Global growth is strong and more balanced

In your latest book (), you Empire(1) George w. Bush and the neo-conservatives for having aggravated the world disorder by their "war on terror." Disallowance of the November 7 election will compel more pragmatism or do you worry a paralysis to the 2008 presidential

No, I do not think to paralysis. The rejection of Bush in the election is mainly the Iraq and will bring a change in direction of American policy. This change would have occurred in any event, as this policy was not sustainable. During the end of the mandate of Bush, it will be conducted by a different team of Bush's father from Vice President Dick Chesney.

You do not regret the resignation of Donald Rumsfeld...

Not at all, because I would like as with the evils of past policy Chesney. Bush has less thickness than them. It was religious. But her lack of personality led him to rely upon his election on Dick Chesney.

Global growth is strong and more balanced. In your book, you say yet worried about the US real estate bubble burst. You are always

You know, it's like someone empties from the Empire State Building and said: "so far so good." For the moment, there is a soft landing. The amount of refinancing mortgages little declined some 900 billion dollars in annual rate at 750. But if the fall in prices continues, the mechanism can collapse. Because, over the past three to four years, prices have increased an average of more than 50. Rest should consider whim: the 10-year interest rates declined, the price of oil has decreased by 20 and there are new poles of growth in the world, in China, India, even in Europe. Perhaps you already landed without knowing... It wasn't until 2007 or 2008 to see the result of these opposing forces.

Your main area of concern remains the energy crisis

Yes. And it is due to several factors: climate change, the increasing needs of countries such as China, the depletion of traditional resources such as oil. Ten years ago, it had more than 10 million barrels day of excess capacity, against 1 million today. The political issues associated with this energy dependence are real. Particularly in Europe. I spoke with Germans, highly dependent on Russian gas. They do not want to recognize the danger that this represents.

Chancellor Angela Merkel is more aware. But it is a subject of disagreements in the coalition...

You are right. And the positions of European countries are very different. The France, with nuclear power, is much more independent, the Germany is much more vulnerable, the Poland is totally dependent. In addition, the Middle East is politically unstable, African countries also. This complements the curse of the raw materials, from colonialism in the 19th century, and the opacity of transactions. But things are improving. It is a very new movement in which I much committed in 2002 with the campaign "publish what you pay". Now many countries are engaged in this way and we put in place of the supervisory bodies in the Kazakhstan, in Azerbaijan, in Africa. The greatest success has been won in Nigeria, with the support of President Obasanjo. Trials have been conducted against leaders who had embezzled money. But the arrival of China prevents this type of surveillance.

Transparency is not yet a Chinese concept

The way to do business in China and Africa is close enough. And, indeed, non-transparent. It is for Governments to find ways to obtain cooperation from Beijing. And it is possible. Conflicts such as the Sudan or the Zimbabwe counter the Chinese doctrine of the "harmonious development". Must that everyone respects the rules of the game. When America refuses that the Chinese are buying Unocal, how to complain that the Chinese are turning to Sudan or Angola

China is an element of imbalance because of its huge energy needs for raw materials. The Russia is another with an oil and gas power, which strengthens the autocrat otherwise dictatorial Putin character

Putin is not a dictator, because there is a democratic accoutrement in Russia. But the Kremlin is seeking to concentrate all powers. It dominates the Duma, the opposition and the media. And now the civil society. I am very committed in Russia with a foundation "for an open society." I closed it a few years ago... Until Putin does.

One of its first members, Gleb Pavlovsky, now works for Putin (Editor's Note: it has been his campaign in 2000). It is creating an NGO on the model of our Foundation through

the money provided by the Kremlin. The Soviet time, artists were receiving lot of money from the Kremlin. It is now the turn of the civil society.

By creating the "Open Russia" Foundation, Mikhail Khodorkovsky was the first to imitate me the model, the program and even the staff of our Foundation. I had a lot of respect for his work. But it represented a political threat to Putin, and the latter it was destroyed.

Is the integration of the Russia in the WTO good news

Undoubtedly. It must do everything that the Russian economy remains open. Because the Russia uses its energy power in a triple political goal: restoring its leadership on the international scene, which is very popular in the country. enrich, on a personal level, the major committed the State; corrupt dictators in neighbouring countries and control their natural resources.

Europe is for you the "open society" to which you aspire, in the lineage of Karl Popper and Henri Bergson. A model for the United States. Europe does not appear you a possible leader. Why

Europe, model of open society, that is the true challenge in my eyes. Why other nations would to draw not Remains that the EU is at the crossroads. Since the end of the war, it was not, under the impetus of the elites. And when the result has been submitted, by referendum, peoples, namely French and Dutch, the elites have been punished. This release marks the end of this process of construction. To go forward, should now take into account the opinion of civil society. And to remain an open society, international cooperation must be strengthened. After playing a role of leader for 50 years, the United States took the wrong path. Europe was an opportunity to assert its model to the America and to renew a partnership with it. But, in addition to a Refoundation of the transatlantic links, must be closer links between the major democracies of the world. Bring the old rich countries and the new emerging democratic powers in South America and Asia.

The leaders of the major French groups denounce the excessive power of the "hedge funds", which, with sometimes less than 5 of the voting rights, impose their strategy. That answer you, you have based your fortune on these "hedge funds"

Leaders of these companies are often too well-established. They do not like being subjected to such attacks. However, they can lead them to be more effective in their society. A little more competition in the appointment leaders, who, in France, is often reserved for finance inspectors, would do no harm. These leaders need to be shaken. Evidenced by the example of Renault. Maybe we went too far in the United States. As a general rule, I am against capitalism. A framework is necessary. However, the delay of the France, where business leaders are too protected is patent.

Central bankers and regulators are advocating new rules of the game. Should we regulate "hedge funds"

I do not think that "hedge funds" must be regulated. It is rather the process of taking control of the companies that should be.

Financial you are now a philanthropist. What judgment wear on the foundation of Bill Gates and Bill Clinton

This is a new generation. It is distinguished from others by the fact that these new philanthropists... are still alive. And I have great respect for Warren Buffett, who gave his money to the foundation of Bill Gates, a good professional organization.

Or to aid granted by some Governments, is their strike force, sometimes greater than that of the IMF and the World Bank, not a danger

The foundations are in close relationship with Governments, because they have to do with their bureaucrats. They represent a counter-power. I am in favour. But private capital cannot replace the aid granted by States. They are a lever to attract Government funding. It is the case for example for the $ 125 million that one of my Foundation has given to the city of New York to help children.

You arrive as "a head of State without State". Are you not in fact a Robin Hood who won billions speculating on the markets and finance a network of foundations with these same billion to help the poor

It is an attractive idea, but wrong. I won money by managing the money of rich have become richer with my manager skills.

But you have benefited from the Asian crisis, for example, and impoverished the poor of the area that you now want to help

I have no responsibility in the initiation of the Asian crisis. I have benefited, but positions I had taken six months before. I do not accept or honor to be a Robin Hood or the stigma of be a trigger of crisis.