Immortalised by Kipling in 1901, at a time when Central Asia was seen by many strategists as the geopolitical centre of the world, now, in the early part of another century, 'The Great Game' is on again.

The first "Great Game" between Tsarist Russia and Britain was never cricket. It was a battle of wits and wills, and often a deadly one. For much of the 19^th century, these two powers fought a secret war across Central Asia, vying for the allegiance of powerful khans. Russia was expanding its empire and Britain was determined to protect the jewel in its colonial crown - India. Espionage came into its own at this time, and every imaginable disguise was put to use, whether that of a mendicant monk or camel trader.

The British writer, Rudyard Kipling, immortalised the term "Great Game" in his novel Kim in 1901, at a time when Central Asia was seen by many strategists as the geopolitical centre of the world.

Now, in the early part of another century, the battle's on again. But this time it's not so much for control of territory as it is for access to the region's rich reserves of oil and gas, as well as to its abundance of minerals. Also tantalising are its markets and huge reserves of petro-dollars, which more and more are being pumped into infrastructure projects as large numbers of people move into urban areas and demand electricity, water, transportation and telecommunications.

The axis that runs through the region extends from Shanghai to Istanbul, and for much of its length follows the route of the ancient Silk Road. Nowadays it is increasingly crisscrossed by pipelines and railways, for which reason some call it the "Iron Silk Road". The Stans - once part of the underbelly of the old Soviet Union - straddle this corridor, with a resurgent Russia across the top, China at one end and India below.

Symbolic of the new dialogue in the region is the Shanghai Cooperation Organisation (SCO) that was set up in 2001 by Russia and China, with Uzbekistan, Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan and Tajikistan as members. India, Iran, Pakistan and Mongolia have observer status. Originally a loose security alliance, it now covers energy, nuclear power, the fight against organised crime and terrorism, plus health and education.

Scratch most Australian organisations and you'll discover a productive diversity that's too good to miss.

The most useful ideas that think tanks produce are those that are not only practical and applicable, but imbued with easy logic. Sometimes they provide a new slant on things so that existing processes can be made more efficient. Other times, they reveal hidden assets that few have identified, though they're right in front of our face.

One such example was a project undertaken nearly 15 years ago by the Committee for Economic Development of Australia (CEDA), in conjunction with the then Office of Multicultural Affairs (OMA), which was part of the Department of Prime Minister & Cabinet. Sandy Hollway, who later went on to manage the Sydney Olympics ran OMA. The project looked at ways of making business more aware of the repository of skills, talents and contacts buried inside the country's multicultural workforce.

It is not uncommon in Australia to find firms scouring the globe for new markets for their products when, say, the brother of a foreign-born employee in the HR section is looking to import that very thing into their home country.

 Digital divide is only one problem we're facing in realising the promises of a unified, Internet-enabled virtual future ...

SARAJEVO - I had an interesting conversation with my boss the other day. As I am currently stationed in Sarajevo, the capital of Bosnia and Herzegovina, a place where democratisation and transition experiments are mixing with the post-war recovery, he wanted to know if there are any interesting Internet-related projects happening here. He assumed that here, like everywhere else on the planet, social and economic activities are gravitating towards the virtual space.

Digital divide notwithstanding, it was an interesting idea to assume that in a country struggling to rebuild basic infrastructure, where the 20 cent difference in the price of bread has serious social consequences requiring state intervention, and the population is begging the international community (this is their mess!) to remove its democratically elected politicians for their lack of sense and a refusal to agree on anything of consequence, one would expect a vibrant debate about a (more) virtual future.