Brussels is absent

The European Union can only survive in the hearts and minds of its citizens if it is perceived as political project that promotes freedom and prosperity, protects the people and facilitates solidarity among the different nations. If it fails to do so, it will lose the support and will become a very fragile meeting point of contradictory national interests. With the current crisis, these goals are being challenged. That is certainly not a very good foundation for the future. In addition, the new leadership of the institutions gives the impression of lacking the necessary weight and audacity. They certainly are very honest people. But that is immensely insufficient at a time of profound shock and division. I am certainly worried by the current lack of visibility and initiative coming from the institutions.

We are hiding again behind national borders

One of the characteristics of the new international disorder is to ignore the role of international organisations. The conventions, resolutions, principles and values, which the experience gained during the several decades that followed the Second World War has built up, are being set aside. The United Nations System has been relegated to a little corner of the international relations map. It is simply ignored. Whose fault is it? That’s a matter for a longer debate, but what is worth emphasising now is that nobody listens to the voices that emphasise the importance of multilateral responses and international cooperation. We are back to country-specific decisions, to the primacy of national interests seen in isolation, to relations of force. We have moved back in history, hiding behind national borders. It is simply unacceptable. It leads to conflict and instability.

Italy and its political clowns

It would be an exaggeration to say that Italy has become a fragile democracy. The governing coalition might be collapsing tonight or tomorrow, but the State institutions are functioning. The President has the necessary prestige and authority. The judiciary system works. And, in general terms, I think we should recognise that public service is experienced and can be competent, if left alone.

It is the political class that is in deep crisis. It has been like that since Berlusconi´s time, in the 90s. His Forza Italia was a joke, inspired by his own example and megalomania. And it created a lot of additional party clones, as time went on, including the populist 5 Star Movement. It has also opened space to the ultra nationalist movements to flourish. 

In this context, the real challenge is to see the emergence of different type of political leaders. Unfortunately, that seems to be a very remote light, at this stage. 

Europe and the Iranian situation

Iran announced yesterday it intends surpass the uranium stockpile limit set under the 2005 nuclear agreement. They want to do it by 27 June.

Obviously, this is no good news. It brings the region to a new level of tension. For Europe, it makes the EU’s political position on Iran untenable.

Actually, the European position had already reached a dead end. Now, that is indisputable.  

Today, Federica Mogherini is on her way to Washington. I do not know what she will bring to the discussions with Mike Pompeo and Jared Kushner, the trusted son-in-law of President Trump. But she has no room left. On one side, she is confronted with an Administration that is determined to further tighten the sanctions already in place against Iran. Not to mention, of course, the additional military deployments to the Gulf region. On the other side, she sees a regime and a leadership that are placing themselves against the wall, when the wise move would have been to remain committed to the implementation of the nuclear agreement.

In my opinion, Mogherini, on behalf of the EU, has no choice but to be frank and direct. Direct means diplomacy with clear words. Here, the message should be that all sides must show restraint and accept to return to the negotiating table. EU and China, with the support of Russia, could be the conveners of such a negotiation.

On her return from Washington, Mogherini should also travel to Beijing and Moscow. Before that, she could meet the UN Secretary-General. That would send an appropriate signal. And it is something the UN needs.

Hormuz tensions

Yesterday’s attacks on two petrochemical tankers sailing in the vicinity of the Strait of Hormuz should ring strident alarm bells. They make obvious there is a strong player that is betting on escalating the tensions in the region. And the fact of the matter is that we do not know who is playing such a destructive card.

We can try to guess based on a careful analysis of some nations’ strategic interests. However, at this stage to point the finger in one direction only contributes to augment the tension. It is certainly not the wisest approach. It should not be accepted.

The UN Secretary-General, António Guterres, should step forward and offer the organisation’s good offices to carry out an independent investigation of the incidents. The International Maritime Organisation could be part of it. In the meantime, he should dispatch a Special Envoy to the region. For instance, the UN Under-Secretary-General for Political and Peacebuilding Affairs. That move would help to lessen the regional political temperature.

In support of democracy in Turkey

I have a lot of admiration for the Turkish people that dare to come to the public squares and streets to demonstrate for human rights and democracy. Besides this appreciation, there isn´t much we can do, here in Europe, to support their risky struggle. To recognise their courage is just a small gesture. It is however important. It is a way of saying that the current actions by the Turkish government do not respect the accepted democratic standards. And to that, we can add, with great concern, a very clear statement: if the authorities continue the current policy of mass repression that will generate, sooner or later, a major civil crisis. Too bad, as it will happen in a region that is already experiencing major disruptions and unacceptable levels of violence.

The EU crisis and Chicken Little

The EU sky is not falling

This is a difficult time to be an optimist in Brussels. It is even more challenging to advocate for a positive look at European affairs. And it becomes almost impossible to talk about collective hopes for a more united Europe in the future. Many will say such optimism belongs to another epoch. Now, the dominant discourse is one that announces a new catastrophe every week. Like Chicken Little, these so-called realists shout, “The sky is falling! The sky is falling!”

As a contrarian, I want to maintain faith in the European project. And be inspired by a forward-looking approach. The best way to build a prosperous and safe future for all of us in Europe is through a united endeavour.  I say it whilst realising the EU is at present facing two major crises. They crowd everything else off the agenda, giving strong arguments to pessimists and those who are against continuing the Union. I mean a possible Brexit and the realities of mass migrations.

With the UK spinning further away from common approaches and policies, arguments for integration and joint responses have indeed become more fragile. In effect, such arguments are practically inaudible because many leaders prefer to focus their attention on their own national agendas. The silence of most of them on EU affairs is deafening.

The UK´s position has brought a lot of uncertainty to the table. At this stage, nobody can predict the outcome of their referendum. It is also difficult to forecast the consequences of a Brexit for the future of the EU.

Nevertheless, the EU would survive a Brexit. Why? Because the UK and the other member states have already learned to go their own separate ways in many areas – the Euro, Schengen, labour laws, justice, and internal security, just to mention a few.  Perhaps the biggest worry is what a Brexit would do to the British themselves, to the status of Scotland, as well as to their tiny neighbour to the west, Ireland.

Brexit or not, the EU shouldn´t be too worried.

The larger question is about immigration. Can the EU survive a continued and expanding mass migration crisis? Many believe it cannot. We keep hearing that without a solution to the current migratory flows, the EU will soon collapse. There is a good degree of exaggeration in the air. The soothsayers of disaster easily capture the headlines. Obviously, the mass arrival of refugees and migrants does pose major challenges and it is essential to recognize this. It is a situation well out of control. Furthermore, this crisis shakes the key foundations of the Union, its values and the role of Europe in the international arena.

More importantly, the migration issue touches the core of a vital dimension of European states—the question of national identity. The people of Europe have shown that they are ready to give away a good number of their sovereign prerogatives, accepting that Brussels can deal with them. This has been the case in a wide range of areas related to economic management, budgets, agriculture, trade, environment, justice, development aid, external relations and other important matters.

Yet, they are not at all prepared to abdicate or dilute their national features, language and everything else that creates a people´s identity. Nor should they. Europe is a complex mosaic of languages, cultures, nationalities and even prejudices. Yes, our views of our neighbours are still shaped by prejudices in significant ways. History and many wars have both divided us and created the diverse assortment we are today. Patriotism is still, and will continue to be for a good while longer, far stronger than pan-Europeanism.

All this must be taken into account. Populists are effective in doing just this, trying to gain the political advantage in the process by exploiting feelings of nationalism. It’s all a little more complicated for an optimist.

This reality notwithstanding, let´s be clear about the present crisis. Let´s imagine we had to face the current migratory instabilities and frictions that the migrations have created in a past context of separate nation states. We can readily assume that some of us would already be at war with our neighbours. We would see coalitions of countries taking military action against others, trying to defend their borders and their own perceived national interests. We would be responding to the threats facing us with weapons drawn upon one another. In the past, this challenge would lead to armed conflict and chaos. We know that the long history of Europe has been written through a succession of wars. 

This all changed when the EU was established. Now, disputes are taken to summits. Summits come and go, often without many concrete outcomes. But, sooner or later, they end up by producing acceptable results of one sort or another. We have learned to take the right decisions at the eleventh hour, that´s true. But we have done so around a conference table and through diplomacy. That´s the kind of lesson we should keep in mind as we get closer to two more summits on the migration crisis: one with Turkey, on the 7th of March and one among the EU leaders on the 17th.

Let´s keep talking and pushing for an agreement. From the cacophony of diverse European voices and the play of varied interests, action will follow. The most relevant contribution of the pessimists, Eurosceptics and  nay-sayers has been to create a greater sense of urgency. Now, the optimists among us have to state that there is only one answer to the big question on the table: Do we allow this challenge to destroy the hard-won political and economic achievements of the EU or do we build on these successes to constructively address this crisis and, in the process, strengthen our union?

I am convinced that realism that will prevail. The European sky isn’t falling.

Celebrating the Pope in Bangui

The visit of Pope Francis to Bangui should be highly commended. He took the right decision, notwithstanding all the advice he got, from different countries and institutions, against such a visit on grounds of security. He has shown that leaders ought to be brave. That´s what people expect from leaders. He has also sent the message that conflicts, even very dramatic crisis like the one the Central African Republic experienced during the last two or three years, can only be solved if national efforts are supported by the international community. And that should be the case in CAR.

It was also very sad to see that the media keeps referring to religion and religious differences as the causes of violence in the country. The issue is much deeper. Religion is just a tag, an identification of sides in conflict. The true issues have to do with migrations into the country of pastoralists from much further North, deforestation and climate change, threats to traditional farming, livelihoods, and chaotic urbanization. And on top of all that, very low level leaders for decades, very often with the protection of political elites from Europe.

My fear is that once Pope Francis has left Bangui the country will fall back into the dark well of forgetfulness. It has been in that realm for so long. 

The Eurogroup has to take a decision that is clear

The Eurogroup meeting of finance ministers is still on at the very end of this evening. It has been a long meeting. And also a very tense discussion, from what I can understand at this stage. All this shows that the EU is confronted with a very serious crisis that has a major impact on Greece, of course, but also on the rest of euro zone countries.

It is time to be very balanced and to think positively. It is also time to be very clear, in one direction or the other.

Major crisis are complex matters, difficult to decide upon, but at the same time they call for clarity. People want to know the direction things will take.

Politics is about opting. And in the case of a grave situation is also about making sure that whatever is decided is the most reasonable approach, among a choice of options that are all rather painful. 

Our little world

Our part of the world is once again responding with indifference to the human tragedies that are taking place in Syria and Iraq and to the deepening of the security crisis around Yemen. As we remain unresponsive to so many other violations of basic human rights.

 Our leaders seem to be overwhelmed by our own domestic problems, the media is focusing on Le Pen, the UK forthcoming elections and the inability of the US local police to deal with the challenges of multi-ethnicity in their towns, and we, the little people, we are just trying to cope with the air control strikes and the taxes that keep falling on us. Or preparing for the next holiday.

These are indeed interesting times: the more we know about the world, and we know plenty nowadays, the more we close ourselves in our little circles. The information reaches us but we have learned to ignore it. 

Greece: they will decide and we will talk with them afterwards

It is unwise for the EU leaders to freely comment on the forthcoming elections in Greece. It sounds like outright interference in the domestic electoral process. The Greeks will decide, based on their own internal power dynamics. Then, and only after that, the rest of the EU will see what comes next. There will for sure a need for negotiations. And everyone knows that only reasonable people with sensible negotiating standpoints can achieve results. Therefore, I believe that both sides, the Greeks and the external partners, will negotiate with a key concern in mind: these are no times to rock the boat. These are times of great global uncertainty and judicious people in Europe understand the current trends and circumstances. It would be a serious mistake for all of us if moderation was put aside. Leadership, today, at the beginning of this New Year, is about avoiding a race and an acceleration towards more confrontations. 

Sudan and South Sudan

For those who know well the key political players in Khartoum, the capital of Sudan, it is difficult to believe those leaders are not playing some games in South Sudan. It is difficult to imagine they are keeping themselves at a prudent distance and not trying to strike some deals with Riek Machar, the head of the rebellion in the South.

The opposite is more likely.

For many reasons, of course, but above all for two main motives.

First, Khartoum is in the middle of a dramatic economic environment. There is very little foreign currency left, serious shortages of basic goods such as wheat, high unemployment and uncontrollable inflation. They need the oil revenues to keep flowing. And the wells are in the regions of South where Machar´s fighters are stronger. For Khartoum it makes then a lot of sense to be on Machar´s side.

Second, there are many in Sudan´s political establishment that have never accepted the independence of South Sudan. For them, Salva Kiir and his group in Juba are living reminders of the humiliation the North suffered. Whatever can be done to make them in South Sudan pay for such humiliation of the “Arabs” in the Sudan should not be missed. Creating havoc in the South is a good way of paying back.

Revenge is a way of life and a leading political approach in this part of world. 

Reconciliation in Mali

On the day of Nelson Mandela Memorial, I found myself writing a few notes about reconciliation in a post-crisis political process. The point was to look at Mali’s situation and try to make some recommendations.

I thought of Mandela, and started by saying that enlightened leadership at the top level of national authority is fundamental. Then I added that that the other levels of political responsibility need to change their approaches towards the minorities as well and adapt a fair attitude that invites inclusiveness. Finally, we need to put in place mechanisms of appeasement at the community level, between neighbours, ethnic groups, local people. On a daily base, that´s where the proof of the pudding takes place. At the grassroots level.

Is all this happening at present in Mali?

My answer is very simple: I am afraid not.