I have a big question. Which is, who runs the world?
Imam važno pitanje. Ono glasi: ko upravlja svetom?
It used to be an easy question to answer. If you're over 45 like me, you grew up in a world that was dominated by two giants. The United States called the shots on one side of the Wall, the Soviets set the rules on the other. And that was a bipolar world. It's very simple.
Nekada je bilo lako dati odgovor. Ako ste stariji od 45 godina poput mene, odrasli ste u svetu kojim su dominirala dva giganta. Sjedinjene Američke Države su vukle konce s jedne strane Zida, dok su Sovjeti diktirali pravila s druge. I bio je to bipolarni svet. Veoma je prosto.
If you're under 45, you grew up when the Soviet Union had already collapsed, and that left the United States as the sole superpower, dominating global institutions and also exerting raw power. And that was a unipolar world.
Ako ste mlađi od 45 godina, odrastali ste nakon što je Sovjetski Savez već pao, zbog čega su Sjedinjene Države ostale jedina supersila koja je dominirala globalnim institucijama i vršila bezuslovnu moć. I to je bio unipolarni svet.
And then about 15 years ago, things got a little more complicated. The United States increasingly didn't want to be the world's policeman or the architect of global trade or even the cheerleader for global values. Other countries were becoming more powerful, and they could increasingly ignore many of the rules they didn't like, sometimes even setting new rules themselves.
A potom, pre oko 15 godina, stvari su se malčice zakomplikovale. Sjedinjene Države su sve manje želele da budu svetski policajac ili arhitekta globalne trgovine, pa čak ni podstrekač globalnih vrednosti. Druge države su postajale sve moćnije, i sve više su mogle da ignorišu mnoga pravila koja im se nisu sviđala, ponekad čak i same određujući nova pravila.
What happened? Three things. Number one, Russia was not integrated into Western institutions. A former great power now in very serious decline and they are angry about it. We can argue about whose fault that is, but we are where we are. Number two, China was integrated into US-led institutions on the presumption that as they got wealthier and more powerful, they would become Americans. Turns out, they're still Chinese.
Šta se desilo? Tri stvari. Pod jedan, Rusija nije integrisana u zapadne institucije. Bivša velika sila, sada u ozbiljnom opadanju, besna je zbog toga. Možemo da raspravljamo ko je kriv za to, ali tu smo gde smo. Pod dva, Kina je integrisana u institucije kojim upravlja SAD s pretpostavkom da će se, kako budu postajali bogatiji i uticajniji, pretvoriti u Amerikance. Ispostavlja se da su i dalje Kinezi.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
And the United States is not particularly comfortable with that. Number three, tens of millions of citizens in the United States and other wealthy democracies felt left behind by globalization. This has been ignored for decades. But as a consequence, they felt that their governments and their leaders were more illegitimate.
A Sjedinjenim Državama to baš i ne prija. Pod tri, desetine miliona građana u Sjedinjenim Državama i drugim imućnim demokratijama se osećalo zapostavljenim zbog globalizacije. Ovo je decenijama ignorisano. Kao posledica toga, smatrali su da su njihove vlade i vođe sve više nelegitimni.
Now if you look at all the headlines in the world today, driving all of this geopolitical tension and conflict, over 90 percent of them are because of these three reasons. And that's why today we live in a leaderless world. But as we know, that's not going to be with us for long.
Ako pogledate sve naslove trenutno u svetu o tome šta pokreće ove geopolitičke tenzije i konflikt, preko 90 procenata njih je iz ova tri razloga. I zato danas živimo u svetu bez vođa. Međutim, kao što znamo, to neće dugo potrajati.
So what comes next? What kind of a world order might we expect over the next ten years? Some of what I might say I think will surprise you. Because we're not going to have a bipolar or a unipolar or even a multipolar world. If we don't have one or two superpowers, we don't have a single global order. No, instead, we will have three different orders, a little overlapping, and the third will have immense importance for how we live, what we think, what we want, and what we're prepared to do to get it.
Dakle, šta sledi? Kakav bismo svetski poredak mogli da očekujemo u narednih deset godina? Ponešto od onoga što ću reći mislim da će vas iznenaditi. Zato što nećemo imati bipolarni ili unipolarni, pa čak ni multipolarni svet. Ako nemamo jednu ili dve supersile, nemamo jedinstven svetski poredak. Ne, umesto toga imaćemo tri različita poretka, koji se malčice preklapaju, a treći će da ima ogromnu važnost za to kako živimo, kako razmišljamo, šta želimo i na šta smo spremni da to postignemo.
But first things first. Today, we have a global security order. And as you see from the map, the United States and its allies are the most powerful players on it. The US is the only country in the world that can send its soldiers and its sailors and its military equipment to every corner of that world. No one else is close. China is growing in its military capabilities in Asia, though nowhere else. Lots of American allies in Asia are concerned about that. And as a consequence, they're becoming more dependent on the United States for a security umbrella. With the Russian invasion of Ukraine, US allies in Europe are becoming more concerned and dependent on the United States and a US-led NATO.
Ipak, krenimo ispočetka. Danas imamo globalni bezbednosni poredak. I kao što vidite na karti, Sjedinjene Države sa saveznicima su tu najjači igrači. SAD je jedina država na svetu koja može da šalje vojnike, mornare i vojnu opremu u svaki ćošak tog sveta. Niko drugi nije ni blizu. Kineski vojni kapaciteti rastu u Aziji, ali ne i bilo gde drugde. Mnogi američki saveznici u Aziji su zabrinuti zbog ovoga. I posledično su sve zavisniji od Sjedinjenih Država i njihovog bezbednosnog štita. Zbog ruske invazije na Ukrajinu, saveznici SAD-a u Evropi su sve zabrinutiji i zavisniji od Sjedinjenih Država i NATO-a predvođenog SAD-om.
The Russian military, of course, has been a greater global concern, much less so today, especially as they've lost over 200,000 troops and all of that equipment and with sanctions making it extremely hard for them to rebuild. Now, Russia and China and others have nuclear weapons, but thank God it is still suicide to use them. And as a consequence, our security order is a unipolar order and it is likely to remain so for the next decade.
Ruska vojska je, naravno, bila značajna globalna pretnja, trenutno je to daleko manje, naročito jer su izgubili preko 200 000 vojnika i svu tu opremu, i uz sankcije im je izuzetno teško da se oporave. Sad, Rusija, Kina i ostali imaju nuklearno oružje, ali, bogu hvala, njegova upotreba je i dalje samoubistvo. A posledično, naš bezbednosni poredak je unipolarni poredak i verovatno će to i ostati u narednoj deceniji.
Now at the same time that there's a security order, there's also a global economic order. And here, power is shared. The United States is still a very robust global economy. But the US can't use its dominant position militarily to tell other countries what to do economically. The United States and China are enormously economically interdependent and so they can't control each other. You may be surprised to hear this, but today US-China trade relations are actually at their highest level in history.
Istovremeno sa postojanjem bezbednosnog poretka, imamo i globalni ekonomski poredak. A tu se moć deli. Sjedinjene Države su i dalje snažna globalna ekonomija. Međutim, SAD ne može da koristi svoju dominantnu vojnu poziciju da naređuje drugim državama kako da se ekonomski ponašaju. Sjedinjene Države i Kina su enormno ekonomski međuzavisne, te stoga ne mogu da kontrolišu jedna drugu. Možda će vas iznenaditi da čujete, ali trenutne trgovinske veze između SAD-a i Kine su na najvišem nivou u istoriji.
Now, other countries in the world, a lot of them want access to US military muscle, but they also want access to the Chinese market, soon, by 2030, likely to be the largest in the world. And you can't very well have a cold war if the US and the Chinese are the only two that are prepared to fight it. Yes? Yes.
Sad, druge države na svetu, mnoge od njih žele pristup američkoj vojnoj sili, ali žele i pristup kineskom tržištu, koje će uskoro, do 2030, verovatno da bude najveće na svetu. A ne možete baš da imate hladni rat, ako su SAD i Kinezi jedini koji su spremni da se bore u njemu. Da? Da.
So the European Union has the largest common market and they set the rules. And if you want to do profitable business there, you listen to those rules. India is playing a greater role economically on the global stage. Japan still matters, too. And over the next ten years, there will be a rise and fall of the relative capacities of these economies. But the global economic order is and will remain a multipolar order.
Dakle, Evropska unija ima najveće jedinstveno tržište i oni određuju pravila. A ako želite tu da se bavite profitabilnim poslom, sledite data pravila. Indija igra sve značajniju ekonomsku ulogu na globalnoj sceni. Japan je i dalje bitan. A u narednih deset godina, dolaziće do uspona i padova u relativnim kapacitetima ovih ekonomija. Međutim, globalni ekonomski poredak jeste, i ostaće, multipolarni poredak.
Now, between these two orders are tensions because the United States will use its power in national security to try to bring more of the world's economies towards it. And we already see this starting to happen in semiconductors and in critical minerals and maybe soon in TikTok. The Chinese are trying to use their dominant commercial position to align more of the world diplomatically. And Japan and Europe and India and everyone else will do their damnedest to ensure that neither of these two orders dominate the other. And they will mostly succeed.
Sad, između ova dva poretka imamo tenzije jer će SAD koristiti svoju moć u nacionalnoj bezbednosti da pokuša da privuče sve više svetskih ekonomija sebi. I već vidimo da se ovo počinje dešavati u slučaju poluprovodnika, kritičnih minerala, a možda uskoro i Tiktoka. Kinezi pokušavaju da iskoriste svoju dominantnu trgovinsku poziciju da diplomatski prestroje sve veći deo sveta. A Japan, Evropa, Indija i svi ostali će učiniti sve što je u njihovoj moći da se postaraju da nijedan od ova dva poretka ne dominira nad drugim. I uglavnom će da budu uspešni.
Now, so far I have spoken with you about the two world orders we already see, but there's a third that is coming soon that's even more important. And that is the digital order. And the digital order is not run by governments but by technology companies.
Do sad sam vam govorio o dva svetska poretka koja već vidimo, ali postoji i treći koji dolazi uskoro i koji je još važniji. A to je digitalni poredak. A digitalnim poretkom ne upravljaju vlade, već tehnološke kompanije.
We all know how much military support NATO countries have provided Ukraine during the war. But it's technology companies that provided the tools allowing Ukraine to defend itself from Russian cyber attack. It's technology companies that gave the Ukrainian leaders the ability to speak with their generals and their soldiers on the front lines. If it wasn't for those technology companies, Ukraine would have been fully offline within weeks of the war. And I don't believe President Zelensky would still be there today.
Svi znamo koliku su vojnu podršku države NATO-a obezbedile Ukrajini tokom rata. Međutim, tehnološke kompanije su obezbedile alate koji omogućuju Ukrajini da se brani od ruskih sajber napada. Tehnološke kompanije su pružile ukrajinskim vođama mogućnost da razgovaraju s generalima i njihovim vojnicima u prvim redovima. Da nije bilo tih tehnoloških kompanija, Ukrajina bi bila u potpunosti bez interneta u prvim nedeljama rata. I ne mislim da bi predsednik Zelenski i danas bio tu.
Technology companies determine whether Donald Trump is able, in real time and without filter, to speak with hundreds of millions of people as he runs again for the presidency. It's social media platforms and their ability to promote disinformation and conspiracy theory. Without them, we do not have riots in the Capitol on January 6. We do not have trucker riots in Ottawa. We do not have a January 8 insurrection in Brazil.
Tehnološke kompanije određuju da li će Donald Tramp biti u stanju da u realnom vremenu i bez filtera razgovara sa stotinama miliona ljudi dok ponovo vodi predsedničku kampanju. Radi se o platformama društvenih mreža i njihovoj sposobnosti da promovišu dezinformacije i teorije zavere. Bez njih nemamo šestojanuarske nerede na Kapitolu. Nemamo nerede kamiondžija u Otavi. Nemamo osmojanuarsku pobunu u Brazilu.
Technology companies increasingly determine our identities. When I was growing up, it's nature or nurture. I mean, my deep and abiding emotional problems either come from how I was raised --
Tehnološke kompanije sve više određuju naše identitete. Kada sam odrastao, bilo je priroda ili odgoj. Mislim, moji duboki i istrajni emocionalni problemi su poticali od toga kako sam odgajan -
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
Or some genetic failure.
Ili nekog genetskog nedostatka.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
Could be both.
Ili možda oba.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
But today, our identities are determined by nature and nurture and algorithm. If you want to challenge the system, you can't just question authority, as we were all told when we were growing up. Today, you have to question the algorithm, and that is a staggering amount of power in the hands of these technology companies. What are they going to do with that power? And that depends on who they want to be when they grow up.
Međutim, danas, naše identitete određuju priroda i odgoj, i algoritmi. Ako želite da se suprotstavite sistemu, ne možete samo da preispitujete autoritete, kao što su nama govorili dok smo odrastali. Danas morate da preispitujete algoritme, a to je zapanjujuća količina moći u rukama ovih tehnoloških kompanija. Šta će da urade s tom moći? To zavisi od toga šta žele da budu kad porastu.
So if China and the United States work to exert much more power over the digital world and technology companies in those countries align with those governments, we will end up in a technology cold war. And that means the digital order will be split in two.
Dakle, ako Kina i Sjedinjene Države počnu da ispoljavaju veću moć nad digitalnim svetom i tehnološke kompanije u tim državama se povinuju tim vladama, završićemo u tehnološkom hladnom ratu. A to znači da će digitalni poredak da bude rascepljen na dva dela.
If, on the other hand technology companies persist with global business models, and we retain competition between the digital and physical worlds, we will have a new globalization, a digital global order.
Ako, s druge strane, tehnološke kompanije istraju u globalnim poslovnim modelima, i zadržimo konkurentnost između digitalnog i fizičkog sveta, imaćemo novu globalizaciju, digitalni svetski poredak.
Or if the digital order becomes increasingly dominant and governments erode in their capacity to govern, and we've already seen the beginning of this, technology companies will become the dominant actors on the global stage in every way and we will have a techno-polar order. And that will determine whether we have a world of limitless opportunity or a world without freedom.
Ili ukoliko digitalni poredak postane sve dominantniji i vladama bude podrivena sposobnost upravljanja, a već svedočimo početku ovoga, tehnološke kompanije će postati dominantni akteri na globalnoj sceni u svakom smislu i imaćemo tehno-polarni poredak. A to će odrediti da li ćemo imati svet bezgraničnih mogućnosti ili svet lišen slobode.
Now at this point in my speech, I'm supposed to talk about the good news.
Sad, u ovoj tački govora, trebalo bi da vam saopštim dobre vesti.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
But those of you that have heard this know that that is not coming.
Međutim, oni koji su ovo već čuli znaju da ih neće biti.
(Laughter)
(Smeh)
There is no pause button on these explosive and disruptive technologies. I don't know if you know this, there are over 100 people in the world today with the knowledge and the technology to create a new smallpox virus.
Ne postoji dugme za pauzu kod ovih eksplozivnih i remetilačkih tehnologija. Ne znam da li vam je poznato, trenutno u svetu postoji preko stotinu ljudi sa znanjem i tehnologijom da naprave novi virus velikih boginja.
Honestly, I don't have answers, but I have a few questions for the people that do. Because these technology companies are not just Fortune 50 and 100 actors. These technology titans are not just men worth 50 or 100 billion dollars or more. They are increasingly the most powerful people on the planet with influence over our futures. And we need to know, are they going to act accountably as they release new and powerful artificial intelligence? What are they going to do with this unprecedented amount of data that they are collecting on us and our environment? And the one that I think should concern us all right now the most: Will they persist with these advertising models driving so much revenues that are turning citizens into products and driving hate and misinformation and ripping apart our society?
Iskreno, nemam odgovore, ali imam pitanja za ljude koji imaju odgovore. Jer ove tehnološke kompanije nisu samo među 50 ili 100 najbogatijih aktera. Ovi tehnološki titani nisu samo muškarci vredni 50 ili 100 milijardi dolara i više. Oni su sve moćniji ljudi na planeti s uticajem na našu budućnost. I mi moramo da znamo: da li će da se ponašaju odgovorno dok oslobađaju novu i moćnu veštačku inteligenciju? Šta će da urade sa ovom nezabeleženom količinom podataka koje sakupljaju o nama i našoj okolini? I pitanje koje smatram da bi trebalo najviše da nas brine trenutno: hoće li da istraju u ovim reklamnim modelima koji podstiču tolike prihode i pretvaraju građane u proizvode, podstiču mržnju i lažne informacije i cepaju naše društvo?
(Applause)
(Aplauz)
When I was a student back in 1989, and the Wall fell, the United States was the principal exporter of democracy in the world. Not always successfully. Often hypocritically. But number one, nonetheless. Today, the United States has become the principal exporter of tools that destroy democracy. The technology leaders who create and control these tools, are they OK with that? Or are they going to do something about it? We need to know.
Kada sam bio student 1989, i Zid je pao, Sjedinjene Države su bile glavni izvoznik demokratije u svetu. Ne uvek uspešan. Često licemeran. Međutim, broj jedan, u svakom slučaju. Danas su Sjedinjene Države postale glavni izvoznik alata koji uništavaju demokratiju. Tehnološkim vođama koji proizvode i kontrolišu ove alate, da li im je to u redu? Ili će da urade nešto povodom toga? Moramo da znamo.
Thank you.
Hvala vam.
(Cheers and applause)
(Ovacije i aplauz)