challenge when I was given the task to repair and rebuild the diplomatic relations between China and Norway. something that took uh a few years because there was uh no trust and you have to stick of course to your national values and and your integrity but at the same time um it is in a country's interest uh two countries interest to be able to to work together.

Okay. Uh I need to ask some uh uh slightly difficult questions too. So uh lots of private jets uh at Davos uh you know kind of a pretty pretty big contrast to the climate focus you have just how do you how do you look at these things?

So um it is true that a lot of um also governmental leaders do come uh with their presidential or official planes. you know, when we have had Trump twice uh in Davos, he he does land um with Air Force One. He's got a new plane now.

Yeah. Yeah. I I saw that.

Uh so uh but it's still uh would be uh counted. And it's also true that some of the big cos of the world uh that run companies that have a bigger turnover than many countries, they also come with their official planes. I think that is uh de facto uh a reality and is not going to change um with Davos. So I'm I'm um I'm just registering this and um it's it's a fact.

What about this being very exclusive and elitist in a in a world where we perhaps need more transparency and openness?

I think we're very transparent. I think we're very open. Uh I think the World Economic Forum has like 40 million followers in social media and we put out a lot of things uh there. Uh I was indirectly addressing this earlier on because you used the word elite but I didn't really want to go into a discussion about it.

But you know when you have the head of states and governments from countries, you have the key cos from the key companies, you have the leaders, directors from the key Ivy League uh institutions of the world, you can say these are the true leaders in the world that can if they come together make a positive uh influence. You can also call them the elite.

I think they're all very uh at least most of them very hardworking people that have come to these positions and I think it's good to bring them uh together.

Some of our meetings are open uh to the public. Some meetings uh as I also mentioned are closed meetings because if you discuss for example between Armenia and Aabajan uh the border uh conflict that cannot be for open camera if you want to have progress.

when we have had discussions among Palestinians and Israelis in Davos when we have had discussions also between Americans and and Chinese of course these should be uh closed meetings uh to make sure that we make prog progress and if there are things to announce then it will be announced in the press conference.

Now your founder Klaus Schwab recently stepped down um and I appreciate this is a very sensitive issue but what can you tell us about uh about this?

So uh um our founder Klaus Shra has stepped down after 55 uh years. uh he is our founder and I work with him uh closely uh for the last uh 7 and a half uh years. Um he is now 87 years old and he said that he chose not to step down uh due to to age. That was his his statement.

And what is your statement?

Yeah, the same.

Okay. How will you change the leadership culture going forward?

So uh the human capital of the world economic forum is the real capital. uh as I mentioned we have thousand uh I have thousand colleagues uh at um web and uh these are the people that uh also contribute every day uh to the mission of the forum to improve the state of the world or to to facilitate uh progress.

but you know to motivate people uh that is of this kind of caliber that we uh recruit uh you have to build strong teams it's all about motivation. If you're motivated, you get so much done and if you feel what you're doing is also important, you're even more motivated.

So that will um be uh and is my big task. making sure that we have the best talent in the world that you know one person can go very fast but if you want to go far we have to go all together and the world economic forum should also uh be a great place uh to work have a great workplace culture that is my goal.

what have you brought from uh a life in politics you were head of the uh the Red Cross uh and so on what what leadership ideals have you brought into the organization

You know that's u understanding also uh how governments work and also uh the private sector and how you can then by matching them uh making uh progress is something that you learn uh if you work both in private sector and in uh in government.

So I'm spending a lot of my time on trying to be creative uh in new ways of breaking impulses because there are so many impulses. So for example, a few years ago during COP uh 26 in Glasgow, we got this uh idea of having the leading global companies using their purchasing power to green their supply chain.

saying that for example Apple says that 25% of their aluminium needs to be green. If you have companies uh doing this, it sets really a strong example. It's their right because they're privately owned companies. So they can do this and that creates also a big demand.

We have for example for years now had a coalition of 100 companies uh going further than the national legislation on fighting corruption, opening up for transparency. we are losing trillions of US dollars every year in corruption uh that should have been invested differently.

These are the areas where I think with my background I hopefully can combine um political insights insights uh from multi-ateral organizations also with uh the private sector that is unique at the forum because we're public private.

but you still talk about uh climate initiatives and so on. Um now in some parts of the world they talk less about it. What um what is your view on on the on the kind of Uturn or backlash we've seen against uh against ESG and and and climate initiatives.

So um politics maybe have changed but science hasn't. But it is true that uh when you discuss climate you also have to bring in energy. It's like a triangle.

There's still like 700 million people on our planet that don't even have access to electricity that is needed uh to support progress and development and we need to decouple uh growth in energy and CO2 emissions uh in the future but at the same time we also have to do it in a way that we don't compromise on energy security.

We have seen in Europe uh how bad an idea it was to base uh almost half of our natural gas um from Russia. Diversification is also important. So I think it's it's not simplistic. changing the energy um demand and changing the way uh we also um support our development with different energy uh sources is the most complex transition uh we've been through uh probably for decades.

and uh we're trying to show the complexity but still what you can do with new technologies like looking at the gen AI I now can accelerate for example fusion uh nuclear uh that we thought was like maybe going to be available in three or four decades commercially. Maybe we can do it in a decade. That means a lot.

Look at the big developments we have had in China on uh renewables. China is the first electrostate um a country that is basing a lot of their energy now on electricity uh sourced from uh renewables but of course it has to be balanced they balance it with uh then coal LG and also uh nuclear.

so we're trying to be balanced but still facilitating progress and we still believe that the cost of inaction far exceeds the cost of action.

We briefly touched on on AI a couple of times um and it's just totally revolutionary in the way that we uh in many of the things we do in our company. Just how do you think it will shape the future of global business?

It's already changing um things uh very fundamentally. I thought we were going to be in like the hardware phase for a bit longer where you needed like trillions of US dollars investing in the uh new language models.

But I think the deepseek uh experience from China suddenly this company that no one had heard about had then a landish model that was developed for maybe one/ird one quarter of what others had done shows that we're maybe a little bit closer to the software phase where we can do applications.

and with that I I think we're just just going to see like uh thousand flowers blossom uh in the energy field uh and AI field uh sorry uh in the years uh to come and where I expecting big big changes is in medicine the synthetic biology there's going to be so many breakthroughs but also of course there are jobs uh that are today done by humans back offices and all that that will be replaced by uh gen AI.

but that is also the history that you then move higher up in the value chain like if you increase productivity ity you can also increase prosperity but it also creates some fair of course fair for jobs and fairs about the future.

but like look here in Switzerland when I'm now based is uh 95% of the population worked in the agriculture sector 100 years ago and now is like 2% and they produce much more food than back then of 2% of the population and um you could ask where did all these people go yes they went up in the value chain created prosperity that's the future.

um how do you think um how do you think AI will change the geopolitical power balance?

So uh the competition is fierce um and I think the two big nations China and the US uh also knows or know that the country that's on top of the new technologies will probably emerge as the most powerful nation also of this century. So that competition is going to continue.

But I think there's also other players that will come in and things are very hard to predict. If you look at for example the list of the 10 companies in the world with the highest market cap today, many of them did not exist two or three decades ago. So it doesn't mean uh that the largest companies uh in a few decades even are started yet and they don't need to come from the big um in in one of the big players uh country.

but they do have things that of course uh work in their interest. For example, access to data. Data is the new oxygen in this economy. If you're big a big home market and access to data you have uh comparative um advantage if you have a lot of capital uh interested in investing if you have great universities if you have great R&D if you have great engineers well educated people.

so um I think the competition related to the new technologies will be more important than uh some of the more military defense parts of the competition.

Do you think AI will um increase global inequality?

I'm not so sure. Um like the because because in theory in theory it should it should decrease it. But don't you need a certain level of education, energy and so on to really utilize it and innovation and entrepreneurship and also a young population uh that is very techsavvy.

Um so as I mentioned like in the platform economy the winner took it all. We have this uh big uh almost private superpowers uh that are very dominating.

But I think also you will see a lot of startups and a lot of opportunities uh also in emerging economies. Look at for example India in this 1.4 four billion people have no um um electronic digital ID. Um there is like 130 uh unicorns uh in China and it is like 10 or something adding almost um on a quarterly uh basis.

we see growth there is mainly related to services and digital uh trade. So I think there is the jury is out uh if you need the huge trillion dollars u of investments. There will be uh advantages for those that have a lot of capital and where you want to allocate your capital.

But at the same time we know that a lot of good ideas have been developed in garages and other places um in the past. Uh so this open up also huge opportunities for the countries with a lot of young people. Look at Nigeria. Uh look at Indonesia, India, Bangladesh, Vietnam. These very fast growing economies that are emerging economists.

Okay, moving on to um um a bit more uh personal uh questions. What part of your job do you enjoy the most? Where are you really in the flow?

When I can feel that we can contribute to finding either solutions or make progress when we could for example have 50 Israeli cos meeting with six 50 Palestinian cos and they said that we can work uh together.

uh when we know thinking about putting together a delegation of cos that want to go to Damascus and invest uh in a wartorrn uh Syria. Uh I think that uh is great. I also felt that the best moment for me and that was when I went to a small meeting between Americans and also Chinese that looked at who can we even in this polarized world uh find ways of working uh together. That's that's the part of the job uh I feel most meaningful.

Now um as we know uh no prophet is honored in his own country and uh you know you were the foreign minister but it's really after you you went global that you become uh you know a rockstar and a heavyweight. Why why do you think that is?

I'm not so sure uh if I'm in that uh lacker category. I don't feel um like that. But um I'm enjoying my job here at the World Economic Forum. I also enjoyed every day um almost at least uh in Norwegian politics for almost 30 years too and I learned so much uh through that.

and um you know I'm very fond of my home country I I think that Norway is one of the best uh governed uh and run countries uh in the world and if you look at the Nordic countries together uh they're like 10th largest economy in the world and they have been able to have uh substantial economic growth but at the same time they're not uh doing so badly when it comes to addressing inequalities too.

So it's it's my view is that equal opportunities is incredibly important for a success of a country. But of course if you work hard you cannot end up with the same results as those that don't work so hard. But equal opportunities meaning that you have access to good schools, have a good educational system that every young talent can succeed. I think that is something that is extremely close to my heart.

How do you relax? How do you chill?

In the mountains maybe uh in Norway. I I I like it in the mountains. I also like a Saturday morning with no speeches, no travel, just uh to have a cup of coffee and sit and read Financial Times the Saturday morning. I'm like I feel very privileged, very very privileged and I can use one and a half hour uh on that. So I'm I'm easily satisfied in in in in that respect.

What else do you read?

So I read uh of course all the relevant papers. Uh I read the So when you what is that? What is all relevant papers? What is that? No.

So I read Financial Times. I read Wall Street Journal. I read uh New York Times. I read also Washington Post. Of course not every page every day but these are the papers that I read. I read a few Norwegian papers uh too. Uh, of course I need to f follow a bit what is happening uh at home.

Uh, and uh then I uh also uh try to uh read uh books mainly on things that I'm not so knowledgeable about for example the new technologies. I I forced myself to read a lot of books about AI and technology even if I do still prefer to read books about geopolitics and geoeconomy. But I'm I do understand that in this role I I can I need to become more techsavvy.

What are you the most grateful for in life?

that I have um grown up in a country uh where you could uh pursue uh your uh interests and uh that I have had the chance to also contribute through public life for many uh years and also seeing my kids growing up uh in a country where there is uh peace and they have had access uh to good education.

And um lastly, what is your advice to young people?

Work hard. Uh be serious, but not think about always if it's greener on the other side of the fence. You know, I have not applied for jobs in my life. I I things I worked I think I worked very hard but the opportunities do come if you just do well in what you're doing and try to work on something that you're passionate about and don't stress about the career.

The less you stress about your career uh and more committed you are to what you're doing uh then uh things have a tendency of solving itself. That's what I trying to tell also to all the very ambitious uh young people at the World Economic Forum.

Well, Booger, you for sure have been very committed to what you uh to what you do and a big congratulations with everything you uh you have achieved. Big thanks for being with us.

Thank you, Nikolai. Thank you for inviting me to your podcast. It's a big honor. Thank you.