Showing posts with label Vladimir Putin. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Vladimir Putin. Show all posts

Thursday, 1 January 2026

2026: On Certain and Uncertain Challenges, and the Indispensable Need for International Cooperation: An Artificial Intelligence critique

 The text offers a comprehensive and thought-provoking analysis of the challenges that may arise in 2026, emphasizing the role of international cooperation in navigating a complex geopolitical landscape. Victor Ângelo presents a clear depiction of the precarious state of global affairs, highlighting the ongoing conflict in Ukraine and the escalating tensions between nuclear powers, particularly under the leadership of figures like Trump and Putin, who prioritize personal power over collective stability.

One notable strength of the text is its nuanced exploration of the interaction between domestic politics and international relations, illustrating how the agendas of individual leaders can have far-reaching implications. This is particularly relevant in the context of the upcoming midterm elections in the United States, where Trump’s potential maneuvers could create instability not only domestically but also on the global stage.

Moreover, the discussion surrounding Xi Jinping's focus on internal prosperity and the potential for aggressive actions toward Taiwan adds depth to the analysis of Chinese geopolitical strategy. The mention of the rapidly advancing fields of AI and quantum technology underscores the race for supremacy in these domains, which could redefine international power dynamics in unpredictable ways.

The author adeptly identifies the United Nations' plight as it grapples with outdated structures and the urgent need for reform, particularly the push for a female Secretary-General from Latin America, which would symbolize a necessary shift in global representation. This aspect not only highlights gender considerations but also points to an emerging multipolarity that reflects the perspectives of the Global South.

However, while the text passionately argues for the necessity of cooperation to address these looming challenges, it could benefit from exploring specific mechanisms or frameworks for such collaboration. Addressing how nations can transcend entrenched rivalries and engage in productive dialogue would bolster the argument significantly.

Finally, the notion of Black Swans reemphasizes the unpredictability of global events and the imperative for preparedness. The potential catastrophe of a collision between satellites serves as a stark reminder of the interconnectedness of technological advancement and the risks it entails.

In summary, the text is a compelling call to recognize the critical importance of international cooperation amidst complex geopolitical challenges, though it could enhance its persuasiveness by integrating more concrete strategies for achieving such cooperation in the face of uncertainty.

Monday, 29 December 2025

Looking ahead into 2026 with realism or just pessimism?

 2026: On Certain and Uncertain Challenges, and the Indispensable Need for International Cooperation

Victor Ângelo

The ancient Oracle of Delphi has now been replaced by Artificial Intelligence (AI) platforms. Even so, it is very risky to predict what the world will be like in the coming times. In the case of 2026, it is even more difficult for three fundamental reasons: firstly, we are in a period of marked geopolitical disorder, a legacy of 2025; secondly, the calendar foresees events of great importance, which may profoundly alter international realities; thirdly, the competition in the fields of AI, quantum technology, and high technology is accelerating rapidly, especially between the USA and China, without it being clear what the consequences of this dizzying rivalry might be. All this without considering the possible appearance of one or more Black Swans, as happened with Covid.

At the geopolitical level, I consider the most significant challenge to be the enormous current threat posed by the Russian Federation to democratic Europe. The criminal large-scale invasion of Ukraine is about to enter its fifth year, and Vladimir Putin does not seem willing to put an end to the violence. Ukraine has managed to resist, in a surprising and heroic manner, but above all from the end of winter onwards, it will need exceptional and continuous financial and military support to guarantee its legitimate defence. It should count on the help of European states—there will be little or nothing to expect from Trump’s America. European aid will be indispensable for the defence of Ukraine and of Europe itself. This aid, though inevitable, will worsen relations between the main European states and Russia, and could even lead to an armed attack, by decision of the Kremlin. We have not been this close to such a situation before. Putin currently boasts that he believes he would emerge victorious from such a confrontation. In reality, he is cornered and, consequently, deluded that war will keep him in power.

Trump will be mainly obsessed, throughout the year, with the US midterm elections on 3 November. He will do everything to retain the majority in Congress. If necessary, he will create incredible confusion on the domestic scene and conflicts on the international chessboard, notably in Venezuela and Greenland, so as to appear, to the more credulous American electorate, as the guarantor of his country’s stability and greatness. It would not be a surprise if this were to happen. Like all other autocrats throughout history, Trump believes that confusion and chaos will play in his favour.

European democracies cannot rely on Trump. He and Putin, each in their own way, are two enormous risks for international law and global order. For the first time, in 2026, two nuclear powers will be led by exacerbated egocentrics, capable of destroying a large part of humanity if, in their view, it is considered vital for them to remain in power.

I must also mention Xi Jinping. His main political concern is to ensure internal prosperity in China, which is understandable given the size of the country’s population and the fact that his political survival depends both on the stick and the carrot, on an iron-fisted rule and on the rising standard of living felt by a significant part of the population. However, in a situation of international chaos, he may attempt to recover Taiwan. This possibility cannot be excluded in 2026.

In terms of AI, competition between states will focus on economic advances, military superiority, and the dominance of the ideological narrative that favours their interests. Whoever wins the race in these areas—the USA or China—will guarantee their supremacy as a global hyperpower.

Financial and scientific investments in AI will continue throughout the year to reach absolutely astronomical values. In the USA, priority will be given to the giant technology companies. The security and defence sectors will establish fabulous contracts with these companies. In China, the development of AI will remain under the absolute control of the state, to ensure the regime’s survival. But in both cases, the fundamental concerns will be related to strengthening national security and manipulating public opinion. Colossally expanded by quantum science, AI will increasingly become a powerful and unpredictable tool in the hands of those who hold power.

In 2026, a new Secretary-General of the UN will be elected. The Global South recognises the value of the United Nations and is increasingly insisting on the urgency of its reorganisation. The survival of the UN’s political role depends on its representativeness. The right of veto and the permanent seats on the Security Council are now considered by the majority of Member States as outdated and obsolete powers, but still very real. They are obviously incapable of reflecting today’s international relations and of enabling the resolution of the major problems that plague the international agenda.

The electoral process that will take place throughout the year until a new Secretary-General is elected will give more strength to the reform movement. It will also insist on the election of a woman. Until now, the post has always been held by men. This will be one of the major themes at the UN level. It is time to elect a woman. In parallel, there will be a whole campaign for the person elected to come from Latin America. According to the rules, that should be the region of origin of the new leader. It would also have another significance: it would show Trump that Latin America really matters, that it is not just the backyard of the USA.

The political dimension of the UN is now going through the deepest crisis in its history. I do not believe, however, that it will cease to exist. The personality of the new Secretary-General will, however, be decisive. It must be someone seen as a political giant and with a skilful and courageous diplomatic streak. In Latin America, we have several such women: the Chilean Michelle Bachelet, the Costa Rican Rebeca Grynspan, the Mexican Alicia Bárcena, the Prime Minister of Barbados, Mia Mottley, and several others. These are personalities who have shown extraordinary political firmness.

Still on the UN, Portugal is seeking a non-permanent seat on the Security Council for the 2027–2028 biennium. It is competing with Germany and Austria, that is, three candidates for two available seats. If it manages to be elected—the decision will be made in June and, in my analysis, the Portuguese candidacy has a strong chance of succeeding—it will be the fourth time that Portugal has had a seat on the Security Council.

In the period of great uncertainties that will be 2026, we cannot fail to speculate about possible Black Swans. In international affairs, a Black Swan is a rare, unpredictable event, but when it happens, it turns out to have generated catastrophic consequences. Six years ago, it was Covid. In 2026, a terrible catastrophe could perhaps be a high-speed collision between two satellites, among the thousands currently in orbit, a number that keeps growing. This would cause an indescribable pulverisation of fragments, which would destroy other satellites and multiply astronomically the pieces of metal in uncontrolled orbit. The impact would be simply devastating for the various global satellite navigation systems, for space internet, meteorological, logistics, and military surveillance networks.

Other Black Swans are equally possible due to technological advances, but also because of their risks and unbridled competition.

Cooperation is the most effective response when any colossal challenge occurs. And with or without Black Swans, the greatest challenges are already here. The future choice is now dramatically clear: either there is cooperation, or we accelerate the destruction of a large part of our planet.

Saturday, 27 December 2025

Comments on my letter to President Vladimir Putin

 Some additonal comments regarding my letter to President Vladimir Putin of Russia.


Analysis of the Diplomatic Approach

While many critiques offer a sobering dose of "geopolitical realism," they contain several assumptions that might actually limit the space for a successful peace process. Therefore, I would like to underline a breakdown of the strengths of my letter versus the potential pitfalls of the critiques.

1. The Necessity of the UN Charter (Countering the "Kosovo Precedent")

  • The Critiques' Weak Point: While Russia frequently cites Kosovo (1999) to highlight Western inconsistency, a total abandonment of the UN Charter (Article 2(4)) serves no one—least of all a "status quo" power like Russia. If the Charter is truly "dead," then Russia loses its primary legal claim to being a Great Power with a privileged sphere of influence.

  • My Letter’s Strength: By grounding my appeal in the UN Charter, I should not seen as naive; I am speaking the only language that grants Russia Permanent Five (P5) status. It forces the conversation back to a platform where Russia is an equal to the United States, rather than just another combatant in a regional war.

2. The UNSC as a Strategic Instrument, Not Just a Guarantor

  • The Critiques' Weak Point: To suggest Russia won't use the UNSC ignores that the Council is the only venue where Russia possesses an absolute veto. Rejecting the UNSC is effectively Russia rejecting its own most powerful tool for shaping global security.

  • My Letter’s Strength: My proposal for Chapter VII mechanisms provides a "legal exit" that saves face. It frames the resolution not as a surrender to the West, but as a Security Council-led restoration of order, which Russia can claim to have co-authored.

3. The "Victors' Peace" vs. Legal Reintegration

  • The Critiques' Weak Point: The idea that Russia will "easily" recover funds through European courts is a significant legal gamble. Sovereign immunity is being aggressively reinterpreted in the West. Relying on courts could take decades of litigation while the Russian economy remains decoupled from global markets.

  • My Letter’s Strength: By framing the "Reparations-for-Reintegration" model, I am offering a negotiated political settlement rather than a legal battle. It allows Russia to present the reconstruction of Ukraine as a voluntary "contribution to European stability" in exchange for the immediate unlocking of the global financial system.

4. The NATO-Russia Founding Act as a Realistic Off-Ramp

  • The Critiques' Weak Point: While there is "anti-Russian hysteria" in Europe, as the Kremlin supporters state and that I deny, this could be considered a symptom of the on-going conflict, not a permanent state. A vacuum of security is what fuels this hysteria.

  • My Letter’s Strength: Revitalizing the Founding Act is the only way to address Russia’s "Western border" concerns without requiring NATO to disband. It addresses the "crux of the conflict" by proposing Strategic Restraint Zones—something Moscow has explicitly asked for in draft treaties since December 2021.


Synthesis of Strong Points

My letter to President Putin is strong because it refuses to treat the conflict as a simple street fight; it treats it as a failure of the global security architecture.

ElementWhy it works
P5 ResponsibilityIt appeals to Putin’s sense of Russia as a "founding father" of the modern world order.
Institutional DepthIt moves away from "Twitter diplomacy" toward technical, verifiable security measures (hotlines, de-confliction).
Balanced Off-RampsIt provides a way for Russia to stop the war without admitting "defeat," by framing it as a "Strategic Realignment."

Acknowledging the "Humanitarian" Gap

The critiques are correct on one vital point: the humanitarian and cultural interests (Church, language, and minority rights) are deeply important to the Russian domestic narrative.