A new EU leadership team

The challenge the EU leaders have in front of them is to make the right decisions regarding the key positions in Brussels and at the European Central Bank. The period ahead of us is most critical for the European Union. The only real choice we have is to consolidate the project. To make it stronger and better understood by the citizens, that’s what it means. Sensible people understand why we need a more united Europe. They know what is going on in some big countries and how those countries can be a major threat to us, if we do not have a collective response.

EU is big enough to be able to weather the storm we see in the horizon. It must count on itself. At the same time, it should look for alliances and balances of interests, with a clear and consistent policy line. That includes stronger relations with Canada, in the Americas, with key African countries, with India and Japan, among others.

But above all, it must win the support of the European citizens.

European politics are changing fast, both in terms of the issues and the actors. The heads of State and government cannot ignore those changes. When selecting the new institutional heads, they must take that into account. We need people that have the courage to face the new issues, know how to communicate, project confidence and empathy, and represent the different regions of our Continent.

Let’s hope the right decisions will be taken.

European energy policy: a priority

Energy remains high in the list of strategic factors. Countries that matter pay a lot of attention to the issue. The U.S., for instance, managed to address it by investing heavily on shale rock exploration. They will become, within the next five years, the key exporter of oil, overtaking Saudi Arabia and Russia. Moreover, they are already a major exporter of liquefied natural gas (LNG). All that is fossil energy. Not what people would call environmentally friendly.

Europe must take a different route. At present, the EU imports 55% of all the energy it consumes, which means around €270 billion per year.  The EU imports 87% of crude oil it consumes. It is time to invest much more money on clean sources of energy, on diversification and on energy efficiency. Including on better performing engines and engines that can run on alternative sources of energy, such as hydrogen.

Europe must pay special attention to its energy policy. That includes the links between energy use and the environment and matters related to our own strategic sovereignty.

Juncker's succession is gaining shape

Tonight, after the EU Council meeting, my bet is that the chances of seeing Margrethe Vestager as the next Commission President have seriously increased.

Manfred Weber, the leading MEP from the centre-right, the biggest political family in the European Parliament, is not getting the support of Emmanuel Macron, Pedro Sánchez and António Costa, among others. They seem prepared to veto his name. That’s not appreciated by Angela Merkel. But the German Chancellor has lost influence in the EU Council’s meetings.

Frans Timmermans, the Socialist leader, is the most experienced candidate. But the member States from Eastern Europe do not like him at all. As the current number two in Brussels, he has been tough on them, particularly on matters of rule of law and freedoms. Those leaders will say no to his nomination.

Michel Barnier is also a very respected and capable politician. His leading role during the Brexit negotiations have shown his high calibre. And he has the right posture. But he is supported by Emmanuel Macron and that’s enough for Viktor Orbán or the Italians – with Matteo Salvini on the background – to firmly opposing Barnier.  

Is there another name that could emerge in the next few days, beyond Vestager’s? It’s possible but not very likely. Unless the Council goes for one of its members, such as the Prime Minister of the Netherlands, Mark Rutte. That happened in 2004, when José Manuel Barroso was chosen out of the blue and as a way of resolving the impasse.

The next boss in Brussels

The results are out, and most of the European voters decided to support the common goal of a stronger Europe. That’s great news. Everybody knows there was a lot of anxiety about a possible shift towards the extreme parties. They have gained votes but not in a significant way.  

Tomorrow the heads of State and Government will meet in Brussels to launch the consultations about the nomination of the next European Commission President. My position on this matter is clear. Jean-Claude Juncker’s successor must come from one of the leading candidates that has competed for the European Parliament. That’s the way we can show respect for the Parliament and for the voters. The heads of national States must not bring forward someone that has not campaigned. Even if that person is somebody of Michel Barnier’s calibre.

The three main contenders are Manfred Weber, the head of European People’s Party grouping, Frans Timmermans, from the Socialist group and Margrethe Vestager, from the Liberal-centre family. They all have the potential to lead the Commission. They must be given priority attention.

My preference would go for Frans Timmermans. He has shown, as Vice-President to Juncker, strong political courage and clear ideas. He has a deep executive experience as well. But that’s not enough, when it comes to horse trading among the heads of Sate and Government.

Angela Merkel will fight for her spitzenkandidat, Manfred Weber. He is not liked by Emmanuel Macron. There will certainly be another clash between Merkel and Macron.

A woman must also get a top position in Brussels. This cannot be ignored by the leaders. It could be Vestager in the Commission or the outgoing Lithuanian President Dalia Grybauskaitė, who could take Donald Tusk’s position. They are both top-notch candidates.

The extreme right and its tactics

The extreme right is like a hodgepodge of ideas. That explains part of its current strength.

 I have looked at their political programmes, statements and slogans. They bring together racist views and ultranationalist feelings with proposals they stole from the left or even from the far left. That is their way of casting the net wide and catching different categories of voters, from the very traditionalist type, the old style bourgeois, to the working class people, that are impressed by the radical promises the extreme right makes in terms of lower taxes, jobs for the citizens, tariffs at the borders, and so on, including the hate posture against international trade and supranational institutions.

They have an agenda that is far from being coherent. But they do not care about consistency and logical sets of proposals. They care about being as populist as they can.

It is not a protest posture, contrary to what many say. It is a deliberate assemblage of impossibilities to attract as many voters as they can. And if they can add to that a smart leader, a sweet talker, and tough discourse, they increase their chances of being supported.

That’s what we have seen today in some EU countries.

Post May's politics

Theresa May has announced her resignation. The extremists within her party did everything they could to get her out. For these hard Brexiteers, the Prime Minister was too close to the EU. They hated her – yes, hate is the right word – for that. They are convinced that the UK is much smarter than the EU altogether and that Queen Victoria will come back, certainly under a new shape, and make Britain imperial again.

There is no rational way of dealing with those hardliners. It is all about emotions, British grandeur, and delusion. When that is the case, the best approach is to let them take care of their own business.

And wish them well. Particularly to the new Prime Minister, whoever that might be. He or she will need the good wishes of all of us. Plenty of them.

For us, the point is to let them know we would prefer a negotiated departure, as proposed in the Withdrawal Agreement. That’s the wise way to move to the next stage, as good neighbours. If that is not possible, because of the British political divisions, they still need to honour the commitments made up to the day of departure. There is no way they can forgo that. It is a legal obligation that must be clear to them and fully respected. The opposite would make the future relationship much more tense.

European elections, national issues

The elections for the European Parliament started today and will be completed on Sunday. They will take place in all the 28 States of the European Union. Unfortunately, these elections are still about national issues and not the European ones. This is a major shortcoming that needs to be addressed in the future. There are enough transnational challenges and options that could be discussed during the process leading to elections day. Leaders cannot ignore the fact that votes motivated only on national concerns will not help Europe to grow.

Brexit, May and Corbyn

Theresa May’s Brexit agreement is still the second-best option for both the UK and the EU. The Prime Minister knows it and I admire her persistence and political courage. Contrary to what many might say, this is not about stubbornness. It is about conviction and wisdom. 

The first-best option would have been a new referendum on the relationship with Europe. But that is now out of the equation, unless there is a political miracle.

The Labour Party’s leader carries a good deal of the responsibility for the missed opportunity of a people’s vote. He has not been clear. Some politicians believe they know how to swim in muddy waters. 

I guess historians will be much nicer to Theresa May than the current conservative media is.

As far as Jeremy Corbyn is concerned, he might become Prime Minister in the foreseeable future. That will be the lucky turn of the irony dice. Not surprising in an extremely confused political landscape.

Politics has a good lot of ironic turns these days.  

European defence: the way forward

On defence, my position is that in the long-term Europe must have its own capabilities and the ability to defend itself. It is always better to count on one’s force. Moreover, that’s the way to keep an independent international policy and decide about the involvement in other people’s conflicts and other strategic moves.  

It is also the best approach to a balanced relationship with Europe’s key allies, with the US. Indeed, the defence relationship with the US will continue to be a crucial dimension of the European security strategy. However, it cannot remain a lopsided relationship. Europe must be much stronger, closer to the capacity of the US. That would bring balance to the alliance, something that does not exist today and compromises tremendously the interests of both parties. And that puts Europe in a weaker standing.

The road to the long-term objective starts today. For that reason, I agree with those who place the question on today’s EU agenda. I also acknowledge that such discussion and the subsequent plans must not undermine the strength of NATO. They call however for a clear understanding of the roles, in the future, that NATO and the EU Defence should play. That basically means that NATO and Europe will have to coordinate the way they will evolve in the coming years. Transformation for both is inevitable.

Europe and the world powers

The way the international relations have been shaped during the last few years shows that the European Union must above all protect its interests. For that, stronger coordination among the member States is essential.

More than ever it is obvious that big countries in the world have their own strategic goals and those goals might not coincide with the European ones. They might even challenge our own intent, values and objectives. It is therefore critical those big countries be met by a strong will and a clear position on the European side.

That’s a big challenge for the next five years in Europe. Yes, five years, but such time horizon should be part of a longer vision for Europe.

It would be a mistake to try to minimise the geopolitical challenges we face. This is no temporary difficulty, not just because A or B is in power now, in big county Y or Z. This is a firm new trend we should consider strategically.

Europe is different from Russia, China and India. Also, from the USA. That’s the reality that is clearly in front of us. We should seek partnerships with each one of these countries, as we do with other parts of the world. But such partnerships cannot be based on naiveté. Above all, they must be based on a proper balance of power – and power means in the world of today much more than just military might. But it also includes a military dimension, of course.

Juncker´s sucession

Last evening, I watched the debate among the six lead candidates for the European Parliament. This was a good initiative, thanks to Euronews, the TV channel.

Six people is a lot of participants and the conversation is therefore constrained by the time available and the balance that is needed between each candidate. The key subjects end up by being treated superficially, more as statements and slogans and less as part of a substantive dialogue. This was the main limitation. But the discussion took place in a civilised manner and was good enough to keep the viewers interested.

It was also relevant to see two young women in the podium. Both did well, notwithstanding the fact that one is a liberal and the other a green activist. I also found the socialist candidate, Frans Timmermans, to be firm and clear in his positions. He flies much higher than many members of his political family. I do not know what will happen to him in the period ahead, but I am happy to know that at least he will have a strong voice in the next European Parliament.

Manfred Weber is the centre-right candidate. That’s the same European People’s Party to which Jean-Claude Juncker belongs. He is young and has a good track record as a parliamentarian. But he lacks charisma. And he should follow some voice training sessions. Voice power is essential for a leader.

They all aspire to be the next President of the European Commission. I am not sure if anyone of them will get the job. My guess, at this moment, is that Margrethe Vestager stands a good chance. She could be a compromise candidate between the left and the right.

The successor to Juncker must see his or her political family do well in the forthcoming elections. However, that is not enough. The heads of State and government will have a strong say. Their first attempt at deciding who should be the next boss of the European Commission will take place on May 28. At this stage, we can speculate a lot about names. There is already an intense social media exchange about the matter. In my opinion that is, for now, a waste of time.  

Iran and the EU approach

Today, unexpectedly, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo came to Brussels. He met the Foreign Ministers of France, Germany and the UK, and briefly, the EU High Representative for Foreign Policy. The matter was Iran.

The US Administration has placed Iran at the top of its international agenda, next to two other critical themes: the trade talks with China and the internal situation in Venezuela. The American leadership is clearly betting on isolating Iran as a way of weakening the regime. Such policy is above all inspired by advice coming from Israel and Saudi Arabia. Both countries want Iran down.

This is certainly a very risky policy.

The alleged sabotage of four oil tankers in the very sensitive area around the Strait of Hormuz, which was big headlines today, is another very serious development in a very explosive environment. It is unclear what really happened to the ships and who was behind the actions, whatever actions they could have been. To draw any conclusion without more information would be extremely foolish. If there was indeed a big issue with those tankers, if an attack took place, an international commission on enquiry should be mandated to assess the facts. I hope the Europeans told something like that to Pompeo. I expressed interest in being part of the investigation.

I understand there was little common ground today between the visiting Secretary and the EU Ministers. That’s is encouraging. The Europeans must show they have their own way of looking at Iran and the Middle East, for that matter. They appreciate the alliance with the US but, at the same time, they must assert their independent views. Particularly when the gravity of the situation does not allow any misguided approach. As it does not tolerate a partisan policy, choosing the Saudi or the Israel side when the region needs a cool and balanced line to be followed by the Europeans.

Full respect for the British people

In the UK, those Conservative opinion-makers who are unconditionally for Brexit want their readers to believe the EU leaders do not respect the British democratic system and, above all, most of the British people.

That message is false. It is just biased propaganda to justify their own personal frenzy for Brexit.

Brexit might be a major mistake, in terms of its negative consequences for both the UK and the EU. Those fellows know it. But they have a very strong ideological position about it. The extreme Conservatives believe they can gain lots of political leverage if they mine the nationalist feelings that led many citizens to vote for the exit.

That’s what makes such opinion writers tick.

The truth is however very different. In the rest of the EU, the leaders and intellectuals that really matter respect whatever in the end the British will decide about their future links with the European space. We recognise the UK’s right to decide. And there are two more political dimensions we should keep repeating. First, the EU does not want to humiliate the people of the UK and their political establishment. Second, we recognise the evidence that shows that Brexit weakens the UK and the EU. It is bad for both sides.  

Juncker's major shortcoming

On this European Day, I wrote in my Portuguese language blog “Vistas Largas” that a lot has been achieved in terms of our common future and joint response to many challenges. But I also added that the European Commission has been mediocre in matters of strategic communications. There is no Commissioner with that kind of portfolio – this should be corrected when the new team takes power in November. And the Commission seems to believe that press conferences, press releases and a crowd of spokespersons are enough to cover the information needs of the European citizens. That’s not a strategic approach. And the experience has shown that it is not enough to keep the citizens aware and get their active involvement in European matters.

If people do not know, they do not support. And they become vulnerable to those who lie and disseminate anti-EU propaganda. That’s where many of us find ourselves today, a few weeks before the next European parliamentary election.

This is a major failure of the outgoing Juncker team. A far-reaching one.

No let up

The glass might be empty, but it is not broken. 

Stay on message

There is no problem if one keeps repeating the same message because most people are not listening, even when they pretend to. The only advice is to repeat it clearly and gracefully.

Iran and the US: the escalating conflict

The military build-up by the US against Iran is a matter of great concern. The Strait of Hormuz is a vital line of communication. As such, it has the potential to be a major reason for a confrontation. The current US Administration will respond with great show of force to any attempt by Iran to disrupt or control navigation through the Strait.

Iran knows that. But they are being pushed against the wall by the American embargo on their oil exports and might make an error of judgement. That makes the situation in the region more delicate and especially dangerous.

The EU should call for restrain.

Brussels must show leadership and initiative.

Unfortunately, I do not see any appetite in Europe to make a statement against the escalation of the tension in that part of the Middle East. It is true that we are now on the eve of EU elections. But it is also a fact that those in charge of the European institutions are very hesitant when the matter touches the US interests. Even now, when they are at the end of their EU mandates, they lack the stature that a stronger Europe would require.

More about the Gilets Jaunes

Another Saturday, another day of rallies for the Gilets Jaunes in France. This is going on since November 2018, almost six months ago. It has been an incredibly long protest movement.

It is true that today’s mobilisation was much weaker than the previous ones. But people were still on the streets, in Paris, Bordeaux and elsewhere. And the forecast is that the rallies will continue. At least until the end of May, when the European elections will be held.

It is not easy to draw all the lessons from the Gilets Jaunes. President Macron has tried to respond to some of the grievances. However, for some, the President’s announcements were not good enough. He himself is seen by those who continue to walk the streets as the target that must be shot down.

That position will not change.

But it is important for the President to be responsive to some of complaints, but also be firm and determined to modernise the French society. It is equally vital he sends the message that public chaos and law-breaking will be seriously punished. Peaceful demonstrations, yes. Looting and destruction, no.

Furthermore, it will be a mistake to approach the Gilets Jaunes from an elitist perspective. Or from a higher-class platform. They are citizens like everyone else. And they should be treated with respect, as long as they remain within the bounds of the law and the rules of civility. I have seen some intellectuals trying to belittle the Gilets Jaunes. In my opinion, such position is not helpful.

As it is not correct to romanticise or glamorise them, as some artists and people from the creative arts have tried to do today, in the Libération newspaper. Their statement is a hotchpotch of idealism, naivety and populism. It does not take the debate any further. It adds nothing to a better understanding of the social issues and frustrations some people are confronted with.

The Gilets Jaunes simply represent a social group that needs attention, firmness but also the building of some bridges.  

Maduro and Guaidó must accept mediation

Venezuela remains at the top of today’s international agenda. People on both sides of the conflict are convinced that the solution to the current national crisis must come out of an open confrontation. That’s where we are now. It would be a serious mistake. The country is deeply divided. Violence can only lead to death and destruction. It will not address the deep causes of conflict.

I continue to insist on dialogue through mediation. Both leaders must accept this approach. The work of the international community should focus on convincing Nicolas Maduro and Juan Guaidó to accept an agenda for dialogue. This is an urgent task to be accomplished.

Unfortunately, the UN is not in a position to play a role, for reasons that I mentioned in my previous post. The UN Secretariat is afraid of Donald Trump. It is paralysed. It cannot master the courage to tell President Trump that there is no other way out but through a conflict resolution process. Through peace.

The European Union has excluded itself from the solution. It has taken sides.

The Latin American States have also aligned themselves with one position or the other. They are too close to the conflict to be impartial.

The only Latin American country that has remained neutral is Mexico. It could be part of an international mediation group. The other two States I see as able of mediating and facilitating are Switzerland and the Vatican.

My proposal is to encourage the Swiss to take the lead and get the other two countries on board. They would approach Maduro and Guaidó to obtain their commitment to the process. They could get it. Particularly if the mediation is accompanied by a serious effort to provide humanitarian aid to the people of Venezuela. True humanitarian aid, of course.