Europe's next door threat

The caricature of a megalomaniac politician

Victor Angelo

 

My text of last week on Islamist radicalism provoked several reactions. The Portuguese friends, who have always lived in Portugal, although with many tourist trips in the curriculum, were surprised by my description of the intolerance in certain schools and in some segments of French society. This is a situation that does not occur in Portugal. Here nobody intimidates anyone by mentioning Infante D. Henrique, Mouzinho de Albuquerque or the atheist José Saramago. Friends living in the Europe of immigration - in Belgium, for example - have recognised in my chronicle situations that are familiar to them. The rejection of values that we consider fundamental and life in social silos are commonplace. They added that it takes courage to talk about these things, in a balanced way and without falling into primary and racist recrimination. I have also received messages from former co-workers, who live out their Muslim faith in many parts of the world. For them, the problem lies in the mockery, the caricatures, their interpretation as an instrument of the Europeans' onslaught against Islam.

I remembered then that at the ceremony to honour Professor Samuel Paty, President Emmanuel Macron said that France would not give up the cartoons. I understand that position. What others see as an unforgivable offence is for us a simple expression of freedom. Religion is a subject like any other. In Europe, the collapse of the idea of blasphemy began in 1789 with the French Revolution.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan clung to Macron's statement about the drawings to treat his French counterpart as mentally ill. He said it repeatedly, so that there would be no doubt about the insult. For Erdogan, the drawing of a bottom end in the air is more shocking than the inhumane persecution of millions of Muslims by the Xi Jinping regime. He does not get nervous, he says nothing about it.

We live in unique times, with one head of state harassing another, from an allied country. Erdogan's hostility towards Macron is nothing new. It began right after the French president's term began in 2017. There are several points of friction between them, starting with the French opposition to Turkey's accession to the EU and continuing in Libya, Syria, in support of Greek sovereignty in the Mediterranean Sea and more and more. There is also enormous tension within NATO, where France accuses Turkey of holding back the organisation's strategy when it comes to regions in which Ankara is directly involved.

On top of all this, I can guess that Erdogan wants to break the alliance that exists between Paris and Berlin. He is investing against France knowing that Germany, where more than four million people with Turkish roots live, does not have much room for manoeuvre to take a stand in solidarity with France. By attacking this pillar of the EU and maintaining the recurrent threat of opening the gates to a new wave of migration to Europe, similar to that which occurred in 2015, Erdogan's Turkey constitutes the most important risk to the survival of the European project.

At the December European Council it is absolutely necessary that the leaders of the member states take a tough stance against the Turkish president. In international politics, there are only two possible positions before a bully: give in and end up paying a high price, or else confront him with all the necessary diplomatic arsenal.

Salman Rushdie warns us that "fundamentalism is not about religion, but about power". Erdogan sees himself as the leader of Sunni Muslims and the guardian of the faithful in the face of the so-called European attacks. He combines megalomania with fanaticism. In collusion with the radicals of the Muslim Brotherhood and with the financial support of Qatar, Erdogan has established in several European countries a series of associations which, under the guise of religion, culture and humanitarian action, promote totalitarian interpretations of the Koran and its image as a defender of the faith.

One of the tasks of the European security services is to monitor these associations and their most influential members. It is, however, an almost impossible mission. Monitoring every potentially violent extremist, to be done properly, requires around twenty officers, twenty-four hours a day. The real answer must therefore be political and shared by all European countries. 

(Machine translation of my opinion column of today, published in the Portuguese newspaper Diário de Notícias, Lisbon)

 

 

Donald Trump and his rabbits

In addition to his domestic claims, President Trump wants to be seen by the American voters as an international statesman. That’s why he is organising all kinds of diplomatic deals. It was the economic deal between Serbia and Kosovo, signed a few days ago. It does not address the delicate political dispute between the two sides, but it was a good photo opportunity. Interestingly, the President of Serbia seemed surprised by some of the terms of the deal, as they were mentioned by Donald Trump. He did not recognise some of the aspects the US President was referring to. But the big game is around the Israeli situation. The President knows that is a big prize, with a significant impact in important American circles. Therefore, he convinced the United Arab Emirates to sign some kind of “peace” commitment with Israel. And today, it was the turn of Bahrain. President Trump will try to get more Arab states to follow suit. That will be big, as he sees it, from the electoral perspective. My understanding is that his people, starting with Jared Kushner, his son-in-law, are now talking to Oman and Qatar to join the bandwagon. That will give Donald Trump and his supporters a lot of ammunition for the rest of the electoral campaign. As I keep saying, it would be a mistake to consider the election won by Joe Biden. Trump will keep pulling new rabbits out of his hat.

Iran, West Africa and the info war game

We are witnessing the emergence of a new campaign against Iran that includes “information” about that country’s growing presence in West Africa, the Sahel and Sudan. It basically says that, following data available to certain security agencies – not named –, Iran is engaged in building a network of terrorist cells in those regions of Africa. Those cells would later be activated against Western interests in the countries concerned.

I have known these corners of Africa for decades. And I have several friends in positions of authority in the area, including in matters of internal security. There is indeed a serious increase of radical activities and armed groups over there. But their link with Iran seems very unlikely. Certainly, very difficult to prove. Those radicals are inspired by Sunni fundamentalism, whilst Iran is a Shiite proponent of Islam.

What I have noticed, and my friends have confirmed, is that the new radicalism in that belt of Africa is mainly supported by groups and mosques based in Saudi Arabia, the Gulf States, especially in Qatar, as well as in Pakistan. In addition, there is also some influence coming from Egypt.

Supporting the Vienna process on Syria

A week ago, I criticised the conveners of the Vienna meeting on Syria for not inviting the UN and EU. Now, after today´s new round of discussions in Vienna, I should commend the US and Russia for bringing to the room not only the UN and the EU, but also the other countries that can have an impact on the solution of the long lasting civil war. It was particularly important to have Iran in the conversation.

This basically means that for the first time, after so many years of destruction and human pain, there is a bit of hope for the Syrians. The road ahead is still very difficult. But at least the diplomacy is now seriously trying to initiate a peace process.

The next step is to find a way of bringing in the Syrian representatives themselves. I am confident that it should be possible, if all those who met in Vienna today do their honest part of the bargain.

It is also critically important to intensify the destruction of the Islamic State leadership and power structures. For that to happen, one has to be very frank and have the courage to denounce any double game that might occur in the future. We cannot accept a country sits in Vienna and talks about the future of a peaceful Syria and, at the same time, keeps somehow supporting the terrorists.

The absolute and unique target should be the IS structures

In Syria and Iraq, the main goals are by far to bring peace and stability back as well as to endeavour for democracy and rule of law.

In the current circumstances, the achievement of such priorities passes by the destruction of the Islamic State. The neutralization of their command-and-control structure is the most urgent step, the overriding concern. Every alliance should be directed at fighting IS. Placing other groups in the bull´s-eye is a very serious political and strategic mistake.

We have to be clear about it. Among ourselves and vis-à-vis our friends and allies. 

More on the strategy against the terrorists of the Islamic State

We usually emphasise that each national crisis should have a political response and end up with an agreement between the parties. In the case of Syria, it would be, at this stage, a serious mistake to insist on a political solution. The situation has reached such a dramatic level that the only way forward, for the moment, is through a military approach. Politics and diplomacy have to wait. They will come later.

The goals to be achieved are clear: to destroy the self-proclaimed Islamic State and protect the civilian population from further violence. These objectives do call for a major allied armed offensive and also for a change of tactics when it comes to the Assad regime.

On the military side, my writing of yesterday is clear. I can only add that we just have to make sure that those who will take the decision to go for the force option have the support of the popular opinion in their countries. And then ask those leaders to move fast.

On Assad, it is time to make a difference between the man and his people. The headman will have to go. The key criminals that have directly supported him must be brought to justice as well. But we need to find ways of bringing his ethnic group, the Alawites, and all those who are around the administrative and security machineries on board, on our side, as long as they have no real crimes in their hands. They should be part of the solution. If they are not they will be, soon enough, because Assad´s collapse is getting closer, the next mass victims of the brutes that only conceive death as the appropriate punishment  for those who are different.

It is indeed time to think strategically. And be strong.

Revise the strategy to destroy the Islamic State

The daily reports are clear. They point to a recent succession of military gains by the self-proclaimed Islamic State (IS), both in Syria and Iraq. As I see it, that terrorist group is stronger today than some weeks back. Its ongoing offensives on different fronts show vitality which can only result from new resources, including fresh money and weapons as well as a mass of additional recruits.

The other side of the coin is about weakness. Those opposing IS are today weaker.

The moderate groups in both countries first. They are losing ground and credibility. They have demonstrated they do not have enough vigour to take care of this major challenge. More than ever it is now obvious they necessitate a great amount of external support.

The raids also show that the Western strategy against the terrorist organisation is not working. It has to be revised immediately. Its revision has to focus on a much stronger involvement in the region, through additional deployment of special force units and better coordination among them, more effective and better shared intelligence, and a closer alliance with the Middle Eastern States that oppose IS.

I recognise that a deeper military engagement in Iraq and Syria is a complex and costly matter. But political hesitation is no longer a solution in this case. Public opinion is prepared, in our part of the world, for a serious increase of our military assistance to those who can be our regional and local allies in this combat. We just have to ensure that the alliances are clear and strategic, meaning, they should aim, above everything all, at destroying the IS threat.

Qatar should be told to keep away from ISIS

The role and the goals of Qatar in Middle East and also in Africa need to be carefully scrutinised. The Qatari authorities were very much behind the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt. They invested billions to support the government of former president Mohamed Morsi. They have been very much behind Hamas in Gaza. And now there are questions being raised about their alleged assistance to the terrorist group ISIS.

In many ways, one has to be clear. Qatar should be challenged. And it is also important to underline that any regime that supports ISIS is an accomplice to a criminal organisation of dark-age fanatics. ISIS has no place in the modern world. And no civilised state should think that funding ISIS will serve its own national interests.

I am for a tough and clear diplomacy in this type of situations. 

EU needs to have a firmer approach towards Qatar and Saudi Arabia

The EU, and in particular the High Representative for Foreign Affairs, should spend more time engaging the North African countries on common security concerns. She should also actively engage the Saudis and the Qataris. Both have a lot of influence in North Africa and the neighbouring countries. And that influence is sometimes used to promote objectives and doctrine that play against stability in the region and have a direct impact of supporting radical views.

This type of proactive diplomatic action would achieve much greater results, if done in strategic way and from a firm position, than any EU military or police operation. Qatar and Saudi Arabia should be made to understand that they cannot play the fundamentalist card in the backyard of Europe.

The strategic interest of the Middle East is tapering

The Middle East, defined in broad terms to include both Egypt and Iran, and the countries in between, remains the most unstable region of the world. It includes very dramatic and intricate crisis, such as the ones in Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, and very fragile governance regimes, such as the ones in Jordan, Iraq and Bahrain, without mentioning Saudi Arabia, which many consider to be experiencing the initial symptoms of instability. It is also home to serious ethnic and sectarian conflicts, as the Kurd situation, which concerns several countries, the rivalries between Sunni and Shia power elites, and the proliferation of extremist groups illustrate. The region is also deeply affected by Israel’s policy towards the Palestinian people.

View from the West, the region has lost a good deal of its strategic importance. Oil from the Middle East can now easily be replaced by oil from other parts of the world, including the US and Canada. Oil is therefore a much weaker argument when looking at the Western interests in the region. Religious fundamentalism and its violent manifestations are still a reason to pay attention to the region. But even in that domain, home-grown fundamentalism in the EU and the US are now getting more attention than distant threats that might be taking roots in the Middle East.

Also, from a trading perspective, the region is perceived as a small market, notwithstanding the wealth available within some of its leading circles.

The trend is therefore to switch the attention away from the Middle East to other parts of the world. 

What is Qatar up to?

I am confronted quite often with questions about Qatar’s role in the Middle East and North Africa. A lot of well-informed observers have serious difficulties to understand the Emirate’s strategic objectives and its political moves. Besides the role played by Qatar’s stated-funded global TV channel Al-Jazeera, which by the way, I watch with interest, people ask questions about many other things, including Doha’s extraordinary financial support provided to former President Morsi of Egypt.

No doubt, one has to have a deeper look at Qatar geo-strategic ambitions. 

Syria is getting back into the headline news again

The Syrian crisis has been pushed out of the TV screens by the situation in Egypt. And a lot of people in the West are feeling good about this. After deciding that they would deliver weapons to the rebels, many in Washington, London and elsewhere felt very uneasy about this move. The fact that Syria has been forgotten by the media during the last many weeks has given those politicians some respite.  But the tragedy is still there, the Geneva conference seems to be dead in the water and the issue is about to return to the top of the international agenda. What will be the Western response then? 

The losing side

The true message that came out of today’s Friends of Syria meeting is that the many rebellions are losing the war. That’s the actual trend on the ground. New weapons for a divided, weakened opposition are just a way of effectively playing on Assad’s hand. He will have a justification to continue the military option, which has given him a new breath of life, and an excuse to postpone any negotiated solution. In the end, the Syrian population will be the real loser.