Duisenberg school of finance (DSF), located in the Amsterdam financial center, is an excellent school to start a successful career in the financial and corporate worlds. DSF provides a one-year MSc program in Finance with three specialisation options: Corporate Finance and Banking, Financial Markets and Regulation, and Risk Management. The school also provides an LLM programme in Finance and Law for aspiring legal and business professionals. Rostra Economica sat down with two of DSF’s current students, Nicolas Hinse and Redmar Poot, to learn more about what it’s like to study at Duisenberg School of Finance. Can you tell me about your previous experience, and how it led you to DSF? Redmar: I studied economics at the Erasmus University Rotterdam and was active in their student association. During my time serving as board member at the economics faculty association, we had opportunities to meet board members of other student association in the Netherlands. It was at one of these events that I first met students from DSF, learning more about the programmes and their study experiences. A friend of mine also graduated from DSF’s Corporate Finance and Banking track, and he highly recommended the school. Later on, I won a case competition called the Duisenberg Battle, which awarded me a scholarship to study here. Since I’d always been fascinated with finance and the dynamics between finance solutions and strategy, I decided to study the Finance and Banking track. Nicolas: I studied economics at the UvA, where I was active in student organisations like Sefa, where I served on the Masters of Finance committee. During my Bachelor’s degree study, I did an internship at Leonardo & Co. where I had a colleague, who graduated from Duisenberg. Through him I learned about the level of education, as well as the ambitious and driven student body. The international setting and practical approach motivated me to apply. I’m also doing the Corporate Finance and Banking track. Why did you choose to study at DSF, as opposed to other Masters programmes in the Netherlands? Nicolas: For me personally, it was the practical approach and structure of the programme. Here they really concentrate on teaching students not only theoretical knowledge, but also how to apply it in real-world scenarios. I also like that the curriculum is more focused on banking subjects rather than general finance. Other master programmes are generally more geared towards theoretical knowledge and preparing students for careers in academia or research, while Duisenberg is very focused on making sure their students get the most desired jobs after they graduate. Redmar: It’s the same for me; I think the practical approach is very beneficial. For example, at Erasmus we once had to prepare a valuation case and write a 40-page report with a lot of redundant parts to it, while at Duisenberg we did a valuation case and then had to present it with a PowerPoint presentation. In a real job, you will never have to hand in academic reports, but rather present and discuss your work in a team. Could you elaborate more on the study environment at DSF? Nicolas: it is intense, and the level of education is very high, but they are there to help you throughout your entire study. Our professors always emphasis how we can use the knowledge we’re gaining in our future careers. For example, we recently did an assignment on corporate valuation: we had to run the valuation, where you learn all the theory behind it, and then we had to present it to the class, which is something that would happen in a real company. Redmar: The classes are very interactive, and there are many group assignments. It’s very motivating to work in a group of active and ambitious students with diverse experiences. This way you can learn not only from the lecturers, but also from your fellow students. The professors here are also amazing; they’re really engaging and passionate about their subjects and always try to explain the bigger picture. Some of them are industry professionals, and some come from different universities like LSE. How does DSF increase and expand your job opportunities? Nicolas: DSF has a very dedicated career team, which helps students get internships that are a compulsory part of the degree, and then get them in contact with future employers. For example, we have several events throughout the year where we can meet DSF industry partners, learn about their companies and discuss with them our own career ambitions. Redmar: Recruiters are keen to meet DSF students because of the school’s great reputation. Furthermore, we have a leadership programme that aims at developing the necessary skills for a successful career. We start with learning how to market ourselves: writing a CV and cover letter, creating a positive impression in an interview, creating convincing presentations and learning how to negotiate well. How would you describe the DSF student community? Nicolas: It’s very international, with around seventy percent of students coming from outside the Netherlands. I believe there are 28 different nationalities at DSF but despite our different backgrounds, all students know what they want and are very driven to succeed. You will not find a student at DSF who is satisfied with simply passing courses. It’s a competitive environment, but it goes hand-in-hand with cooperation and pushing each other to do our best. There are also many extra curricular activities like the career and social committees. This year, a committee is organising a field trip to Istanbul, where we’ll will visit companies and just enjoy our time together. Redmar: The student body is very diverse. Some may get the impression that all the students previously studied finance and served on student boards, but actuality there are students of different academic experiences, we even have students with a background in medicine. The community at DSF is very tight-knit, and everybody has a social responsibility to help Duisenberg make the next step. Some students become committee members, while some become research assistants or contribute in some other way. What are your plans after leaving Duisenberg? Nicolas: I want to pursue a career in investment banking, and I already have a job lined up at J.P. Morgan. I am starting in June at their London office, so I’m really excited. Redmar: I’m also thinking about working in investment banking. I’ll be doing an internship at Nomura in the summer, and I’ll see where to go from there. “it is intense, and the level of education is very high, but they are there to help you” What advice could you give to potential applicants? Redmar: Be sure that you want to work in finance. The masters’ programme is challenging, so you need to be very motivated to excel. Participating in Duisenberg events will also help you decide whether Duisenberg is the right fit for you and how to create a successful application. Nicolas: They search for students with a combination of good academic performance and practical experience, like the skills to find a job after graduating. Before you decide, you should come to Duisenberg and talk with the current students. There are open days, but you can also just stop by on a regular day, and the students will be happy to have a chat with you and answer your questions.

An interview with Iichi Mishima, managing director of Mitsubishi Corporation Tokyo’s successful bid for the 2020 Olympic Games as well as Prime Minister Shinzo Abe’s economic plan “Abenomics” to revive the Japanese economy have once again put spotlights on Japan – a country with formidable industrial organisation, technological mastery and financial depth. We asked Mr. Mishima, Managing Director of Mitsubishi Nederland B.V., one of the global offices of Mitsubishi Corporation, about the Japanese businesses and their operations abroad. What are some of the strengths of Japanese businesses in a global setting? In general, the strength of Japanese businesses lies in their ability to pay attention to the very details of their products, services and operations. That is why the Japanese products are known for their high quality and performance standards. The strengths of Japanese businesses also come from the Japanese culture itself. In Japan, people value teamwork and they are highly efficient because people are generally good at time management with much less delays in projects. Japan is also a country with a homogenous culture. The Japanese share similar values and most of them come from similar economical backgrounds. They also share similar high level of educational backgrounds. These makes communication within a team much easier and allows even the largest businesses to function in a very well-structured way. Since these advantages come from the Japanese culture itself, I think it is difficult for other businesses from foreign countries to imitate the Japanese models and that is why there are no similar company like us, Sogo-Sho-Sha, in the world. What are some of the weaknesses of Japanese businesses when they operate abroad? One of the weak points of Japanese businesses, in general, is their linguistic skills. The ordinary Japanese have difficulties expressing themselves in English or other foreign language which sometimes makes business communication very difficult. I mentioned earlier that the Japanese share a homogenous culture, this can also become a disadvantage when it comes to operating abroad since they are slow in adapting to foreign culture. They tend to be less flexible and hesitant in accepting new ideas or new ways of doing things. This prevents them from actively expanding their businesses to markets outside Japan. In addition, many Japanese companies, especially medium and small scale, lack a structured system to explain to their foreign employees about their corporate standards and share their corporate philosophies. They fail to construct an environment where the Japanese employees can work smoothly with other foreign employees. Mitsubishi Corporation operates in more than 90 countries, how do you structure your business both in Japan and abroad? We don’t have problems in terms of communication between the headquarter and foreign offices within MC since we have long time history experience in doing business outside Japan and basically everyone who joins MC are already with excellent English skills. In fact, almost 25% of the new hires in the headquarter in Tokyo are those who studied abroad and/or grew up in a foreign country. In MC, if one person in the team does not speak Japanese, the meetings will be held in English naturally. Japanese is not required when working for a global office of MC. On the other hand though, most of the information sent from Tokyo is still in Japanese. Of course, they also send information to the offices in English but those are far less compared to the information in Japanese. This tends to create an information barrier between the employees who speak Japanese and those who do not. What is MC’s experience in operating in the Netherlands so far? Have you encountered any problems when operating in the Netherlands or in Europe in general? Mitsubishi Nederland B.V. ‘s focus is not on trading between Japan and the Netherlands. We mainly conduct business investments and operations within Europe.  Currently, we are involved in the development, investment and operations of wind farms in the Netherlands together with our partner ENECO. Of course, we sometimes face problems such as the local residents opposing the construction plans but these are certainly not problems specific to the Netherlands or Europe. Our experience in operating in the Netherlands so far has been great. As a country that depends heavily on trading and foreign direct investment, the Netherlands is very friendly to us foreign businesses, especially to Japan since we are the second largest investor to the Netherlands. They are very generous in giving foreign investers various forms of tax benefits and they also made the visa application process very simple for qualified persons. For example, in Japan, the corporate tax rate is around 35%, in the Netherlands, however, it’s only 25%. Compared to other countries in the European Union, I would say that the Netherlands is one of the countries that are most friendly to foreign businesses. Have you experienced any culture shock when working in the Netherlands or in other E.U. countries? Before coming to the Netherlands, I have worked and lived in Australia, the Philippines, Malaysia, the United States and Germany, so I am probably more tolerant to cultural differences than most Japanese. In terms of the Netherlands, I was surprised at first that the Dutch employees would take time off from work no matter how busy it was at the office. In Japan, no one would go on holidays for 2-3 weeks without handing over the tasks properly to his/her co-workers beforehand. In Japan, everyone in the office will share most of the work information just in case someone is unable to come to the office. In Europe, people value work-life balance more than the Japanese do. It is normal for the employees here to finish their work at 5pm and go pick up their kids, but working over time is common practice in Japan. Do you think the Japanese are working too much? Well (laugh), we absolutely have to. In Japan—a country so small and without any natural resources, working hard is the only option left for us in order to stay competitive in the global market. As the Managing Director of Mitsubishi Nederland B.V., what is your next goal? I want to start new kinds of projects that were never done by MC before. Right now, we are looking to start various projects that can bring the innovative Dutch “agro technology”to other parts of the world, such as Africa and/or other emerging countries. We hope to use the Dutch agricultural technology to help grow healthy and safe food that is produced with respect to nature and the environment. I have been studying a lot about the industry and technology. By collaborating with Dutch and/or other company in Europe, we hope to launch the projects in near future. Can you give some advice to the current FEB students? I think it is very important to gain all kinds of experiences when you are young. When I was younger, I volunteered a chance to work in developing countries including South East Asia and I also met all kinds of people who really broadened my horizon. At work, I always tried to do my best at whatever tasks that were given to me and I tried to learn the essence from them. I believe all those efforts and experiences made me who I am today. The young people tend to daydream a lot, they think they don’t belong to wherever they are now and dream that one day they can get out of there. The truth is, you will never succeed without living your life today at where you are standing now. You don’t have to go look for golden opportunities, they will come to you if you had worked hard enough. Compared to other countries in the European Union, I would say that the Netherlands is one of the countries that are most friendly to foreign businesses.

COSCO is one of the largest Chinese state-owned shipping lines (Source: Alf van Beem) Paranoia has swept across Europe. Skyrocketing energy prices and uncertainty in the future economic outlook have made Europeans far more wary of their nations’ reliance on other nations, particularly those potentially as malicious as Russia. In a frenzy, pundits have underscored any possible dependencies, ranging from cheaply manufactured goods from South Asia to the Taiwanese chip production, which, if lost, threatens to handicap Europe’s most crucial industries. In light of this renewed awareness of leverage that foreign powers may possess over the European trade bloc, the sale of a 24.9% stake in Hamburg’s Container Terminal Tollerort (CCT) to the state-owned Chinese Ocean Shipping Company (COSCO) was met with a wave of protest. Down from the original proposal of a 35% stake, and including newly added provisions that bar the Chinese shipping giant from influencing managerial decisions, the deal nevertheless split the political landscape. Furthermore, Chancellor Olaf Scholz’s rigour in pursuing the sale revealed clear fissions in Western governments on their dependence on other – perhaps rivalrous – states. Indeed, not only did several ministries and coalition partners in Germany lament the agreement, but Germany’s strategic partners, including France and the United States, expressed disapproval. The overarching fear is that Germany is once again rushing into a vulnerable position, thereby repeating the mistakes it made through its years-long dependence on Russian energy imports. Yet, proponents of the deal are plenty; including COSCO and the Chinese state that owns it, elements of the German government, as well as the Hamburger Hafen und Logistik AG (HHLA), which operates three of the four container terminals at Hamburg’s port. These parties stress that the sale is simply the victim of gratuitous scepticism and fear mongering. Indeed, the purchase of such port facilities is neither new nor limited to Europe. COSCO, and the China Merchant Group (CMG) – which is also state-owned – possess stakes and operate a myriad of berths worldwide, From Europe to the US. European firms such as Maersk, have also prominently invested in harbour facilities worldwide in an effort to expedite cargo handling and save costs. Supporters of COSCO’s purchase underscore a promised boost to the German economy as a major advantage to the seller. The investment of these firms in the port terminals, and the consequential increased volume of Chinese trade passing through these port facilities, are expected to provide further growth opportunities for the local economy. In the view of many, this move is also necessary. As put by a spokesman of the HHLA, Hans-Jorg Heims, a lack of foreign investment would see Hamburg’s harbour fall behind competitors. After all, other major European ports, such as those in Rotterdam, Antwerp, and Le Havre, have all seen significant investments by either CMG or COSCO. The Reach of Chinese Shipping Companies expands (Source: Financial Times) The expanding reach of Chinese shipping giants is a phenomenon not only limited to the European continent. The port systems across Southern Asia and the coasts of Africa, as well as the Americas have seen greater Chinese investment in the past years. This accumulation in port ownership parallels China’s dominance in maritime trade. Being the world’s largest exporter, China’s shipping lines have grown in unison with its exports. Concurrently, China has vied to further increase its influence over ports around the world. This undertaking was formalised under the Maritime Silk Road (MSR) project, which itself falls under the famed Belt and Road Initiative (BRI). The BRI, an infrastructure and trade development program meant to stimulate trade from China to large consumer markets worldwide, is seen by most to be the centrepiece tool of China’s modern foreign policy. Especially along the South Asian and East African coastline, there have been massive infrastructure project aimed at rapidly expanding and renewing port facilities to match growing global trade volumes. While initially being received with doubt from the international community, the BRI has played an instrumental role in China’s widening global reach. This influence is seen materialising both in developing nations, where large-scale investment and modernising projects funded by China are aplenty, and in Western nations, which see China in a dual sense as an increasingly crucial trade partner as well as an increasingly threatening systemic rival. China’s ‘big break’ into the European port system came with COSCO’s acquisition of a majority stake in the Greek port of Piraeus. The sale occurred gradually over the last decades: starting with the purchase of harbour operating rights in 2008, slowly marching towards a 51% stake in 2016 and reaching the current ownership of 67% just five years later. Perhaps supporting the argument of those who celebrate COSCO’s investment in Hamburg, the Mediterranean gateway to the Suez Canal seems to benefit both buyer and seller. The shipping giant’s massive investment in the port came to the aid of a floundering Greek economy, whilst COSCO gained a foothold in the lucrative European market. Both the Chinese and Greek governments have praised the project and the cooperation between both nations, as demonstrated by a friendly visit of the People’s Liberation Army Navy in 2017. Yet, along with reports of abysmal working conditions, the increasingly fraught relations between the EU and China threaten to crack the façade of harmony so diligently publicised by Beijing. While ultimately China claims its initiative, including COSCO’s purchases in Hamburg, are in the interest of expanding trade and common prosperity, many would attribute malicious intentions to the growing dominance. While it is unlikely that China would be able to feasibly turn its terminals into military bases to project naval power in Europe’s backyard, recent expansions of Chinese military influence in Djibouti does plenty to unsettle the most sceptical. The intensifying tensions between Brussels, Washington and Beijing also do not assure those arguing to block further Chinese influence over key European infrastructure. The ongoing frictions vis-à-vis the status of Taiwan and the greater South China Sea, the support (or rather lack of condemnation) of certain international actors, as well as the suppression of ethnic minorities and activists in China, being just some of the points of contention. In light of these deteriorated relationships, granting shipping lines that operate within parameters of China’s government leverage over Europe becomes more and more daunting. How much influence should a regime hold over our key infrastructure in the context of all this discord? Contrarily, China’s positioning could be interpreted as defensive in nature, after all, for all the dependence the EU and the West exhibit towards imports from China, so does the latter require the constant functioning of their exports to Western markets. In essence, Beijing may deny any nation the chance to exert leverage through sanctions of Chinese imports. From this standpoint, the continued acquisition of stakes in port infrastructure worldwide allows the state’s shipping lines to ensure a constant flow of exports, as they diversify in terms of their trade routes and guarantee the safety of their own supply lines. Regardless of the true nature of China’s posturing, an overly optimistic approach by the EU and the West would be ill-advised. European nations have a troubled history when it comes to assessing how dependent they are on the continued benevolence of their suppliers. Continuing this pattern of rosy overconfidence may prove disastrous. A patent example comes to mind when considering the German delegation’s reaction to warnings at the 2018 UN General Assembly of their nation’s reliance on Russian energy imports. When warned by the then US President Donald Trump of the potentially hostage-like position this may lead Germany into, the German delegation was pictured laughing and portraying the claim as absurd. Considering the gas shortages and severe consequences the country is facing now that Russian Gas imports have dried up, the German’s haughty attitude seems to have aged about as well as spoiled milk. While the sale of stakes of the CTT to a Chinese state-owned shipping line is unlikely to threaten Germany, as the damage potential to limiting imports into Europe is relatively low, such discussion might be limited. Focusing on cases in isolation ignores the systematic risk of leverage China might have on the EU through their diversified holdings in port infrastructure, among other industries. Should China take drastic steps to handicap the EU’s import abilities to function, this would have far greater implications if it were applied to several of Europe’s key ports. In turn, a macroanalysis must be applied when assessing risk exposures. In the context the EU currently finds itself in, with a resurgence of both interstate conflicts and great power rivalries providing an unclear security outlook, a scrupulous examination of Europe’s dependence is vital. Wishful optimism may simply not be enough to avoid future crises. After all, the adage “hope for the best, plan for the worst” is not without merits. Yet Olaf Scholz’s determination to go ahead with the partial purchase of the Tollerort Terminal, although diluted, shows cracks in the West’s united front against reliance on foreign – sometimes even unfriendly- powers. The extent to which such dependencies are deemed acceptable within the EU thus remains ambiguous. As such, the question arises: with the bear’s claw clamping Europe’s oil imports, how much further is Europe willing to venture into the jaw of the dragon, hoping it does not snap shut?