France s big NATO opportunity
EUROPE BUREAU
VILNIUS, Lithuania A decisive stride back toward the centre of the world stage for France. A deft play of diplomatic poker by Canada. A shot in the arm of sufficient octane to keep Canadian boots on the ground in Kandahar.
Not a bad storyline. No wonder the world's cameras swarmed Defence Minister Peter MacKay yesterday when he emerged after two days of meetings in the Lithuanian capital to spell out the Canadian bottom line to his NATO colleagues.
And no wonder everyone else was looking to Paris, where an Ottawa delegation led by the Prime Minister's chief of staff, Ian Brodie, landed in an effort to quickly seal the deal.
It all adds up to an almost perfect political moment for Nicolas Sarkozy, the man with sole control of the lever to make it all happen. In one dramatic coup de gr ce a grand gesture that would see major troop reinforcements alongside Canada in fractious southern Afghanistan the French president can glue NATO back together again.
What the cameras didn't pick up was the senior NATO official quietly fretting on the sidelines in Vilnius. Yes, he acknowledged, France's door has opened, perhaps more than a crack, but that doesn't mean Canada should just burst in and help itself to the champagne.
I'm worried Ottawa may be painting itself into a corner by putting so much emphasis on France, the official told the Toronto Star, adding that we could all be jumping to conclusions about the actual heft of the French help.
Look what happened to the Dutch they thought they had some big commitments (for help in Afghanistan) and ended up with dribs and drabs. I may be wrong I hope I am.
When NATO's top official met last Friday with Sarkozy to quietly agitate on Canada's behalf the conversation went in many directions. And Ottawa was not uppermost on the French president's mind. Canada was just there in a stew of geopolitical considerations relating to Washington, Chad and Europe.
It seems unlikely all the hoopla will come to nothing. Yet it is far from certain the French commitment is going to measure up to the glare of expectations. And unless Stephen Harper can prevail upon Sarkozy to accelerate his decision, the answer may not be known until the two sit down together in April in the NATO leaders' summit in Bucharest, a date Sarkozy appears intent upon waiting for.
The issue failed to make the front page in one French paper yesterday and was ignored altogether by others, unlike the splash it made back home. Canadians seem to expect a big French kiss; the French didn't even know they had puckered.
Still, for Sarkozy, the attraction of stepping forward at this moment is self-evident, according to political analyst Batelemi Courmont of the Paris-based National Institute for International Relations Strategy.
Clearly, Sarkozy's aim for quite some time has been to come closer to NATO by fully integrating France into the alliance. And to reach out to Washington by amplifying the French contribution in Afghanistan, said Courmont.
So this Canadian crisis provides just the opportunity he was waiting for to make his move. The urgency in Ottawa and the fact that Canada has been engaged in a process that could see it leave Afghanistan could change the timing, and make Sarkozy act more quickly than anticipated.
How likely it is to wash with Sarkozy's electorate remains to be seen. The French public is no less doubtful than Canadians on the prospects for a way forward in Afghanistan. Neither are they immune to such a dramatic reassertion of French diplomacy.
I cannot see there being major obstacles to sending help for the Canadians, even if it is help in a combat situation, said Courmont.
French people don't have the same negative view of Afghanistan as they do of the war in Iraq. And it would be a prime example of French influence being raised on the world stage.
So it is a great opportunity for Sarkozy. It is going to be fascinating to see how he handles it.
Introduction: - March 27, the majority of investors believe that advanced investment is lower than the risk of early investment, especially for seed investment. However, the wind has been 20 for the experience of New York venture capitalist Fred Wilson (Fred Wilson), however, took a contrary view. He recently published a blog of his own views.
Following is the main contents of the article:
Most investors believe that advanced investment is lower than the risk of early investment, especially for seed investment. This view is correct, depends largely on how the definition of risk. In the financial markets, risk is usually defined as the expected return on investment returns on the basis of changes in scope. The greater the scope of changes, the greater the risk. From this perspective, the early investment is far greater than the risk of advanced investment. However, this is only from the perspective of the limited partners to consider this issue.
From my personal experience, the conclusions may be completely different. As a direct-to-company investment risk investment, I think that the risk of investment in the late than early investments, mainly three reasons:
First, the investment risk sometimes like playing poker. I think that in the seed / early stage investments, investors tend to Oshiage a small number of chips, and then under the surface of the card in their hands to determine whether Oshiage more chips. Changes in the hands of the licence every time, investors can choose again. Investors often take several years before all the chips will Oshiage, is the total venture capital, the risks are also greatly diluted. In this model, investors can effectively manage all types of risk, such as risk management, valuation risk, technology risk, as well as the risks and so on. By comparison, the late one-time Oshiage investors will need all the chips can be read licensing opportunities.
Second, investors are not late to influence the development of the company, could be its established direction for development. For this reason, we generally only those that have not yet ripe for investment revenue model company. Under normal circumstances, these companies already have their own technology platform, and even received some success. However, the business model and market strategy is the key. What is the business model? Enterprise software model, the advertising model, the business model, or other mode? This decision is very important. Advanced investors can only accept the direction of the development of the established companies, investment companies later changed the direction of development be slim. If they must do so, only shows that the initial investment mistakes.
Third, investors must assume advanced past mistakes. As an early investor, you can take part in the various decision-making companies, such as the impact on other investors the choice to determine ownership structure, technical protection measures, staff salaries, staff contracts and contract structure, and so on. In short, you can, through their own actions to ensure that the right track. If you are an advanced investors, although it can to protect its investment, but experience tells us that if the company s initial decision-making errors, all need to pay for it.
So far, I have invested in more than 50 companies, the investment experience, I can prove that this view. In most cases, early investment gave me bring tremendous returns, and very few losses. Of course, this may also be because I experienced in the operation of early investments, and other people skilled in the operation of advanced investment. (Otto)
