Brexit: time to move on

Brexit is taking too much of EU leaders’ attention and energy. It’s time to sort it out, to have enough clarity about the direction to follow and then move on. There are many other issues that require top attention. Including an assessment of what remains to be achieved as the current leadership ends their mandates and a definition of what should be the goals for the next cycle. Being clear about those goals could allow for a more substantive campaign for the European elections of May this year. It would bring the debate to a higher level. The candidates must be questioned about their responses to the key challenges. Beyond, well beyond, Brexit. 

Intelligence and balance

President Trump said today that the US intelligence chiefs are “extremely passive and naïve” and that “they should go back to school”. The President is indeed sui generis. Uncommon, and odd, to be clear.

These remarks he made are unjustified. That’s how we see it, from this side of the Alliance. The people that are currently in charge of the US national security are actually very experienced and balanced. These might be the characteristics the President has serious difficulties to identify with. They talk based of facts and assessments. The other side talks based on political instincts and emotions, and on a view that places him at the centre of the universe. Power blinds and disturbs quite often those who see themselves as above the crowd.

As an additional note, let me add that the American people and we in Europe are lucky enough to have such kind of professionals in charge of a key State function. And we encourage them not to feel undermined by unjustified and prejudiced remarks. They should keep playing the serene role that is theirs and is so crucial to avoid immature and irrational strategic decisions.

Sugar-coated Brexit

Today the British Parliament discussed and voted a few motions on Brexit.

Beyond the words, the show and the votes, for me the point is clear: the deal that is on the table, the one painstakingly negotiated between Theresa May and the EU, is the best option at this stage. Today’s Westminster session seems to reveal that a good number of MPs have also realised that. They said clearly, they do not want to vote without a deal. And they expect the EU leaders to put some sugar on top of the current proposal. Just to make it a bit more palatable. If the EU does it, if some language is changed in the Political Declaration – not in the deal, I do not see it as possible – the MPs will twist that coat of sugar in such a way that it will save their face, as they finally approve the deal.

Very shrewd political actors they are.

Brexit means noise

Brexit reminds me of many parts of India. It’s all about noise. There is noise everywhere and people live in the middle of the most disturbing noise. But, in the end, there is a way out. People find a solution. It might not be the best one, it can even be painful, but they must keep moving, go beyond the chaos. Life goes on, as they say. At a cost, of course.

Brexit: decision time

Theresa May’s leadership style can be criticised for many reasons. But it’s difficult to challenge her level of resolve, her determination.

The Prime Minister believes she must deliver the outcome of the 2016 referendum on Europe. Also, that the exit needs to be based on a deal between the UK and the EU.

There was a time when she repeatedly said that “no deal was better than a bad deal”. On that, she has changed her mind. Since last summer she has become fully convinced that an accord is necessary. And not just for the transition, not just for the short term. It’s critical for a mutually profitable relationship between her country and its major economic and security partner, the EU.

She is also sure that the draft deal she has negotiated with the Europeans is the best possible arrangement. Therefore, she will keep pressing on. Theresa May wants her proposal approved.

This week we will find out if she wins or loses. The coming days are crucial for the continuation of her leadership. 

This is now the time to go beyond the crossroads. I, like all of us here in Brussels, would prefer to see her determination rewarded.

Maduro's days

The Venezuela standoff goes on. Time plays against Nicolás Maduro. He sees what remains of his authority being eroded with the passing of the days. He knows that, I believe, and is certainly preparing a heavy-handed response. And that’s the main danger at this stage: serious loss of lives.

Maduro also understands that the current context is different and not very favourable to him. The opposition is united. They have a charismatic and widely accepted leader. There is regional and international support to the new leader. Moreover, the regional rapport of forces is no longer what it used to be: now there is Bolsonaro next door, and the countries of the region are against him, except for Mexico, Cuba and Bolivia. And there has been a serious deterioration of the hardships most of the population is confronted with. The circumstances are playing against Maduro.

But he is still in the Miraflores Presidential Palace. And he has the support of his generals and admirals. That is important. The question is about the support of the lower ranking officers within the armed forces. That’s one of the keys to unlock the crisis.

Venezuela needs a domestic settlement

Venezuela is again a huge headline in the international agenda. And this time, the situation is extremely delicate. The country is at the hedge of major internal violent conflict.

The positions of the different Sates in Latin America and elsewhere must therefore be very clear.

It’s obvious that the last presidential elections have no credibility. As such, Nicolás Maduro cannot claim any legitimacy. He can claim power, as many dictators usually do, because he controls the armed forces and the police. The armed forces are now in charge of the oil business and that’s the reason why they still support Maduro and his regime. But many in the ranks know that the people to whom they belong, the grassroots men and women, are under enormous stress and just struggling to cope with poverty and the lack of very basic goods. This has nothing to do with imperialist forces in the outside world. It has to do with Maduro’s madness and crazy approach to the national economy.  

The EU has taken a view on the crisis that is very reasonable. It has called for a full respect for the National Assembly´s decisions and for the integrity of its leader, Juan Guaidó. It has called for proper elections to be organised. That’s fine, but how to organise them, in a way that meets internationally accepted criteria, that’s the impossible question. Elections are indeed the way forward, but I do not see them coming soon.

The most immediate step is to see how to stop a very likely escalation of violence. That’s, for me, the most urgent issue.

In the meantime, the US has said they do accept Maduro’s decision about the end of their diplomatic relations. That’s understandable. But Washington should however withdraw its diplomatic staff from Caracas. To keep them there opens a new opportunity to fire up violence, this time against the embassy personnel. And that could be an excuse for an American intervention that nobody wants. An outside military intervention would be a major mistake. It should be clear that it is not under preparation and that no action will be taken to try to justify it.

The people of Venezuela has now suffered enough. They need to find a domestic solution to their crisis.

Davos 2019: power and planes

Davos 2019 is now underway.

Davos is the annual high mass on globalization and power. This year’s headline is about the absence of key political leaders. The big names – Trump, Xi, Putin, Modi, Merkel, Macron, May – are not attending. They have more pressing matters to address at their respective home fronts. Even second line political leaders are not many this time. Bad omen for the organisers: Jair Bolsonaro of Brazil is the star at the opening.

Almost 50 years down the line, since the first meeting, the World Economic Forum is at risk of becoming no more than a networking venue for major corporate leaders, friendly NGOs heads, and plenty of star media people. Also, one high-visibility opportunity for the elites that love to be seen attending seminars and participating in panel discussions on global themes. Boring as such talks can be, and abstract, so many times, they pretend to identify the key challenges of the day and come up with new solutions. That sounds great and visionary.

But it is not just the question of the elitist image, of powerful people deeply disconnected from the realities of the ordinary citizen meeting on the rocks of Davos. It’s also that nowadays there are many competing initiatives, dozens of conferences in many places that debate the same issues and come to similar conclusions.

Maybe the only true difference is related to private planes. In Davos this year, they expect around 1,500 of them. That’s the ultimate symbol of power. The private plane.

On the situation in DRC (Congo)

Regrettably, chaos and misery are the two words closely associated with the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC). A good part of this enduring disaster comes from the political leadership in Kinshasa. They manipulate the institutions and fire up the instability and the divisions for their own corrupt gain.

The presidential electoral process has very much been an illustration of all the ills associated with such leaders. As a process, it is not credible at all. But it has brought a ray of change. And that, for now, seems enough to keep the people tranquil. The Congolese wanted, above all, to get rid of Joseph Kabila and his henchmen. The announced outcome of the election, as disputed as it can be, might also be a step in that direction. A very timid step, it’s recognised, with a rather weak new President, but still, at the eyes of many, a step forward.

That’s why the friends of Congo, both in the region and elsewhere, ought to be very prudent in their approach to the current situation.

Zimbabwe's distress

Unfortunately, Zimbabwe is again in the news headlines for the very wrong reasons. 

This past week has seen mass protests, violence, misery and death. As in the past, the government responded to unrest with extreme and unjustified force. Basic human rights are simply ignored. The regime is brutal, as ruthless as it has been in past similar situations. It’s unclear how many people have been killed by the police and the soldiers.

Zimbabweans have been under tremendous suffering, unimaginable hardship, for the best part of the last two decades. That´s a long national crisis, with a very heavy toll. The leadership has been inconsiderately inhumane.

And the little ray of hope that the new President had brought, after the departure of Robert Mugabe, appears now to have become a very sad illusion. Key democrats feel devastated by the new dramatic events. And as I write this evening, the situation is still getting worse.

Very sad.

Supporting the Kurds in Syria

All indications, facts and intelligence, and independent media reports, show that the so-called Islamic State is still a serious threat in North-Eastern Syria. It would be utterly irresponsible for any democratic leader do deny it.

Moreover, all the support that can be provided to those inside Syria that have demonstrated their determination to effectively fight the IS terrorists should be sustained. That’s the case of the Kurdish fighters under the banner of the Syrian Democratic Forces.

That support must include political negotiations with the Turkish government, even if one knows that such initiative is not easily accepted by President Erdogan. Without ignoring Erdogan’s belligerent approach towards the Syrian Kurds, my recommendation is to keep the strategic liaison with Ankara as close as possible. Turkey must be part of the Syrian stabilization process. There should be no doubt about that, as there is no doubt about the critical role played by the Syrian Kurds and their fellow allies. All this, as we make sure everyone understands that any form of terrorism, war crimes and violence are absolutely unacceptable. 

After the Brexit vote

After the Westminster vote on the Brexit Deal, and its most shocking result, the question that is in all minds is very clear: what’s next? Obvious interrogation, that’s true, but the answer is far from being clear. But the British political class must find an answer to it. For that, they must immediately take the initiative of stopping the Brexit time glass. It’s impossible to keep the current deadline of 29 March. It’s also completely unwise. An extension is required. And that extension is possible, at least up to the opening of the new European Parliament in July 2019.

It’s on the interest of both sides – the British and the EU – to reach an agreement. That’s now the position of many at Westminster. But there are some in that Parliament and above all in the popular media that advocate a No Deal. That is absolute madness. They can’t be serious when they defend that. They are either politically blind or foolish.

On the EU side, it is critical to avoid any kind of statement that would complicate things. Leaders need to show they are patient people and balanced as well. Silence is the best option. When silence is not possible, then the EU leaders should just state they are open to look at any meaningful proposal coming from London.

Westminster is making it impossible

At this stage, the best option for all of us in the European neighbourhood – UK and EU – would be to have the Withdrawal Agreement approved by the British parliament. That would be the most reasonable way forward, this late in the process. Both sides need a Brexit arrangement that would bring clarity and could ensure a good degree of continuity to a very close relationship.

Unfortunately, Westminster seems determined to vote down the deal. That will complicate further a political situation that is already very delicate. The UK population deserves better. And they are also tired of the discussions about the Brexit. But the politicians in Parliament are too divided. Moreover, many of them are just guided by personal reasons and by an idea of Britain that does not tally with the international affairs of today.  

Brexit, NATO and security cooperation

To assert that the deal proposed by Prime Minister Theresa May will put at risk the UK’s place in NATO and the country’s intelligence system is not more than fallacious propaganda. The UK will keep playing a crucial role within the Atlantic Alliance, after the Brexit, as it did in the past. There is no change here. And concerning the security arrangements, the type of cooperation that will be in place if the deal with the EU is approved will be the same as we have now between the UK and the rest of Europe. Even with the UK out of Europol. Security is a critical area for both sides. That has been said several times in the last two years or so. And there is no doubt about the future relation in this field.

A couple of days ago, two gentlemen came to the front door of the British public opinion to affirm and give credibility to such fraudulent assessment: Sir Richard Dearlove and Lord Guthrie. They also said that the UK dues are “ransom money”. Or, the PM has clearly explained that the money the UK must transfer to the EU at the end of the union relates to commitments taken in the recent past and other costs related to the pensions of former EU staff of British nationality. There is no punishment to explain such payment, no liberation money is required to exit the EU.

Sir Richard is a former MI6 – British external intelligence service – director-general. He was in charge during the Iraq false declaration by Tony Blair about “weapons of mass destruction” as well as when Dr David Kelly, the scientist whistle-blower that denied such allegation, was found dead, following an apparent suicide. A very mysterious suicide, for that matter. Lord Guthrie is also an old man now. He had been the boss of the British armed forces at the end of the 90s and at the very beginning of the 2000s. He seems to have lost contact with today’s reality.

Both were powerful men in their times. But now, if they are the true authors of the piece on “risks” associated with the proposed Brexit deal, a piece they both signed as being their position, they have become very partisan and taken their distances from the truth. I can only hope they were more impartial when still in office.

Let's trust the DRC civil society organisations

The presidential electoral process in the Democratic Republic of Congo is a mess. On purpose, of course, to allow the outgoing power circle, led by President Joseph Kabila, to manipulate its outcome and guarantee a safer retirement. Chaotic, it’s true, but it could have been worse, another tragedy for the martyred population.

The process is not transparent at all. Not credible, I should add. However, the key concern at this stage is to avoid new eruptions of violence. And try to bring a minimum of acceptability to the results.

We should trust the Congolese civil society organisations. In particular, those linked to the Catholic Church and to the popular electoral observation. They are strong enough and very courageous. They should be able to force the electoral commission – independent only on name – to recount the votes and be true to the voters. Not easy, but that’s the way forward. Everything else would be a return to the undemocratic practises the country has experienced for so long.

It’s also clear this is not the time for external actors to be dictating possible courses of action. No time either for undiplomatic pressure. It would not work. And it would not respect the determination of the Congolese people to find their own path to a more stable and democratic nation. Outside partners of the DRC can only express moral support for the domestic organisations that are genuinely committed to addressing the electoral manipulation.

British out of the EU diplomatic service

As their country leaves, the UK nationals that are head of EU delegations in different parts of the world will be replaced soon. The selection of the new ambassadors that will take over is now ready to be approved by Federica Mogherini, the EU diplomatic boss. Names should be known soon, and accreditation processes initiated. EU diplomacy can’t wait, it must keep moving on.

This another dimension of the Brexit process. It’s not very well known, but it will happen, and it will lead to the departure from the European External Action Service of some very competent staff. They are British passport holders and therefore cannot represent the EU.

The fact of the matter is that Britain is already seen as out of the EU, when it comes to many of these procedural matters. Life goes on, as they say. Unfortunately, without the UK. But it will go on.

Brexit means confusion and lies

The British people are today more divided and confused than any time in the past 75 years. The Brexit process, as conducted by the British, is a total mess. It has brought out a very high degree of intellectual intolerance and social arrogance. But, above all, it has shown that many within the political class are just concerned with their personal career and well-being. They do not care about the broader issues that we used to call the common good. The ideals are dead. We grew up believing that politics were about public service and patriotism. Now, many of these fools teach us that current political fights are about positions, media exposure and crushing the other side. They are also about promoting delusion and outright lies.

Immigration and integration

In the EU context, immigration cannot be seen just from the number of people that keep entering the European territory. Very often the debate is about new arrivals and how the numbers compare with past figures. That’s not the most current concern, I would say. Particularly now, that the arrival numbers are down. Immigration is above all about the integration of those already in.

Integration has many facets and the discussion should as much as possible focus on this issue.

In some countries, the immigrants have become very visible. They are now part of our daily public experience, as we walk the streets or enter the shopping malls and other open spaces. Visibility brings attention, also some degree of concern, and the political parties in those countries know that. That’s why the issue has become a central theme in the political arena. And it will be very present during the forthcoming EU parliamentary elections.

My take is that we should try to focus the political discussions on the issue of social integration. And be clear that such an issue calls for efforts from both sides, the one receiving the new populations and the one we call the immigrants.

Brexit time

We should remind ourselves that Brexit is not just a British issue. But, at this stage, the ball is in their court. And the most appropriate way forward would be to have the draft deal approved by the UK Parliament.

It seems difficult to achieve that. The No-deal camp is getting additional traction. Many see it as a possibility. It’s hard to understand such a position, but the fact of the matter is that the contingency planning for a No-deal is creating the impression, among some popular segments, that there will be a way out in case of no agreement. Also, that the related difficulties will be just temporary.

It’s strange as a reaction, certainly irrational, for many of us, but it’s also linked to the fact that a good number of British still believe in their superior approach to international relations. And the place of the UK in the world.

On the other hand, I think it’s too late for a second referendum. It takes time to go through the constitutional process that is required in the case of a referendum. Furthermore, I do not see enough political and media support for holding it. In the minds of many, such a consultation would open many wounds. The debate and the campaign would be deeply divisive. And nobody can be sure of its outcome. It could end up by giving more arguments and space to the populist politicians. These extremists have no bounds and would take advantage of this new referendum to challenge the established principles of representative democracy. They would try to confuse the voters as much as possible.

As such, this is no time to promote a new referendum. It’s Westminster and the May Cabinet that must take up their responsibilities and decide how they want to see the Brexit settled. And they will have to assume the political consequences as well.

Fragmentation and the balance of interests

Recently, I have seen a bit of alarm about our “divided societies”. Some analysts would even say that we are more divided than ever, and they would point in the direction of the social platforms as the vehicles used to promote splits – and conflicts – among the people.

It’s true that Facebook, Twitter and other instruments of communication are being used to propagate all sorts of views. And to create a group mentality that aims at opposing – and fighting, as well – another set of opinions.

But I think the reference to fragmentation is exaggerated. Our societies have for a long time been composed of different social categories. Politics and democracy have been the translation of different interests and distinct views about societal organisation and our common destiny as a nation. Diversity is the norm. And we should not be afraid of it. The point is to be able to find the equilibrium between the interests of diverse categories of people. That’s what leadership must be about.

Populists are the enemy

As we move into this new year, a very challenging one in many fronts, let's not forget that fear is the currency of the populist leaders. To be successful and mobilise support, they create frightening news, exaggerate the problems, scare people out, and then, they present themselves as the only guarantors of a safer world, and the saviours that will take us there.

They create a fantasy and false narrative.

To fight such extremists, one must be able to demonstrate that the fears they have identified are not real or, if indeed there is a big issue, there is also a set of solutions that can be implemented to deal with it, without disturbing the established institutions and within a democratic and participatory set-up.

The challenge is therefore to address people's fears. And to win the narrative. That means a pragmatic approach must be followed, words should be clear and frank, and the combat against populists must be explained to everyone. We should talk about it all the time.

Populist leaders are manipulators and delusional. We should be able to show that to everyone.  

Best wishes for 2019

Time to wish all my readers a very happy 2019.

And to promise I will be around, as much as possible, and try to propose balanced views, innovative analysis, and the appropriate critique, when necessary.

That’s a very demanding agenda, I agree. But that’s what is needed at this time of confusion, superficiality and self-centred communication that is nothing but distortion and egoistic promotion of one’s agenda.

Let’s move on.