Paz na Europa

 https://www.dn.pt/opiniao/o-futuro-da-paz-na-europa-passa-por-um-reequilbrio-de-foras

No Diário de Notícias de 28/11/2025

Europe and its weak strategy regarding the ASEAN

 From Kuala Lumpur to Brussels, the ASEAN summit shows the weakness of the European strategy towards Southeast Asia

Victor Ângelo

The European Union and its Member States have shown limited attention to the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN), which has allowed China to significantly expand its influence in the region. Other countries, such as India, Japan, Australia, and New Zealand, have also strengthened their ties with ASEAN. All this contrasts with the inertia on the part of the EU—a missed opportunity for both sides and a vacuum that others skillfully fill. It also highlights yet another failure of imagination, initiative, courage, and understanding of the political game in that part of the world at the level of European external action. This scenario of European imprecision is particularly relevant in a geopolitical area that is rapidly gaining weight in international relations.

Recently, the United States has also recognized the strategic value of ASEAN. Donald Trump will be present at this year's summit, from October 26 to 28, in Kuala Lumpur, the capital of Malaysia. In addition to meeting with the ten ASEAN leaders—who will become eleven, with the formal admission of Timor-Leste, an important step for the political, economic, and cultural integration of the country into the region to which it truly belongs—the American president will also have the opportunity to meet other prominent politicians, such as Narendra Modi, Li Qiang (Prime Minister of China), Sanae Takaichi (the new ultraconservative leader of Japan), Lula da Silva, and Cyril Ramaphosa.

The Prime Minister of Malaysia, Anwar Ibrahim, also invited Vladimir Putin, a significant gesture, although the Russian president has indicated that he will not be able to attend. Even so, Russia will be represented at a high level. Until the announcement this Wednesday of the new American sanctions, the possibility of a last-minute participation by Putin was not excluded, considering the media and political projection that this would have. Now, it is certain that Putin does not wish to meet Trump, unless the latter reverses this week's decision.

Among the European guests, the Prime Minister of Finland and Giorgia Meloni of Italy stand out, with Meloni already confirming her presence. Meloni recognizes that her visibility at international events is fundamental for consolidating her domestic policy. However, it remains uncertain who will represent the European institutions, with António Costa being one of the names mentioned in diplomatic circles. If confirmed, his presence will be mainly symbolic, since much of the power, namely the executive, resides with the European Commission, led by Ursula von der Leyen.

The European Union needs to look at ASEAN with greater realism and commitment, strengthening political and economic ties with a group of countries that together make up the third most populous region in the world (about 685 million people) and the fifth largest global economy. ASEAN is one of the engines of development of the so-called Global South and aims to play a prominent role in building a new international order. Ignoring this reality would be a strategic mistake for Europe. Historically, Europeans feel closer to Africa and Latin America, but betting on Southeast Asia is increasingly an inevitable path for the coming decades. Furthermore, competition with China, Russia, India, and the USA will be more balanced if the EU manages to establish a solid relationship with the region.

The Kuala Lumpur summit will focus on four major themes considered priorities by the Member States: economic cooperation, regional stability and security, renewable energy production (with the goal of reaching 45% by 2030), and the deepening of free trade agreements with partners such as China, Japan, South Korea, India, Australia, and New Zealand.

Significantly, the summit will not address the serious political crisis affecting Myanmar, one of ASEAN's Member States. This deliberate omission reflects the principle of non-interference in the internal affairs of each State, one of the Association's pillars, something that clearly contradicts the political cooperation project and obviously favors economic interests. This stance, partly inspired by China, contributes to the distancing between Europe and Southeast Asia, especially due to the indifference of some ASEAN members regarding human rights.

In this context, the messages that the European Union should convey at the Kuala Lumpur summit are clear. On the one hand, to affirm that we, Europeans, consider it mutually beneficial to deepen the full range of relations with ASEAN. On the other hand, to express our conviction that respect for citizens is the only way to guarantee peace, strengthen international cooperation, and ensure sustainable prosperity.

Our Putin policy

Russia in fat letters

Victor Angelo

 

This week, Vladimir Putin and Russia made headlines again. One of the reasons was the message of congratulations that Putin sent to Joe Biden. The Russian leader turned out to be one of the last heads of state to congratulate the winner of the US elections. The pretext for the delay was to wait for the results of the Electoral College. This formalism, which was impeccable from a legal point of view, but undiplomatic and inconsequential in terms of future relations, barely conceals Putin's preference for Donald Trump. In Moscow's view, Trump's incompetent, incoherent and divisive policy was the one that most weakened the international position of the USA and best served the Russian geopolitical renaissance. Not to mention, of course, the deference that the American always showed for the Kremlin's strong man. 

Putin's message speaks of cooperation and puts his country on a par with the USA, in the very exclusive league of the great states "especially responsible for global security and stability". Putin, always attentive, takes this opportunity to reaffirm his country's indispensable role on the world stage.

In the meantime, other headlines have emerged about Russia. Since March she has been accused of infiltrating the computer systems of several major American targets. The list of federal institutions and private companies violated, as well as the level of refinement used, show the gigantic scale of the operation, which can only have been carried out by the highly specialised services that make up the official Russian espionage web. It is true that other countries are constantly trying to do the same. But the fact is that the Russians have succeeded and for a long time. This can only mean that the leadership invests exceptionally in cyber-espionage. It will never be known exactly what information has been extracted. The hope remains that the volume of data will be of such magnitude that it will eventually overwhelm the analysts. In these matters, it is one thing to obtain information, but another to have the capacity to carry out its analysis, in order to transform it into knowledge and courses of action, and this in good time, which becomes short as soon as the infiltration is discovered.

To complete the bunch, it was simultaneously noticed that the Russians had also pirated the European Medicines Agency. And CNN published a detailed report of the persecution and poisoning of the opposition figure, Alexei Navalny, by Putin's agents. Then came the news about doping and the ban on participation in the next Olympic Games. A series of negative headlines about a regime that loves to sell its image as respectable.  

Amid all this, Europeans extended sanctions against Russia until July 2021. These measures, which come from 2014 and relate to Russian armed intrusions into Ukraine and the occupation of the Crimea, have a narrow scope. They do not include, for example, the suspension of the construction of the Nord Stream 2 gas pipeline, which will link Russia and Germany across the Baltic. Another title of the week was to announce that work on the installation of the pipeline had resumed and had even entered the final phase.

The reality is that EU leaders do not have a clear political vision of what the relationship with Russia should be like. There has been much debate on the issue, including the design of scenarios, but no agreement. The trend seems to me, as we look at the decade ahead, a mixture of deadlock, hesitation, opportunism, mistrust, and detachment. A policy of uncertainties, with Putin setting the pace.

The Organisation for Security and Cooperation in Europe (OSCE), now with Helga Schmid at the helm, should seek to be the bridge for dialogue between us and Moscow. But not only that. The EU's external agenda needs to define a strategic line on Russia, including proposals for joint action, first in areas of least controversy and serving to build understanding and trust. The same should happen at the military level, both in the EU and NATO. Russia is our massive neighbour. Threatening, certainly, with autocratic leadership, but geographically, culturally, and economically close. A policy of locked doors has no way out.

 

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published today in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper)

 

 

The EU must be more creative in matters of crisis response

Josep Borrel, the EU High Representative for Foreign Policy, addressed the UN Security Council yesterday. It was a long speech about several crisis situations. But the true message was about multilateralism. He stated the strong support the EU is providing to the UN and repeated the message that global problems do call for multilateral action. That was positive. But he was speaking to a very divided and weak Security Council. His words were certainly the right ones, but I can safely guess that their impact was negligible. The climate in the Council is not favourable to global or multinational responses. In addition, his description of the crisis was not creative. For instance, he spoke about the Sahel but added no new idea to what is already known. His concern was to show that the situation in the region is deteriorating – an important message – and that the EU and the UN are cooperating throughout the Sahel. But there was no indication of a line of action that should be followed to stop the fall.

The EU must be more realist in terms of crisis resolution. It should recognise that the current approaches are not yielding results. And it must come up with alternative paths. That would be a much stronger message and a way of giving strength to the EU’s role in matters of peace and security.

South of Europe

In the Southern flank of the EU, just next door to all of us, the instability and systematic violations of people’s rights are growing by the day.

The area is a combination of several active political volcanoes. It is the situation in Libya and in most of North Africa plus the Sahel, vast area of absence of government. The Sahel was a semi-desert, now is a full-fledged governance desert. It is the deepening of the conflict between Israel and her neighbours. It is the all-out conflict in Yemen and the war crimes in Syria. Add to that, Iran and its fast deteriorating economic circumstances plus the armed competition with the vicinity and beyond, the violence in Afghanistan, the mess in Pakistan. And, of course, the crazy political line President Erdogan is following in his country.

The different components of this Southern neighbourhood are all extreme violent and with far reaching consequences. Mass movements are one of them. The complexity calls for a much better-defined EU political approach. It also requires more public attention. Leaders in Brussels and the capitals should be speaking about these matters more often and with better words. The words must be explicit, comprehensive and coherent.

Our role is to put pressure on our leaders for lines of action to be defined and the narrative to become strategic. And we should act with a strong sense of urgency.

EU foreign policy

The new European Commission will have to think afresh the EU’s foreign policy, including its strategic alliances. The last few years have shown that world is changing fast. The new trends are clear enough for scenario designing. It should not be too difficult to agree on possible world scenarios in five- or ten-years’ time. The Europeans must decide about the kind of role they want to play in international affairs by the end of the incoming Commission’s mandate. And what are the bridges they want to consolidate.

Sudan, the people and the Western interests

Not too long ago, during my time in the Sahel Region, I met regularly with Sudanese community villagers, men and women, as well as with officials. I had also to deal with the security and humanitarian consequences of the Janjaweed militias, the armed groups doing the dirty work in Darfur at the service of Omar al-Bashir. I gained then a lot of admiration for the people of Sudan and felt deeply their aspiration for security and democracy. I also learned how strategic the Khartoum leadership could be, including the intelligence agencies and the generals.

The fall of al-Bashir, following the continued, widespread popular pressure, came to me as good news. But I also knew that the military and security establishment, including the militias, now operating as Rapid Support Forces (RSF), would not let it go too easily. And that is the situation today. More than a hundred people were killed last week in the capital by the military and the militias, many more were wounded or raped. The establishment cannot lose control. They have a heavy hand on the economy – on what remains of it, as most of the economy is in a state of collapse – and they are also afraid to be brought to justice due to past crimes they have been associated with. Therefore, it is the survival of the al-Bashir regime’s elite that is now at stake. They are ready to make al-Bashir and a few others pay the bill. But they do not want it to go beyond that.

The generals, including General Mohamed Hamdan Dagalo, the RSF boss, are closely supported by the Saudis, the Egyptian President and the Military, and the United Arab Emirates leadership. The generals have sent Sudanese armed men to fight the Saudi-UAE war in Yemen, among other things. This is a smart alliance. It protects the Khartoum generals from pressure from the European Union and the US. For the West, the friends of our friends deserve some consideration, no doubt. That explains the relative lack of attention the Sudanese situation has generated in Brussels and other capitals. People’s rights are a beautiful thing as long as they do not interfere with Western interests in the region.

The Chinese have also strong stakes in Sudan, particularly related to the oil pipeline that crosses the country.

All this makes the Sudanese transition to democracy extremely challenging for the people of that great country.

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.

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.

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.

Trump and the EU´s position

At this early stage, the leaders of the EU institutions, especially the President of the European Commission and the head of the European External Action Service (EEAS), should be very prudent and diplomatic when referring to Donald Trump´s election win.

They for sure have their own personal opinions about the incoming President. That´s fine. They also have some serious apprehensions about the future of the US relations with the EU. That´s fine as well.

But at this time of the game, it pays to be extremely formal, diplomatic and patient. Diplomacy helps to smooth things out, as it often does between countries that share interests. And patience is fundamental to keep a strong negotiating position.

A sharper EU foreign policy

I am for a much firmer approach to EU foreign policy. And also for a much more focused approach.

European leaders must be clear. Among themselves and with the outside world. That´s what the citizens – today better informed than ever – expect. They do not want to be taken for fools. They do not take contempt easily.  

To be clear means we call a spade a spade or we just remain silent and move way from what we cannot change or should not try. An example is the EU presence in the Middle East Quartet. This is never-ending swamp. We should make it known we do not believe it can achieve any meaningful progress in the medium term. And call our participation off.

The leaders are also required to be more strategic. That means they should put the resources where it matters. We can´t be everywhere. We shouldn´t be everywhere. We might have a global presence but that does imply a global reach. We have interests to fight for and they should be the priority. Also, we have some international moral commitments. We should also respond to them. In a very unambiguous way.

The current EU foreign policy is too fluffy. It needs a sharper approach. 

Mali: a matter of serious concern

After a discussion this morning with a Malian friend, who is a former senior UN official, what I retained can be easily summarised in a few words: a failed political process and damaging high level corruption.

Basically, this means that unless the domestic leaders and the international community representatives address these two fundamental issues there will be no peace, stability and economic revival in the foreseeable future. And the country will remain dangerously insecure, dramatically poor and a major source of illegal immigration.

I do not think we can expect much of the current national leadership if we do not discuss the situation frankly with them. This is no time for us, the outside friends of Mali, to be ambiguous. We are required to be frank, courageous but also practice good diplomatic judgement.

Who should take the lead in the policy dialogue, as far as the international community is concerned?

Progress on Syria and Libya: it should be possible

The efforts being led these days by John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov regarding Libya and Syria should be recognised. They are spending a good amount of time in Vienna and around. And they have also been wise in terms of keeping the UN on board and at the centre of the processes. If they keep this kind of engagement we should be able to see some progress. Actually, when it comes to Libya, it is now obvious that things have started to move in the right direction. The EU should come out clearly in support of these efforts. That should be done as a single voice. Through the EU High Representative, if possible.

Libya needs a more coordinated EU assistance

Key countries committed to help Libya to overcome the chaos created in October 2011, when Muammar Kaddafi was overthrown by a Western coalition of countries, met today in Vienna to look for ways of supporting the Government of National Accord (GNA) that is now in place in Tripoli. The GNA is led by Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj and has the support of the UN. It´s however facing major difficulties. There are two other rival governments in the Eastern and Central areas of the country as well as dozens of small armed groups all over. The terrorist group Islamic State is also heavily present in a growing number of places.

The EU could play a major role in the stabilisation process. Italy should take the leading coordinating role on the European side. But Italy is very unclear about its own policy approach to Libya. It had suggested it would deploy Italian troops under the UN banner. Now, the government in Rome says it is not prepared to go that way. Fine. But at least they could bring together the EU States and advocate for a common political position. That´s very much needed as France, the UK and others are on their own in the country and working with separate armed groups and factions. Such actions do contribute to add further confusion in Libya. There is therefore room for fighting for a unified EU position. Why is Italy so hesitant? 

Two additional questions about the Middle East

After the agreement on Iran´s nuclear programme, there are two additional questions related to the Middle East that should receive the same amount of attention. They are both related to peace and security in the region. As such, they are vital for a geopolitical space that has known decades of conflict and remains the major focus of international instability.

One of those questions is about fighting violence. What can the UN Security Council and the countries of the region do to bring peace to Syria and Iraq as well as to Yemen? In different words, can we launch a regional conference on peace and security in the Middle East? This is a very central question. It has to be raised and we have to call on the international leaders to take up their responsibilities and dare to initiate such a process.

It cannot be just about peace in country A or B. In this very volatile part of the world we need to look at the future from a regional perspective. The country by country approach has a very limited impact.

The second question is about the Palestinian crisis. The Quartet is not producing any tangible results. The Palestinian issue is just not being properly addressed. We need to ask ourselves what can be done to change the trend and be in a position to initiate a true process that can lead to a durable solution. 

Here, I see a much greater role for the EU. The EU should take the lead. And it has a chance to do it, now that Tony Blair has moved out of the picture. It has also the moral responsibility, to compensate for all the years we have lost with Blair pretending to be around.

EU mission in Ukraine

The EU has initiated the deployment of an assistance mission to Ukraine to support the civilian dimensions of security sector reform: police, prosecution, justice, penal system. This will a large deployment for an initial period of two years.

It is certainly a good move. It should contribute to bring the civilian security system up to more acceptable standards. But the mission will face very serious obstacles within the Ukrainian security establishment. The officers, at every level, are used to practices that come from the old authoritarian times. That´s their level of comfort, their culture in dealing with the citizens. In addition, there is a lot of corruption built in the system. And corruption is a source of income in a country that is in serious economic difficulties and pays very low salaries.

With these difficulties in mind it will be important to closely monitor how the EU mission will respond to these challenges.

It will also be necessary to watch the performance of the mission leadership. 

EEAS: too many chiefs and few foot soldiers

I spent some time yesterday discussing with staff from the European External Action Service. And I got the impression they are a bit overstretched. Great staff but overwhelmed by the work, the complicated bureaucratic processes and the meetings they have to attend to. The lists of assignments keep growing, the level of ambition is huge, and the eagerness to take additional responsibilities is deeply rooted in the culture of the service. But the number of Indians available to carry out the work seems to me to be insufficient. Actually, the EEAS appears to be heavy on bosses and chiefs, and certainly very light on the question of work bees. 

We need a new approach to EU external military deployments

The decision to deploy an EU brigade to Bangui –EUFOR RCA – has now been taken. The level of ambition and the duration of this mission are very limited, at best 6 months, and just to protect the international airport.

But that´s not my point today.

The decision has shown once more that the EU has to adopt a different model to finance this type of missions. They cannot be financed by the participating countries. Some countries would be ready to supply the soldiers and the logistical military support but they can´t afford the costs. Portugal is just one those countries. Lisbon would be willing to deploy but the defence budget for 2014 cannot pay for it. This means the Portuguese will stay away.

These missions should be funded from a common EU budget. Each member state should contribute to the annual replenishment of that fund in accordance with their GDP per capita. This is the only way to approach in more proactive way the external peace keeping operations of the EU. If it is not adopted, we will continue to see a contradiction between the decision to assist counties in crisis and the effective deployment of a credible force. The foreign ministers will taken the decision but the soldiers will not reach the ground on time and in sufficient numbers.

 And Germany, among others, will never be part of any effort of this type. Not even by contributing a few euros. 

The Central African Republic: the coming days can change the situation.

I spent a good deal of the day looking at the new developments in the Central Africa Republic. And I came to the conclusion that the departure from power of Michel Djotodia, the Interim President that rode the March rebellion and subsequently lost control of its own allied rebel forces, the Seleka combatants, opens a window of opportunity for security and reconciliation. The sooner the new Interim President is chosen by the assembly of representatives the better.

Then, the partners of the country should provide enough resources for him to be able to rebuild the national security forces and bring law and order back. This is where the priority should lie.