Is perfect the enemy of the good in international partnerships?

Simone Sorento, a professor of modern languages at a Brazilian university, commented, "I think as developing countries, we have a lot going on in terms of research, so perhaps we should be looked at as partners, important partners, and not only as markets." Sigbolt Noorda, former President of the University of Amsterdam and now president of Magna Charta Observatory, reinforced the point when he said, "...negotiating partnership implies defining what you find acceptable and what not, how far you are will to go along, where you draw a line. One cannot simply dictate conditions, and engaging in international collaborations implies being prepared to take one's partner seriously, including their values and culture and their priorities and the social system they are part of."

These statements (made at the Scholars at Risk network meeting in Montreal) by higher education leaders in South America and Europe capture the core of international partnerships - respect and mutuality. Values are at the core of cross-border work, thus requiring careful consideration and determination of common ground. Seeking that common ground may not look like a specific "partner's" perspective; as Jonathan Becker of Bard College says, "We don't want to compromise our core values or, worse, be a stooge for an authoritarian regime. On the other hand, we don't want to let the perfect be the enemy of the good."

The biggest question is, as mutual partnership are sought, how can the disparate values be sorted out honestly so that the good of higher education can spread around the world?