Sure, here’s a rewritten version of the content while keeping the HTML tags intact:
The Global Futures Councils (GFC) of the World Economic Forum recently held its 16th annual meeting in Dubai, touted as the “largest brainstorming event in the world”.
However, last week’s gathering resembled more of a Western liberal democracy vacationing by the sea.
Allow me to elaborate.
Over 500 “thought leaders” came together with 150 cybersecurity specialists for three intensive days of brainstorming, dialogue, and collaboration, all aimed at shaping the agenda for the major annual event in Davos, Switzerland, this upcoming January.
I have participated in several of these gatherings in Dubai, which stands out as one of the more civil, accessible, and fruitful events in the overcrowded global forum calendar.
The Johara ballroom complex, located by the Madinat canals and accessible via Uber even during Gitex week, serves as an ideal venue.
Unlike the WEF events in Davos, which are often attended by billionaire “masters of the universe” and celebrities, this gathering facilitates earnest discussions on significant global challenges: AI, technology, employment, inequality, and climate change, among others.
Yet, beneath the surface, there was a palpable tension, as the WEF has just navigated what might be its most tumultuous year.
Professor Klaus Schwab, a long-time keynote speaker in Dubai, is no longer with the organization he established 54 years ago. An extensive internal review cleared him and his wife Hilde of any misconduct concerning their involvement with the WEF. However, internal conflicts and resentment among the organization’s executives led to his departure.
Additionally, it appears we are witnessing the twilight of the globalized, elitist landscape that the WEF helped cultivate over the past 50 years, now overshadowed by a surge of populist “strong men” leaders in major global powers.
It seems inevitable for the WEF to reassess its core perspective in light of both the ascendance of global autocrats and the exit of their own influential figure.
Who better to shed light on this than Borge Brende, who has served as president and CEO since 2017 and is now stepping out from Schwab’s shadow?
During the opening press conference, I posed a question to Brende, who offered a reflective answer. “There is a need for an impartial organization. At Davos, we can convene individuals with differing viewpoints, some of whom might prefer to avoid each other,” he remarked.
This is indeed accurate. The WEF’s ability to bring people together is renowned, even as numerous competitors vie for its spot. Brende indicated that a record number of attendees are eager to join the gathering in Davos this year.
They may be anticipating what the Financial Times has labeled a “make or break” scenario—a characterisation dismissed by WEF officials, even while they acknowledged the significance of the January meeting.
As I ruminated by the canal after the GFC’s conclusion, it struck me that the WEF is currently in a profound existential crisis that must be addressed well before January arrives.
For instance, Brende mentioned from the stage that AI represents the “second industrial revolution”—a curious statement from an organization that has previously branded digital transformation as the “fourth industrial revolution” under Schwab’s guidance.
It may have been a simple slip of the tongue, but other indications in Dubai suggested that cohesive thinking is beginning to unravel.
One WEF moderator asserted from the stage that “the age of Big Climate is over,” implying that radical environmentalist ideologies are waning in influence within global climate discussions.
I hope this holds true, yet there wasn’t much evidence in Dubai to suggest that the “thought leaders” are embracing this notion—the event still maintained its environmentalist fervor, even within the world’s hydrocarbon capital.

This duality also extended to discussions regarding AI and technology.
Many speakers highlighted the dangers and threats related to AI and cyberattacks, yet they continued to endorse clichés of the digital age: “disruption” is beneficial, “creative destruction” spurs business, and “move fast and break things” serves as the guiding principle.
Someone should inform the WEF that the “tech bros”—Musk, Zuckerberg, Bezos—who popularized these phrases are no longer aligned with the ideals of Davos Man.
Above all, the WEF must stop straddling the geopolitical fence. Multiple speakers identified “uncertainty” as the greatest threat the world currently faces. Brende referred to it as the “biggest tariff”.
It seems as though “uncertainty” is being treated as an independent force, rather than recognizing it as a direct outcome of the global “strong man” phenomenon.
There’s an underlying reason why financial markets are ballooning, international trade is in decline, and military conflict appears imminent, and that is a failure of global leadership.
Perhaps the WEF hesitates to voice these concerns due to the intellectual legacy of its own figurehead—Schwab—or perhaps it’s mindful of its sponsors in various nations. However, it must clarify its stance on global allies and adversaries before January.
Otherwise, Davos 26 could resemble a disoriented US Democratic party vacationing in the Alps, struggling to find its footing.
Frank Kane is the Editor-at-Large of AGBI and an award-winning business journalist. He also serves as a consultant to the Ministry of Energy in Saudi Arabia.