My friend gets special treatment

It is a serious mistake to follow double standards when you are leading a country. You cannot be exacting for some and permissive for others, particularly when it is a political friend that is overstepping the red line. That fundamentally undermines the leader’s credibility. Once lost, it is not easy to recuperate.

Boris Johnson and Covid-19

Wishing a speedy recovery to Prime Minister Boris Johnson of the UK. He has been transferred this evening to intensive care because of the coronavirus. This sad moment sends a very strong message to the population. The coronavirus is a very threatening disease and people must follow all the official protocols the health authorities have adopted. The Prime Minister is a strong person, not old at all, and surrounded by the best medical care one can get. Notwithstanding all that, he is struggling. He has been sick for eleven days or so. If that can happen to the leader of the UK, we must pay a lot of attention to the virus. This is no small matter.

Boris and his crazy world

I would summarise today’s Cabinet reshuffle in the UK along three lines. It was a public opinion disaster, because the only thing people will remember is that Boris Johnson got into a fight with one of his closest allies so far, Sajid Javid. In addition, it demonstrated that the Prime Minister wants to concentrate the key levers of power in his office and leave very little room for policy decisions in the hands of the Cabinet ministers. And, third point, it confirmed that the real power behind the throne Boris occupies is his crazy political advisor, Dominic Cummings. Cummings is a puppet master.  

Macron leads on defence

Today President Macron of France delivered a very long, dense speech to the top military personnel. The President shared his deep concern with the new international order, which is basically defined by rapports de force and not by international law and underlined once again the need for an autonomous European defence pillar, as well as his call for a strategic dialogue with Russia. But his main messages were about France as a global power and his country’s nuclear capabilities. He spent a bit of time explaining his approach to nuclear power, as a means of deterrence, a weapon that is there not to be used. France is the only nuclear power within the European Union, now that the British are outside.

But my deep reading of his address makes me conclude President Macron wants to take the lead in European defence matters. That could be part of his legacy. But he is very much aware that Germany is not ready to move too far in such field and that several other EU countries, particularly those in the East, think that the key dimension of our common defence passes through keeping the US fully engaged in Europe. 

In such circumstances, the French President wants to convince the Poles to adopt his views. That’s why he was in Poland at the beginning of the week. He also needs to convince the Polish leaders that European defence is a genuine concern, not just a screen to have France and Germany dominating the European military scene. There is a bit of a silent rivalry between Poland and Germany on defence matters.

Poland pays a lot of attention to its armed forces and it has become a key player in European military matters. The problem with Poland is that its leaders follow a political line that is very different from the one Macron promotes. And that does not facilitate a collaborative approach.

Brexit means additional fragility for both sides

Competition between nations opens the door to conflict and even war. Cooperation leads the way to progress and peace. That should be the message on this Brexit day.

And we should also keep in mind that our adversaries and even some of Europe’s allies would prefer us to be fragmented and disunited.  

The new Boris Johnson

I do not see the world the way Boris Johnson does. But I accept he is a great political campaigner, someone who knows that in today’s complex world people want simple messages to be put across and a clear show of determination. He did both. And he won, a huge victory by all means. He has five years of power in front of him. Let’s see if he is as good at exercising it as he has been at canvassing for it.

He will govern a very divided country. His choices are clear: either he keeps deepening the sharp split or he opts for a moderate route that can make a good part of the opposition feel comfortable with his governance. I think he knows the latter is the only way forward. He cannot contribute to the augmentation of the political divide; he cannot ignore those who want to keep a close relationship with the European Union. That includes the Scottish people.

The United Kingdom must keep a strong link with the EU. Boris Johnson is smart enough to understand that and strong enough, within his party, to impose such a political line. The only question mark is about his balance: will he be wise enough to seek a compromise with the EU? I don’t know. And I am afraid he might not have that kind of wisdom. He might fall into the old trap that makes British people believe they are better than their neighbours. That would be a serious mistake. Let’s hope it will not happen.

Boris Johnson's weird proposal

The plan the British Prime Minister sent to Brussels today, regarding a withdrawal agreement with the EU, is a construction in the air. It’s not grounded on realistic operational premises, meaning, it is unclear in terms of its day-to-day implementation. And it plays with words and images, basically to show to the British voters this plan is different from the one Theresa May had agreed upon. It is not about substance and cooperation, it is about personal ambition and party politics in the UK. 

The EU leaders are not convinced. However, they played smart in their reactions to Boris Johnson’s proposal. They said they would look at it with the required attention. That’s a diplomatic way of saying we are not convinced but do not want to kill hope right away. Brussels does not want to give the British PM any chance that would allow him to blame the EU for a No Deal situation. It is true he will blame in any case, but without any definitive proof. 

Besides the confusing lines, the plan was presented almost like an ultimatum from the British side to the European one. That is not very smart. Key leaders in Europe will take such approach as an affront. Politically, Boris Johnson's tone calls for a response that might further complicate the Brexit issue. This is no time for “take it or leave it”, as the PM is saying. That is unwise, but not surprising as Boris Johnson is more interested in impressing the British nationalists than in finding a solution to his country’s future relationship with Europe. He is already campaigning. The bizarre Brexit plan he submitted today is part and parcel of his electoral strategy. Not much more than that.

President Trump and the EU

A few of my readers have expressed some degree of surprise after reading what I wrote in my last blog about President Trump’s policy towards the EU. I basically said the President is not in favour of a strong EU. And that is a radical change of approach, because for decades his predecessors have encouraged the European countries to cooperate and strengthen the EU. Even in the case of the UK, the message coming from Washington has always been in the sense of advising London to be closer to Continental Europe.

 With President Trump, we have a new situation. First, he sees the EU as economic competition and a market that is huge but has too many barriers when it comes to some critical American exports, such as cars and farm products. But there is more to it, beyond the economic and trade issues. He thinks that the key EU leaders have an international agenda that contradicts his own and weakens it. That is the case on climate, on Iran, on Russia, on Cuba and Venezuela, on multilateralism, even on China. Not to mention the new idea of a European common defence, an idea that Emmanuel Macron personalises. On defence, President Trump follows a line that has been present in Washington for long now: the Europeans must spend more on their armies but keep them under the overall control and command of the US military. He senses that in this area the European response is becoming more independent and he does not like it at all.

August is not a good time to discuss these matters. People on both sides of the Atlantic are above all concerned with the weather and their holidays. It is however a debate that must be reopened after the rentrée in September.

No Deal, soon in a street near you

31 October is not too far away. But it is far enough for us to be able to say what is going to happen to the UK’s Brexit. However, it should be clear, at this stage, that the No Deal is very likely. If, in the end, we get to that point, it is obvious that the relations between the EU and the UK will reach a very low point. It will take a lot of time to recover from such a fall. And that will also have an impact on other forms of cooperation between the two sides. It will certainly be, if it happens, a most defining moment in the history of modern Europe.

Boris Johnson is in charge

From a diplomatic perspective, the European leaders can only wish every success to Boris Johnson. He won the leadership of his Conservative Party and the British political tradition makes him the next Prime Minister.

This is not a very easy time for the UK, as the country is more divided than ever and must make some very decisive choices. Johnson knows that. His initial steps are particularly important. Above all, the way he approaches the European Union. If he tries the impossible, and a different type of Withdrawal Agreement, based on fantasy, he might end up by stepping into the abyss. I am sure he is aware of that and does not want his premiership to be tainted by economic distress and domestic constitutional crisis. By failure, in a word.

We will see.

In the meantime, the Labour Party is also facing some serious difficulties. Jeremy Corbyn is less and less able to respond to the major challenges the UK is confronted with. Time is defeating him. Now, he must find a sharper way of defining his party’s position. During the next few weeks all the attentions will be focused on the way he responds to the Boris Johnson Cabinet’s initiatives. That’s not a very comfortable position. The one who takes the initiative, if he is smart, is always ahead of the game. To try to catch up – that will be Corbyn’s most likely approach – is not good enough. Corbyn and his party must go beyond responding and be prepared to come up with striking ideas. They must re-capture the people’s attention. That’s not easy when on the other side is standing someone like Johnson.  

The Hormuz crisis must be taken very seriously

The outgoing British Cabinet – a new team will take over on Wednesday, once the new Prime Minister is confirmed – responded today to Iran’s capture of the British tanker with a good combination of firmness and balance. It has demanded the release of the ship and, at the same time, made the announcement that a European naval task force will be dispatched to the Strait of Hormuz to ensure the freedom of navigation.

The British vessel will not be released unless there is a reciprocal action regarding the Iranian ship that has been stopped in Gibraltar two weeks ago. London knows it, they know how the Iranians behave in these situations. Moreover , Mohammad Javad Zarif, the Iranian Foreign Minister, stated that condition very clearly. This is a delicate matter because neither country wants to be perceived as giving up. The solution would be to get both ministers to meet and make an announcement at the end of such meeting, as a compromise between both sides. Here, third-party mediation will not work.

As far as the European task force is concerned, that is a good approach from a political point of view. It keeps the British and the rest of Europe at arm’s length from the US. The Europeans do not agree with the Americans’ stance on Iran and do not want to be subordinated to the US. The real problem, however, is to be able to assemble such a task force fast and effectively. I have some doubts about that possibility.

In the meantime, the matter will remain top of the international agenda. As I wrote yesterday, it calls for a concerted effort to de-escalate. Someone independent enough must take the initiative.

Official secrets and the media

The British Police is now investigating the leak of Ambassador Kim Darroch’s cables. The task has been given to the Counter Terrorism Command because the leak is considered a criminal breach of the Official Secrets Act.

I agree there has been a serious violation of that Act. Ambassadors and other Envoys work under special rules and conditions. They must be able to write about their assignments in full confidence and without fear.

I authored many cables during my years as head of special political missions and every time I had to be sure the matters I was reporting about – and the opinions I shared – would remain within a very limited circle within the top decision-makers. Basically, the rules on the receiving side were about secrecy and access reserved to those who needed to know.

That is the nature of diplomatic work and international affairs.

There is another dimension that the Metropolitan Police raises, and I see as of exceptional relevance. In short, the Police advises media editors and the social platforms not to publish any additional document that might be made available to them on the matter or related issue and that is covered by the Official Secrets Act.

I agree with the Police’s warning. The advice takes into account the freedom of the press. The Police is not questioning the freedom to print and to inform. It is reminding all of us that some matters are of vital national interest and should be kept secret. 

Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt, in their frenzy to please as many Conservative Party members as possible, have indirectly criticised that Police’s statement. They fundamentally said the press could go ahead and disseminate that type of information. It is wrong. Their statements are just opportunistic and foolish. They mislead the public. That is not what leaders are supposed to do.

Boris Johnson, you said?

Something must be dramatically wrong with the Conservative Party. Why do I say it? Because I see that its key members believe that the only way to beat an unsophisticated politician like Jeremy Corbyn is to elect as party leader Boris Johnson.

They know that Boris is an incurious, lazy, dilettante, person. His intellectual arrogance is also obvious. It is based on his shallow approach to politics, to the important issues, and on his narcissism.

To think that he might become the next UK Prime Minister, despite all those shortcomings, is startling. It indeed says a lot about the state of disarray within the Conservatives. And, in many ways, about the lack of realism in some segments of the British public opinion.

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.

Wishing the British good fortune

The key European leaders and all those who have a balanced approach to opinion-making here in Brussels and other capitals have no intention of humiliating the British politicians. Moreover, as neighbours and because we share the same values and so many aspects of our European history, we also have a great respect for the British people.

Nobody wants to see a weaker, divided UK in the future. Such view would be an absolute foolishness.

I am sure Theresa May understands all that.

UK, the land of the confusion

The “will of the people” is no longer represented in the British Parliament. Both parties are deeply divided within their own ranks. The image of their leaders is not good at all. Both have lost great chunks of credibility. Both, not just Theresa May. But her case is even more significant because she is the Prime Minister of the land.

In normal circumstances, such dramatic situation would bring a call for fresh elections. That’s not the case this time. Everything is so confusing in British politics that even this very traditional move is not implemented. The “friends” of Theresa May are just positioning themselves to replace her, without going back to the voters.

However, nobody knows what will happen in the next days and weeks. We might have some clarity by the end of this week. It is indispensable.

Keeping the EU project together

For those who have not yet understood it – also for those who might have lost sight of it –, it seems important to remember that the safeguard of the European common project is a paramount goal and a topmost concern. Anything that might threaten the unity of the project – and its coherence – will be fought.

That’s the way leaders have been looking at the Brexit saga, a process that, notwithstanding the confusion that prevails in the British Parliament, should be completed as negotiated. And without any significant delay. The departure of the United Kingdom is regrettable, no doubt. But it has been the choice of the British people and that choice must be implemented without menacing the integrity of the EU.

There is no concession to be made when that integrity is at stake.

Brexit means transformation

The Brexit crisis is creating the conditions for a new partisan alignment in the UK. Brexit is a major political earthquake. Therefore, it can seriously transform the British party landscape, something that has not happened for generations.  

Let's be positive and wise

Today's world in Brussels should be "restrain". This is a time that requires moderation, tact, discretion, prudence, circumspection, you call it whatever you deem more appropriate. I prefer “restrain”.

And I would add to it that this is no time to irritate the side that might seem very confused. It’s actually the moment to be warm about the future, because the future can only be about cooperation and mutual interests.

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.