Kim Jong-un must be cordoned off

What does Kim Jong-un want? What is his end-game? Or, even a smaller question, what are the next provocations he is prepared to launch?

There is no simple answer to these very fundamental questions. We are caught in a dark room and have no sense of purpose.

The only certainty is that the man is a rogue leader. He completely is out of the accepted norms. He has no respect for some of the most basic principles that govern the relations among states.

In view of that, each major country has to ask itself a very straight question: what can we do to stop this extremely dangerous course of action, this criminal behaviour?

And the right answer is to isolate the man and his regime. They must be treated as pariah politicians. And that should be said loud and clear, including by the Chinese and the Russians. Ambiguity coming from Beijing and Moscow is not at all helpful.

There is no need for any additional show of force. The rogues know that such force is available and formidable. They also know that they would be reduced to pieces if they decided to take the initiative to carry an aggression against any other state. 

But there is a need to gather as much means of prevention as possible. Including the most sophisticated military means. 

My reading of the G20 summit (2017)

On the recent G20, the negative issues on the table, either openly or coated in diplomatic words, could be summarised as follows:

- The risks linked to international uncontrolled massive migrations;

- The US withdrawal from the Paris accord on Climate Change

- New trends towards trade protectionism

- The attempts to side-line key international organisations, including the UN, the WTO and the Human Rights Council.

The positives, as I see them:

- Establishment of a new fund, to be administered by the WB, to promote the entrepreneurship of African women; USD 325 million.

- The review of steel overcapacity issue and the recommendation that a plan of action should be prepared by Nov. 2017 to address this most divisive economic and trade issue.

- More coordination on the fight against terrorism and violent extremism.

- The leaders have shown they want to find a common ground on a number of issues.

Kim Jong-un, a dangerous provocateur

Kim Jong-un is above all a provocateur. But a dangerous one, let's be clear. His repeated provocations have created a very delicate situation in his part of the world. And that's a complex region, at it's at the centre of fundamental geopolitical and strategic interests of very powerful countries.

In my opinion, he is not reading the current international situation with smart eyes. Political circumstances have deeply changed. As the intelligence about his most strategic means of power and military capabilities has also changed.

He still believes that China will shield him from any military action coming from outside. In addition, he is convinced that his threats of retaliation against South Korea will discourage others from intervening in the North. He might have a point. However, I am no longer sure that such point is strong enough. 

The EU and the US

When it comes to the difficult response to the current US Administration, the EU leaders have decided to follow two lines.

First, to keep the political dialogue open. This policy dialogue should be centred on the key issues, particularly on respect for the international institutions, defence, trade and climate change. It should be based on clarity: the EU's positions should be stated without any unnecessary ambiguity.

Second, to emphasise the long term nature of the mutual relationship. Both sides have a long history of cooperation and share a number of fundamental values. That should be the basis to identify the common interests and to work together to achieve them. 

The suggestion made by some in Europe that today´s US leadership should be, as much as possible, ignored was not adopted. The EU political masters believe that a reasonable level of engagement should be cultivated.

Renewed confidence in Europe

The EU leaders participating in the forthcoming G20 Summit, scheduled for next week, met today in Germany to coordinate their views on key agenda issues.

This was a very positive initiative, a development that should be recognised.

It shows a fresh level of determination in matters of European policy coordination and harmonization. It was also a manifestation of the new momentum Europe is experiencing and that gives us a new breath of confidence in our shared future. 

Brexit game

The Brexit formal discussions have finally been launched. The first meeting between the EU and the UK negotiators took place today. It was, from the European perspective, a good beginning.

The UK position evolved a great deal as a result of the popular vote in their recent general election. Today´s meeting showed a conciliatory approach. The British policy line seems to be to keep the country out of the EU political decisions and banner, and, at the same time, to maintain it strongly connected to Europe, including when it comes some critical political matters.

This policy is very British. It´s the extraordinary art of playing with ambivalence. To be out and in, depending which mirror you may use to look at the reality.

Oil and diplomacy

Last year, in the US, the number of shale oil wells has doubled. The American production is now 9.29 million barrels a day. That is about 47% of the country's daily consumption. And it takes significant pressure out of the international oil market.

It also brings the value of the barrel down.

It has consequently a major strategic impact on oil revenues in Russia and other key producers. The economic strength of such countries is seriously affected. And that will be the case in the foreseeable future. More so, as many developed economies are steadily moving out of fossil fuels into renewable sources of energy.

One of the lessons we should extract from these developments is that, when it comes to deal with adversarial countries, economic factors are at present much more effective – and acceptable – than the military ones.

A related lesson is that your adversaries will not take this matter lightly. Therefore, you must be prepared to confront them on the political field as well. And that means, among other things, promoting the appropriate public information campaigns, keeping your own citizens aware of the challenges at stake, and responding to hostile propaganda. But it also means to open dialogue lines of communication with those antagonistic countries. That´s the role of diplomacy. It is as important as ever.

On trek up to the end of May

This blog will resume at the end of May, upon my return from a long journey. 

Thank you for your support. 

VA

Let the intelligence people do their work

The most dangerous mistake regarding North Korea could result from erroneous intelligence. It´s a real possibility. I know from a number of examples that intelligence agencies, even the best resourced and the most experienced ones, tend to make mistakes on critical matters. That´s particularly the case when they are under serious political pressure, as it is the case.

If the relevant intelligence people come to the conclusion that the North is about to launch some kind of nuclear or other threatening device, our side might then decide that the time for pre-emptive action is upon us. In these matters, decisions are taken fast.

Once they have been taken, it might be too late to contain and mitigate their multiple consequences.

Therefore, the first point in such a delicate situation as the current one is to make sure the intelligence work is carried out as professionally as possible, outside any type of political compulsion. Secondly, it is essential to fully consider the regional leaders ´opinion. Particularly, the South Korean ones, who are at present at the end of a decisive presidential campaign for an election scheduled for May 9. This is their region and in the world of today, their views are of paramount importance. 

Dangerous times in the Korean Peninsula

The North Korea´s dangerously aggressive posture remains a major issue in the international political agenda. Consequently, the UN Security Council met yesterday on the matter. This was a meeting at the ministerial level as to demonstrate the seriousness of the most recent developments related to the country.

The US approach to make use of extreme diplomatic pressure on Pyongyang deserves support. Diplomacy passes through Beijing. The key to convince Kim Jong Un to abandon the accelerated missile and nuclear programmes is held by China. Therefore, the efforts on the diplomatic front must focus on very close contacts with the Chinese leadership.

It is also true that China does not appreciate a deeper US presence in the region. In particular, it remains strongly opposed to the THAAD missile deployment that the US has launched in South Korea. But that disagreement should not be an excuse. China must use all its leverage on North Korea.

The US additional show of force can be justified by the recent threats coming from the North. It should also be recognised that it contributes to intensify the atmosphere of crisis. But it is also obvious that the main cause of tension comes from Kim´s options.

The North Korean leader must understand that the American policy has changed. It is in his own interest, besides the interests of his fellow citizens.

In the last few hours there have been some noises regarding direct action against Kim himself. I would not be surprised if it is confirmed that such action is under review. However, that or any preventive strike – and we have been further away from a strike than we are today – would cause hell in the Peninsula, and in the region.

I trust that people who decide about these matters fully understand what is at play.

On robots

Today I only have questions. And they are in a very different field but in the end they might be of tremendous importance for matters of peace and human rights. And these are the two most important dimensions in any human life.

But let's list the questions. They concern robots.

Can we teach robots ethics and international law? Do we need to?

Is there a real threat that robots could go beyond the actions they have been programmed for? What should be the limits when designing and programming an extremely smart robot?

Maybe it is time to start looking at these interrogations.

Time to be very clear

The campaign for the final round of the French presidential election – to be held on May 7 – has started. The actions so far show a country that is deeply divided. And also, leaders that have lost their sense of direction and above all, the courage to be clear about what is at stake. We are confronted with a terribly dangerous mix of abysmal personal resentment with a large and widespread dose of political confusion.

It is obvious this is a time that calls for profound changes in the way politics are conducted in France.

Le Pen´s camp belongs to the old order. It represents the past in so many ways. Certainly, not the future.

Furthermore, I see a lot of rage in the ranks of her supporters.

And Le Pen's political style and posture reminds me of the caudillos of another era.

We should not be blind to the way she conducts her public performances and deaf to what she says. This candidate and her words are animated by feelings of intolerance, resentment, negative passions, and violence against the opponents. 

These destructive attitudes and beliefs should be exposed relentlessly. 

Focus on a conflict at a time

The recent US statements on the current status of the Iran Nuclear deal are not wise. They contradict the position of all the other signatories of the agreement, leaving the US alone on such a delicate matter. That´s what I would call to paint oneself into a corner by trying to appear smarter and bolder than the other key members of the international community.

Furthermore, the new war of words coming from Washington towards Iran opens an additional front of conflict at a time no one has a clear understanding of the Trump Administration's strategy on Syria and North Korea. Why should they want to have one more problem on the table at this stage when the two others are already complex and dangerous enough? And confusing, as well. 

A comprehensive view of criminal behaviour.

The assailant that yesterday attacked the police officers on duty at the Champs Elysées had a long past of criminal behaviour. He spent many years in jail. And all those who knew him a bit agree he was a deeply deranged fellow.

 As we take these facts into account, we must raise a number of questions about the workings of the penitentiary system, the failures – or at least, the limitations – of the re-education programmes, the inefficiency of the back-to-society policies and also the way our institutional arrangements miss the target when it comes to deal with extremely violent people. 

All these matters need to be seriously thought through, and challenged, if we are indeed committed to making our environment safer.

It´s not enough just to speak about terrorism.  

Turkey´s path

It´s worrisome to see the Turkish society being pushed towards more political radicalisation and deeper national divisions. It´s also a matter of great concern to watch its leadership moving away from accepted democratic principles. And taking the country in a direction that is contrary to greater proximity with the EU. 

Our dear unpredictable enemy

There are a number of shockingly bizarre leaders and unacceptable governance regimes in the world. The North Korean one is certainly the strangest system. But, above all, it is a very serious menace to peace in the region, not to mention the human rights violations its citizens suffer on a daily basis.

It is also an extremely militarised country. By far, number one on this category. And on top of it, it is absolutely unpredictable.

The unpredictability is the main cause of deep concern in the region and also for the US, a country that has a strong strategic presence in the Korean Peninsula and in neighbouring Japan.

Today, the most pressing question is how to deal with such unpredictability. That´s what is under very active discussion in the special rooms where strategy is formulated. 

Talking about North Korea

The North Korean problem is very much linked to Kim´s power base. Therefore, its solution passes above all through a package of actions that can undermine the dictator's personal standing. Among other measures, which also include ridiculing the man, the diplomatic and economic ones are the most impactful. That means a very high degree of diplomatic isolation of the regime and the intensification of the economic and financial sanctions.

The question cannot be resolved through bombs and bombastic declarations. Such an approach would be used by Kim Jong-Un to his own advantage. External military action against the regime will allow him to further entrench himself in power.   

A disciplined and strategic approach

I see the authority of Gen. HR McMaster being consolidated within the White House. And I would like to believe he will be able to get enough support in the Defence and Intelligence circles to master a strategic influence on the President and be able to instil a more disciplined approach by the top cat.

It's true I do not ignore the nature and traits of the President's personality and his tendency to play by his own sheet of music. The question then is very clear: will McMaster and his think-alike friends be able to contain the explosive reactions of their boss when vital matters will be at play? The new trend looks encouraging but it´s too early to make a call.  

The reform of the UN Security Council

Acts of war and drawn-out conflicts are among the key factors that undermine the authority of UN Security Council. Actually, they have a major negative impact on the Council. And they are in open contradiction with the positions stated by some key members of the UN that keep repeating that it is important to improve the functioning of the Council and abide by its decisions.

This reminds me that the reform of the Security Council is not just about revisiting the issue of its membership. That one is already an impossible goal. However, it seems easier to achieve than the issues related to improving the Council’s capacity to resolve conflicts that are directly related to the strategic interests of its permanent members. Or the Council's approach to long lasting impasses. What could be the accepted doctrine on intervening in that type of intractable conflicts?

Trump´s most pressing international challenges

This week, President Trump has been directly trapped by Bashar al-Assad of Syria and Kim Jong-un of North Korea. Both dictators decided to challenge the incoherence that defines the global policy of the new US President. Assad with sarin, the gas that he dropped from his airplanes and killed scores of innocent people. A true war crime, by all measures. Kim by firing a new missile towards the Sea of Japan, just a few days prior to his powerful neighbour´s visit to Florida for a first meeting with the big man from Washington.

He is also being challenged by Vladimir Putin. This special, unique strongman created the most absurd “explanation” to excuse the war crime committed by his ally in Syria. And decided to continue to block any action the UN Security Council could have taken on this appalling crisis.

The US President cannot limit his response to these major challenges to words of condemnation and expressions of outrage. They are essential, indeed, but not enough at this stage. He came to the White House as man of action and determination. He has now to show his resolution. Actions ought to match the promises.

But he has very narrow options.

The first one is about prioritising. He has to focus on one of his challengers and show that man that Trump means business. And that priority as things stand now should be about Assad. It must combine diplomatic initiatives, including a serious push for an international commission of inquiry, with other political measures and direct military pressure. The package has to be multifaceted, clear in its purpose, well explained to everyone but also limited in its range, in its initial stage. 

We are prepared to deal with terrorists

The sponsors of terrorist acts against European countries should be told two things.

First that we are much better prepared to prevent. The attacks by lone individuals, with very modest means, show that at present it is much more difficult for criminal groups to plan and organise terrorist raids. The intelligence services are now much more efficient than a few years ago. Exchanges between these types of individuals have become better monitored. Surveillance is more sophisticated.

Secondly, the sponsors should understand that these isolated acts do not change the way we see public life and do not split our societies along sectarian lines. We respond by continuing to lead routine lives. We carry on. The terrorists might kill innocent people but they have no lasting impact on our democratic values and institutions. Furthermore, they do not generate c continuous state of social panic and entrenched fear. The effect on society is local, and short lived.

A terrorist is a loser.  

EU at Sixty

The EU leaders today met in Rome to celebrate the 60^th anniversary of the common European political dream. And they approved a Declaration to charter the way for the next ten years or so. In my opinion, the most salient point of this initiative is about unity. The leaders have shown they believe in the joint future of the EU Member States. They are particularly keen about strengthening the Euro, as the Union's currency. And they want to focus their attention on four priority areas: security, economic prosperity, social protection and a more strategic presence in international affairs. It´s a good choice even if within each one of these areas there is still a need to be more precise, both in terms of narrowing down the areas to concentrate on what is indeed transformational and timelines.

Challenging times

I went back to the notes I wrote at the beginning of last year and noticed I had pencilled that 2016 would be a year of political renewal. Well, it has exceeded the expectations, but not in the sense I was expecting.

What can I say about 2017?

What a strange question to be raised in mid-March, when the year is already moving fast.

Still, I think I can write that this is the year that is going to challenge many of the lessons we have learned in the past. That might sound pretty worrying. But it is above all a call for those who believe in principles and international cooperation to show they can respond to the danger and have the intelligence and the courage to bring us back to reason.

UN funds should not be cut

The new US Administration plans to cut in a big way the country´s financial contributions to the UN. This decision, if it materialises, will have a major impact on programmes and operations at a time of greater demands and some extreme dramatic situations. 

At this early stage, it is not possible to measure the effect of such a decision. 

It´s only possible to say that the UN has the experience, the logistics and the credibility that make such operations tremendously cost-effective and able to reach many difficult corners of the globe. This might be a weak argument in some circles in Washington. But it is a strong reason for many to keep fighting for a strong, efficient, and properly funded UN system. 

Too much despair

About 30 years ago, the famine in Ethiopia became a big story and millions of people responded to the call. Live Aid was launched and hundreds of millions of dollars were raised from individual donations by people from many countries. We lived a great storm of generosity.

In the last few days, the UN has launched a major humanitarian appeal to respond to dramatic famine situations in Yemen, Somalia and the Sahel. The UN stated this was a crisis of unheard dimensions.

The appeal got a few minutes of attention here and there.

The fact of the matter is that we are inundated with catastrophic news. And we have seen so many pictures of human suffering on our TV screens that we have become indifferent. We have “banalized” distress and death. And we might have also lost a good deal of our humanity. Or maybe, not. It could just be that we are deeply confused by the political horrors we are witnessing these days. We might just feel too powerless.

I wonder.

Europe´s unity

Donald Tusk has been re-elected as President of the European Council. The Council brings together all the Heads of State and Government of the Union. They have voted today for Tusk. With one exception: the Polish government did not support his own citizen. For reasons of domestic politics, that's the truth. Not for reasons of competence: Tusk´s competence has been recognised by everybody else.

This was an important development. The Polish ultra conservative leaders had actively campaigned against the re-election. Some of us thought that the rest of the EU leaders would be willing to accept the Warsaw position in order to keep the European unity. But this time, reason has been stronger that unity at any cost. And that is certainly good news. 

Time for some tough questions about North Korea

Kim Jong-un, the North Korean dictator, is a crazy man. But above all, as a political leader, he is tremendously dangerous. For his people and for the region. He controls an all-pervasive internal security apparatus, a machinery that makes everyone in country look either as mentally retarded or simply terrified. In addition, the tyrant spends most of the country´s limited resources on military hardware, including on expensive nuclear research projects for aggressive ends, and on an incredibly large number of troops, that make North Korea the most militarised country in the world. All this represents a major threat to peace in the region and gives rise to an arms race that includes Japan and South Korea.

The UN Security Council has approved a series of sanctions against the North Korean regime. But the man keeps provoking the international community. Today, it was the launch of four ballistic missiles into the Sea of Japan.

It is now time to make the sanctions more stringent. They should also be expanded. One area could be related to the international travel of the North Korean officials. Those movements should be made more difficult. And the 47 countries housing North Korean embassies should be advised to limit the privileges of the country´s diplomats.

North Korea must understand they have a choice. One option is to accept the existing international order and behave as a partner country. The other, is to continue the rogue policies of today and then face as much isolation and constraints as the international community can implement. And if such rigorous approach by the international community does not bring a change, then it is time to ask some tougher questions about the way we should treat a regime of such nature. 

Juncker´s options

Now that Jean-Claude Juncker has presented his ideas about the options regarding the future of the EU, a matter that I will discuss in the next writings, it has become apparent that the Germans and the French have decided to support Juncker and accept his implicit suggestion that they should become again the core engine of the European project. Both governments back Juncker´s views that see different groupings of countries opting for distinct levels of integration. Also, they are convinced that this is no time for a change at top of the European Commission. That´s the reason they want to be seen as keen supporters of Juncker´s full mandate. 

When the generals write open letters

Over 120 US flag officers – generals and admirals – wrote an open letter yesterday to remind the key leaders of Congress and the top people in the Trump administration in charge of foreign affairs, defence and security that national security is a complex issue. It calls for a comprehensive approach that goes well beyond the military means and the armed response.

In today´s world, national security and the protection of key strategic interests are above all done through means of healthy diplomatic relations, efficient development cooperation and other external programmes that combat poverty, exclusion, disease and bad governance.

As such, these top commanders urge the Administration and the representatives of the American people to keep the investment of public resources on those programmes that fall under the State Department and have been designed and improved over time in order to more effectively prevent conflict in other parts of the globe.

This is a position that calls for wide support. It is the modern way of looking at international relations and of promoting peace and stability. Its relevance is even greater because it is stated by people that know about matters of war and peace. They understand the limitations of the use of armed forces. They are also people who have seen the world. They know what they are talking about.

The link to the letter is the following: 

http://www.usglc.org/2017/02/27/over-120-retired-generals-admirals-on-state-and-usaid-budget-now-is-not-the-time-to-retreat/

German politics

Martin Schulz spent many years in Brussels first as Member of European Parliament and in the end, as its President (Speaker). A few weeks ago, he returned to his native Germany and took the leadership of his party, the SPD (Social Democrat). He is now campaigning throughout the country, with the forthcoming legislative elections in mind. The elections will take place at the end of September. That´s a long way down the line. An eternity, in political terms, particularly now, that everything goes fast and can change even faster. He is competing against Angela Merkel, who will be fighting for a fourth term as leader of Germany. That´s a formidable challenge. But Schulz is doing well. He is seen as potential winner. That´s good, in politics.

In any case, we are fortunate to have Merkel and Schulz as the key competitors in Germany. They are both balanced leaders and people without fear. They are also resolutely pro-Europeans. Their presence in the front lines is good news for the EU.

On EU matters: let´s move on

The EU´s future is at a crossroads. My choice is to move forward. But not every member state will be prepared for a closer integration process. They have their national circumstances and might consider this is no time to enter into new power sharing agreements. I accept that. The union has to result from a shared and voluntary political approach.

Those countries that are ready for a deeper relationship should however be able to move on. The treaties allow it under the principle of “enhanced co-operation”. And there are a number of areas that would benefit from more co-operation and harmonization among a certain number of states. One of them is for sure in the field of defence. To be complemented by new forms of domestic security interoperability. Other areas would be in the financial and economic fields, in scientific research, higher education and student’s exchange, and external affairs.

The point is to decide on a new set of common goals and then invite the member states to pool their resources and political will. Several will join. And history will move on.

It would be a mistake to believe that every European country will share the same level of ambition. It is also a major impediment not to show leadership and wait for a consensus. That will never happen.

EU and Defence: additional considerations

Taking into account the ongoing discussions on military budgets, I went back to the text approved at the NATO Summit of 2014, in Wales. The paragraph 5 of "The Wales Declaration on the Transatlantic Bond" is quoted below. It´s worth a careful reading of its words.

"We recognise that these steps will take the necessary effort and funding. In light of this, we agree to reverse the trend of declining defence budgets and aim to increase defence expenditure in real terms as GDP grows; we will direct our defence budgets as efficiently and effectively as possible; we will aim to move towards the existing NATO guideline of spending 2% of GDP on defence within a decade, with a view to fulfilling NATO capability priorities. We will display the political will to provide required capabilities and deploy forces when they are needed."

This commitment follows the recognition stated in the last sentence of the previous paragraph. I quote it as well.

"We will continue to invest in modern and deployable armed forces that can operate effectively together and at a high level of readiness to fulfil NATO's tasks, in full accordance with the principles of the UN Charter and the Helsinki Final Act." 

And I would underline the following points:

-             Interoperability and readiness are key dimensions in terms of greater joint effectiveness;

-            Additional defence expenditure is linked to economic growth;

-             Budget allocations should be reviewed to respond to new priorities and up-to-date military approaches and to ensure a more appropriate funding of the new roles of the armed forces as required by a new type of threats;

-            The 2% goal is a guideline and it should be gradually build up to 2014; it cannot happen in the short term;

-           The States must be willing to participate in joint operations and be perceived as able to rapidly respond to needs as they arise, taking into account the capabilities of each nation.

I also find the references to the UN Charter and to the Helsinki Final Act essential. They should be continuously recalled.  

The defence challenge

On defence matters, the EU countries have no other option but to pool resources together. That´s the future and that´s the only way to realise our own share of responsibilities. It´s time to see things from a joint perspective. We are talking about the defence of Europe, not just about the protection of country A or B within the EU. If country A is attacked tomorrow, other countries will be destabilised soon after. What is at stake is our common EU future as democracies and countries that respect the rule of law and the distinct role of the key political institutions.  

There are many inefficiencies and a good deal of overlapping expenditures in between countries. All that needs to be streamlined and approached from a complementary perspective that goes beyond the national borders and the old concept of individual sovereignty in matters of defence.

Unfortunately that´s not easy to achieve. In many parts of the European space, the armed forces are still seen from a national angle only. The challenge is to convince the citizens that that´s no longer the way forward. 

Romania´s street lessons

The people of Romania have been demonstrating on the streets for the least 15 days or so. The rallying cry is against official corruption, the abuse of power the elected authorities exert for their own advantage and enrichment. And there are plenty of cases: thousands of accusations have been made by the special prosecutor and her office since 2013. People want the current government, led by the Social Democrats to leave office. This government has tried to save from the justice quite a number of past politicians who have been accused of corruption.

As I see the masses on the streets, braving the extreme weather conditions, I come to the conclusion that a number of points should be underlined. They must make us think.

The prosecution is headed by a very brave woman, Laura Codruta Kovesi. She is in charge of the anti-corruption agency, which comprises a good number of young lawyers and prosecutors. Kovesi has shown that leadership, honesty and modesty can change a country.

The political parties have no role in the popular mobilization. They have been side-lined, overtaken. This is civil society in action. There are no stars, no street leaders. It´s citizen’s power at its best.

The traditional media has also been overtaken. The information is shared through social networks. It´s faster, free of charge, and much more creative and closer to the people´s concerns. The established press comes later, just to pick the information and report about the events. But plays no role in the heat of the action.

Many of those on the streets are young people with a good level of education and a higher level of social frustration. Their participation creates some hope that change might happen. 

Juncker´s faux pas

Jean-Claude Juncker has announced he will not seek re-election at the end of his current term as President of the European Commission. I doubt the wisdom of such a disclosure. He still has almost three years to go before the end of his mandate. An early announcement weakens his position at a time the EU needs strong leadership. Furthermore, this decision can be read as a statement of despair when we need to revive the sentiment of hope in the future of the Union.

Juncker might be very bitter about the present state of affairs. He can say so. Actually, he should say it but with elegance. At the same time, he must be seen as a fighter and not as a quitter. In his position, criticism has to be tempered with room for a change of course. By making public his state of mind about his own future he has further contributed to the climate of gloom that is permeating many European circles. He must correct that. 

Choppy waters and calm leaders

Notwithstanding the recent political developments in the US, the European leaders should keep a cool approach and fight every manifestation of anti-Americanism.

The EU and the US have been, for many decades, key allies and it´s in their mutual interest to keep it that way.

In terms of social progress, prosperity and peace, alliances between countries are the only way forward. Each side should bring to the fore the best it can offer. That does not mean, of course, that there will be agreement every time. Relations between countries touch a complex and varied number of dimensions, from security to trade and investment, in addition to more political matters, including the promotion of human values, liberties and rights. There will be times when the interpretations of the interests at play might diverge.

The challenge, for the leaders, is to find common ground. And if one of the sides keeps going in a direction that deviates from the traditional path, the duty of the other side is to be firm and clear. And remind everyone that what keeps us together can be seriously undermined by a narrow view of international politics. It can also be tremendously damaged by political amateurism, retrograde beliefs, personal arrogance and a short term view of one´s national interests.

France´s complexities

I lost my bet. I told a couple of friends that François Fillon, the French conservative leader, would resign from the presidential race before the weekend. But he is still struggling on, apparently convinced that his best option lays in remaining in the contest. So I was wrong, the man is still kicking.

After all the revelations about his extraordinary and unjustified use of public monies to pay his wife and two children, for work that seemingly never happened, Fillon has lost a very good deal of credibility. He was, up to the disclosures, the candidate everybody thought would win the French presidency in May. Now, his chances have simply evaporated.

Fillon´s fall from grace can have a major negative impact on the conservative camp and also on the outcome of the elections. Some of his voters will move further right and might end up by supporting Marine Le Pen, the extreme-right flag bearer.

For the democratic camp, the challenge is to prevent such move. There is a real danger here. Le Pen can benefit from the deep discontent that was already present in the French society and that Fillon´s scandal has seriously contributed to exacerbate. In addition, it will be essential to attract many of those supporters to the centre field. That´s not very easy to achieve but it is possible. That´s where all the efforts should be focused.

On leadership again

We do not need an illuminated mind that promises to re-write every rule in the book. We need leaders that follow the rules in the book, that´s what we are looking for. People who know that we have spent the last seventy or so years putting together the rules of today and, in addition, are ready to wisely implement them. That´s about predictability and also about building confidence between nations. No nation is big enough to go for it alone. And no leader should be foolish enough not to understand that the international relations of today are based on cooperation and the harmonization of common interests and values. 

Let´s be positive

The good news is about the EU economy. The employment rates are up and again there is economic growth. Science-based innovation and renewable sources of energy, among other sectors, are particularly contributing to the expansion. And the euro has kept its value when compared with the currencies of our main trading partners. It does not show any sign of imminent collapse. 

EU leaders walking through a minefield

Donald Trump´s presidency remains the main subject of conversation among the EU politicians. They are still figuring out how to deal with the new American leader.

At this stage the prevailing approach is basically about keeping a courteous distance from the man. Beyond the surprise, they don´t like what they see, that´s obvious. But the Europeans know that it is important not to antagonize Trump. However, more importantly yet, the EU leaders are very much aware that large segments of the European public opinion do not appreciate the new White House man at all. Actually, to be clear, those citizens consider that Trump´s values do not match the democratic practice the West has put in place during the last decades. They see Trump both as an extremely negative, destructive political actor and as a serious menace to the international order.

The EU leaders cannot ignore the views of their citizens. They are therefore walking a minefield. They know they have to be very careful. 

Our fascists are very happy

The fascist leaders of extreme right parties, in a small number of EU countries, spent the weekend in Koblenz, Germany, celebrating the victory of Donald Trump and strategizing. Trump´s election is seen with great delight by the most reactionary segments of our societies. And the fascist are convinced this time they can make it to power, as we go for elections in the Netherlands, France and Germany.

In view of this, we have to be even more convinced they will not get there. And be clear in our political combat against them. Europe has experienced fascism in the past and we should remind ourselves of the terrible pain we got then. It happened in Germany, of course, in Italy as well, but also in Portugal and Spain and some other places, when local extremist parties aligned themselves with the Nazis and their fellow collaborationists.

It´s time to be politically tough. Any mild approach to the fascist leaders will end up by encouraging them further. They might look good on TV. They might be more civil in their manners and speech than their brutal American friend. But they are just dangerous wolves in sheep´s clothing. 

Global leadership

A very simple question for the weekend: now that the new President of the US is manifestly not capable – or not interested, you chose the most appropriate word – of leading the world, who is going to fill the empty space?

Humanity will continue the common quest for peace and prosperity. That´s the way things are today, when there is greater conscience about the issues and a stronger popular determination to move forward. But where can we find the global leadership that such endeavour requires?

You might think of two or three possible names, of course. The question is then: do they have the right level of authority? Do they have the leverage that the leader of the most powerful country in the world used to have?

Let´s think about this. 

Farewell to President Obama

As President Obama completes his official mandate, I want to register my admiration for him as a politician. It is true there are decisions he took I would not support. Or that would make me uncomfortable. But he was by and large an inspiring leader and as humane as one can be when at the head of the most powerful country on earth.

History cannot be confused with the horizon in front of us. The short term commentary about Obama might be unfair and even harsh. We cannot be discouraged by the cruelty of immediacy and the blindness of partisanship.

We should be confident. And be convinced that history will be honest and kind to Barack Obama.

Gullibility

The more I listen to the noises made by the incoming US President on matters of international affairs, the more I get convinced that when it comes to his views about Russia and China he is a naïve. It´s all unsophisticated inspiration and no experience or wise listening to those who know about those countries ´political leaders. And that is certainly not good news, it can´t augur well for the US and their allies, especially when you have on the other side of the table foxy fellows like Putin and Xi. These two are no joke. They do not tweet. They plan. 

Who is in charge?

The journalist from Macao asked me who in the EU is taking the lead in the fight against populist and xenophobic ideas. It was a genuine question with a serious touch of apprehension. For someone from afar two things seemed to be obvious: that there is a growing extremist political wave in Europe and that some personalities are for sure fully engaged in combatting such trend.

Well, for me, the first part is indeed obvious. The current radicalism combined with old fashioned nationalistic fantasies is a matter of concern, for sure. But the other dimension – who is taking the lead and proposing a more generous and democratic alternative that would make the European dream great again, as someone would say – the answer is not so easy. Actually, I am still looking for an answer.

Mario Soares: a great European

Today, at the age of 92, Mario Soares, the former President and also Prime Minister of Portugal, passed away. He had been a symbol of freedom and democratic values during his days in politics. Furthermore, he was a firm believer in the unity of the European nations. Soares was convinced that Europe can only move into the future if it remains in peace with itself, mutually supportive and united. He was also an excellent example of leadership: unusual, not afraid of speaking his mind, and always connected with the feelings of the majority of the citizens. It is time to honour his memory and exalt his example. 

Elections money

Elections will take place in a number of EU countries this year. And interestingly enough, we will see those countries actively borrowing in the capital markets. Italy´s government will be number one. They intend to issue public debt bonds totaling € 271 billion. That´s a lot of money, to be paid by future governments and the younger people. France will be number two. They should be in market to borrow over €200 billion. Even Germany, with general elections later in the year, will be looking for fresh money in the financial markets: €160 billion.

The point here is to spend a lot on public goodies to get the voters happy and ready to support those in place. It´s short term politics against long term liabilities.

US and the EU

We have to get used and draw the consequences but the fact of the matter is that today´s US public opinion is less interested in European matters. Europe has lost space in the American political agenda.

My very best wishes

In my part of Europe, a region that has Brussels at the centre, about 60% of the citizens see 2017 with some apprehension. This disquiet results from a combination of different factors, including the unresolved issues related to mass migrations, domestic and international security, the uncertainty that comes out of the US presidential elections, and the perceived lack of leadership in some of our key European countries and the impact that might have on the future of the EU. Brexit, interestingly, is not at this stage considered as a major problem.

Nonetheless, the majority of the people are still very much in favour of the EU. It is important to sustain such support. And that responsibility should lie mainly in the hands of the national leaders. They should stop the practice of blaming the Brussels institutions or the European Central Bank for their domestic difficulties. We ought to be firm on this and openly criticise those who keep doing it in 2017. They are not the kind of politicians we need now.

This is a time to be positive. And fight for a stronger, clear-cut political New Year.