Reflecting about democracy

 Democracy cannot be make-believe

Victor Ângelo

 

In the most developed societies, we are witnessing an acceleration in the digitalisation of all dimensions of citizens' lives. The pandemic has contributed enormously to this digital revolution. But more is coming.  The ability to process millions of pieces of information through new methods of artificial intelligence and advances in automation will allow the control - and, in many cases, manipulation - of people in a way never seen before.

The new digital age brings numerous challenges, and even threats, for democracy. Think, for example, of the role of robots in the multiplication of propaganda, fake news, and the creation of echo chambers, which give the impression of massive political support for some, and build around them all sorts of illusions, alongside the harassment of others, the opponents, with thousands of hostile messages from fake profiles. But the most immediate aspect concerns participation in the electoral act. If a citizen can pay his taxes or renew his identity card while sitting at the kitchen table, why is he not allowed to vote by computer link-up, also from home? Going to a polling station, going through crowds of people, queuing up and wasting time seem like procedures from another time, even if people like Donald Trump try to discredit electronic voting.

Already this week, the French have thrown another challenge into the debate. The abstention rate in the regional elections reached a record high. Two-thirds did not vote. Worse still, around 9 out of 10 of 18–24-year-olds were not ready for the hassle. They just ignored the election calls. Analysts were baffled. In discoursing on the reasons for such indifference, they fell into the same simplism that Marine Le Pen, Jean-Luc Mélenchon and other political personalities had already shown on election night - it would be the fault of the citizens, who found the inconvenience not worth it. And they launched cries to the heavens to lament that such a trend could lead to the death of democracy.

All that is television talk. People - especially young people - do not vote because most of the political class doesn't mean anything to them, doesn't inspire them, has no new ideas, is just more of the same, with too much hubris and too few ethics. This is what is happening in France and other European countries. The main threat to democracy does not come from apathy among citizens. That is the consequence. The cause lies upstream, in the political parties - there are always exceptions - which are generally nothing more than a club of opportunists or fanatics, enlightened by short-sightedness.

The question of democracy is also on the agenda of the European Council meeting that has been held since yesterday, marking the end of the Portuguese presidency. The big question, which has been a long time coming and so far, unanswered, is what to do about the authoritarian governance currently practised in Hungary and Poland. The leaders in these two countries have long systematically violated Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union, which defines the fundamental values on which the EU is based - freedom, democracy, separation of powers and human rights. The lack of an adequate response to these violations is another fuel to the fire that is consuming away the citizens' confidence in democracy and politicians.

Less talked about, but equally important for the vitality of democracy, is having a capable system of administration of justice that is independent of politicians. Citizens need to have confidence in the speedy and efficient functioning of the courts, as a means of defending their rights and correcting injustices. In the age of "digital totalitarianism" this is even more essential. In member states where justice is slow, ill-equipped, and inefficient, we have a problem almost as serious as the authoritarianism that exists elsewhere. Those states have a lame democracy. They should also be the subject of criticism in the European Council. Without effective justice, democracy is an illusion. And the citizens, as the French have now shown, are no longer so easily deceived.

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

 

The future of politics must be based on values

They do not fit into our future

Victor Angelo

 

I recognise the concerns that many thinkers express about what the world will be like in the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic. A large proportion say that this crisis pulverizes our societies and disrupts democracy and the alliances that bind us to other peoples, promotes a tendency towards isolation, nationalistic selfishness and the loss of the points of reference that gave meaning to international relations. Thus, the world would emerge fragmented from the crisis, with each country more self-centred, more autocratic, and with the institutions of the multilateral system rather weakened.

I propose a different reading of the route we are now taking. I believe that the crisis gives us the opportunity to strengthen the humanist dimension that has been lacking, both in domestic politics and on the international stage. We will certainly be poorer economically, but we can become much richer politically. It is a question of good leadership and strong citizenship movements. The pandemic has reminded us that people are the essential end of politics. Not people in a general and abstract sense, but each of us, simultaneously in our individuality and as members of the social space to which we belong. Politics must place a stronger emphasis on protecting and respecting our fundamental rights, starting with the right to dignity, health, security and diversity, as well as creating the conditions for everyone to develop their potential as best they know how. 

I believe that the pandemic drama has prepared a good part of the citizens for a new kind of awareness as regards their relationship with others and nature. I think it has made us more measured in our ambitions. We are faced with the possibility of renewing political practice. That is the main conclusion I draw from the present situation. It is also the line that guides my vision of the future. Politics tomorrow must mean a continuous struggle for human rights, for democratisation, for smoothness in public management and for more solidarity. We must build on the maturity we have acquired during this period of shock. If this happens, the credibility of politics will be enhanced, multilateral cooperation will be cemented and we will be in a better position to tackle what I consider to be the three biggest global challenges of the decade: the fight against poverty, the defence of freedom and the regeneration of the environment, starting with the mitigation of climate change.

Indeed, none of this should be new to us Europeans. Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union clearly defines - and happily worded, which is not always the case when it comes to legal commitments between states - the values that constitute the fundamental foundations of our common project, including the centrality of the human dimension of politics. But politicians, who are generally very skilful in the games of opportunism and in the ambiguity of consensus designed to please Greeks and Trojans, do not always support themselves as they should in that article of the Treaty.

In these circumstances, it is essential that the European Commission's budget for the period 2021-2027 and the exceptional plan for economic recovery, which must respond to the challenges created by the pandemic, recognise the essential need for each Member State to respect the letter and spirit of the aforementioned Article 2. Budgets and democracy are the two sides of the same Europe. Here there can be no tricks or juggling of words and misunderstandings. The Hungarian vetoes of Viktor Orbán and the Polish vetoes of Jaroslaw Kaczynski, now also supported by Janez Janša, the Prime Minister of Slovenia, are unacceptable. Let us speak clearly. Orbán is a despot at the head of a clique that many accuse of kleptocracy. Kaczynski is a backward man who exploits feelings from other times. Janša is a small brain man: he was the only European leader to congratulate Donald Trump on his electoral "victory". They all manipulate public opinion in their countries and will not change as long as they retain control of power. We cannot let these gentlemen think that the EU is just a source of money, unrelated to a policy of democratic values and rights. Any compromise on this issue would mean that we would not have learned anything from the cultural revolution that the pandemic crisis is offering us. 

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

Lukashenko must go

The people of Belarus had never occupied the centre of our European attention. For us, in the European Union, they were just a small nation at the outer periphery of our political space. We knew nothing about them. Now, they are at the centre of our admiration. They have shown, since the fraudulent early August elections, to be a very valiant people. They have been on the streets almost every day, to tell the dictator that enough is enough and that he should go. Men and women, lots of folks, some older people as well, everyone is ready to face the police repression because they want to be heard. This is no revolution pushed from outside the country. This is a genuine popular movement. I think that sooner the dictator will have to yield. The popular dislike is too obvious for him and his small group of supporters to be able to ignore it. And he cannot count of Vladimir Putin’s help. If this one comes to help – I hope he will not – he will get rid of him in any case. Putin knows that Lukashenko is politically finished.

For Hong Kong and a bit more

The new Hong Kong National Security Law is a clear violation of the legal process as established by the territory’s Basic Law – there was no consultation with the local population and their representatives – as well as of the agreed principle “One Country, Two Systems”. Furthermore, the key offences it contemplates – subversion, secession, terrorism, and collusion with foreign powers – are defined in overly broad terms. That means the Hong Kong Executive is given extensive flexibility to judge and condemn. They are the ones, not the judiciary, that will apply the law, meaning, they will decide on the offences and the punishments. They will certainly follow a targeted approach to repression.

Another “innovation” of such new law is that it also applies to people outside Hong Kong and Mainland China. If someone in Paris, a French citizen resident in France, says that the territory should be independent and later in life travels to Hong Kong, he or she can be prosecuted for such a statement.

I feel sorry for the people of Hong Kong who cherish freedom and democracy. I have the same feeling for those in the Mainland that share these same values. And I ask myself what kind of political relationship our democracies should have with the leadership in Beijing. It is time to reflect on that before it is too late. The message should be simple. It must tell them that we are not prepared to accept their vision of politics. And we should keep an all-weather distance, as wide as possible, between them and us.

The international arena must be guided by values. It is time to say that again, loud, and clear. Very straightforward values, that take their inspiration from individual rights, the protection of each person against authoritarian States, from our inherent right to freedom and human security. Some might see this aspiration as a utopic one. I hear you. But, please, believe me, the post-covid world opens the door to imagine a more dignified approach to each human being.

A plane trip in the new normal

Yesterday, I took the plane for the first time in this post-Covid era. I had a compelling reason to travel.

It was a three-hour trip out of Frankfurt. And I got a couple of surprises. First, the aircraft was full. Like in the old days. It is true that everyone was wearing a mask, but every seat was taken. And this is still a time of restrictions on travelling abroad, even within the Schengen area. Second, there were all types of passengers, from young families with small kids to older couples, and everyone in between. I would have loved to ask my fellow passengers what the reason for travel was, but I had no authority to do it. I know that the airline had asked them a similar question, in very vague terms and without requiring any supporting document. Third, there was no health or temperature checking before embarkation. Just a request to keep a safe distance before passing through the boarding pass control, a request that was in contradiction with the crowding on board.

Upon arrival at the destination, there was a temperature check. And that was it. We all left the airport to go and take care of our own business.

My conclusion was that it is better to re-open the air travel soon. And, at least, check the temperature of the would-be passengers before boarding. If there are more options to travel, more flights available, there might be less crowding on each plane. This should go hand in hand with the lifting of restrictions on cross border road and train trips.

At the same time, it is important to keep repeating the recommendation for people to think twice before travelling. Many will follow such advice, I am sure.

Three challenges

Besides the public health challenge and the balanced approach to the opening of economic life, the third big issue we are confronted with is about democracy and freedom. Our governments are imposing too many limitations and controls on matters that have to do with our liberties and personal choices. We can accept such decisions for a while and with full justification. But they must be temporary. No way we can have a state of exception for extended periods of time. Pandemics are not treated with limitations of liberties and the deployment of police forces. That was the practise in the middle ages. They are treated with masks, disinfection, hygiene, distancing, and medical surveillance and advice. We must understand that governments love to control people. It is in their genes, even in our multiparty societies. And if they can, they will keep some form of control for an awfully long time. That could be the beginning of a regime change that we certainly do not want. In the end, we do not want to copy the Chinese government when it comes to human rights issues.

Notes about China and Europe

In the last few days, I have re-tweeted some articles on China, must of them without a personal note about their content. Just sharing. I did it because I think we need to have, in this part of the world where I live, a serious debate about the future of our relations with China.

Looking ahead, my starting points are two. First, the growing hostility between the US and China is dangerous for both countries and for the rest of us. I have written about that and I will keep repeating it. I see such antagonism spreading in the US, both among Republicans and Democrats. And it has now reached some other circles in the West, from Australia to Europe. The second point is that the European Union must engage positively with China, meaning, in a balanced and frank way, defining clearly what we expect from this relationship and what are the limits we cannot cross. The Chinese would be expected to do the same. Such dialogue would be based on the understanding that both sides would gain from a close and fair relationship.

I do not want to spend time commenting on the internal politics of China. However, I should be clear about such an important matter. My approach is that there are values we all must follow. The list would include freedom of speech, human rights, and acceptance of political diversity. A leading country must be a sharp example of full respect for such values. In our dialogue with China, as well as in our policy discussions with the US, Russia, and others that play paramount roles in the world, we cannot ignore such values. The younger generations expect us to act based on fundamental principles, that are common to all peoples.

Having said that, I do recognise the great achievements the Chinese can legitimately claim and the potential they have for further innovation and the betterment of their society. I also know some of the contributions they made to the growth of other nations. All that is incredibly positive. I am also aware of China’s increased contributions to peace, security, and development in various parts of the world.

There is -- and there will be in the times ahead of us -- a good number of Western politicians that will try to gain popular support by systematically attacking the Beijing leadership. Please do not count me in that group.

China prefers Donald Trump

It is now clear that the Chinese leadership would prefer Donald Trump. The messages we are getting from Beijing are that they believe that Joe Biden would be tougher on China than Trump. They now know the current President relatively well and they think that if there is an agreement on trade everything else will be manageable. They see Donald Trump as a transactional leader. He is aware of the Chinese geopolitical ambitions and must refer to them in his public speeches. But he can be satisfied with a trade agreement if he thinks the agreement is good for his electoral basis. And it is true he has a good personal rapport with President Xi Jinping. On the other side, the Chinese leadership see Biden as more ideological. He will be raising issues that are particularly unpleasant to the ears of the Chinese Communist bosses. Issues such as human rights, the special status and freedom in Hong Kong, the re-education camps in Xinjiang Province, the relations with Taiwan, and so on. These are extremely sensitive matters for Beijing. Trade is a small business when compared with any of these challenges. Therefore, they will try to do anything they can to make sure that Donald Trump gets re-elected.

A dictator called Viktor Orban

The emergency powers approved yesterday by the Hungarian Parliament are outside the democratic framework that guides the European politics and governance. They allow the Prime Minister, Viktor Orban, to rule by decree as he pleases and for as long as he wants to. He will have the authority to imprison any opponent for years, including journalists, bloggers, human rights activists and whoever he sees as a threat to his leadership. This move must be clearly denounced by the European leaders. It cannot just be mentioned in vague terms, as Ursula von der Leyen did today. It must be spelled out with all letters and with the Prime Minister’s name attached to it. The EU has no place for people like Mr. Orban.

Health and freedom: the key aspirations

Plenty of thoughts about the geopolitical picture after the coronavirus pandemic crisis. Plenty of intellectuals frantically writing about this matter. I just tell them, at this stage, that after the health issues, the priority remains focused on safeguarding the different freedoms we so intensely cherish. Today’s world is an open space. People all over want to be free. Healthy and free.

Today's reminder

There is only one meaningful struggle: the persistent search for the ideal.

Hong Kong: the politics of escalation

The Hong Kong political crisis calls for a deep analysis. It raises many questions. What is happening in the city for several months now is unique and a major challenge to President Xi Jinping’s authority. The population in Mainland China is not properly informed about the events. But I am told that the younger professionals in key Chinese cities are particularly interested in what is taking place in Hong Kong. To get a better picture, they are looking for alternative sources of information. And they are able to get to them, notwithstanding the extreme control the authorities try to impose on access to information. A new narrative, different from the official one, is now circulating among the younger segments of society, those with higher levels of education. It is yet too early to assess how significant that can be. But what it is clear is that in Mainland China some people are now getting a strong message coming from the demonstrations in Hong Kong. That is, there are Chinese people that do not want to live under the dictatorship imposed by the Communist leaders. They are ready to fight for their freedom. The only dimension that is tarnishing the message is the violence that is also taking place. And the Communist leaders know that they can take advantage of such violence. But playing with violence is not a good political bet.

9 November is a European date

Besides the German leaders, the Presidents of Slovakia, Poland, the Czech Republic and Hungary participated in the ceremony in Berlin, marking the 30^th anniversary of the fall of the Wall. I am very pleased they did. The date is an important one for freedom and democracy in their part of Europe. But it is also a key one for the rest of us, in the EU. It is about freedom, the end of a totalitarian approach to governance, the realisation that the communist utopia, as promoted by the Soviets and their allies, was nothing else but a tragic instrument to keep power in the hands of minority political extremists. It is above all a key date for Europe and its modern history. As such, it is most surprising not to see at today’s ceremony some politicians such as Emmanuel Macron, Charles Michel, the incoming EU Council President, and many others from the Western side of Europe. I think they made a mistake.

Hong Kong people send strong messages

A huge crowd rallied today in Hong Kong. Its size has sent a strong message to Mainland China. The pro-democracy movement is deeply rooted in the Hong Kong society. It can’t be addressed with militarised police coming from the other side of the border line. And there is a second message, as pressing as the first one: Carrie Lam, the Chief Minister, and her governing team must be replaced. They have no capacity to respond to the complex challenges the territory is facing, from democracy to housing, and beyond. Also, they have lost the confidence of large segments of the population.

Hong Kong and Xi's response

Today, the Hong Kong crisis led to the cancellation of all flights to and from its international airport. That is a major development. It shows clearly that Hong Kong is now a critical challenge for President Xi Jinping in Beijing.

Knowing the all-out importance the Chinese leadership give to law and order, as well as to obeisance to the rulings of the Communist Party, one can only expect a crushing reaction to the mass demonstrations and, in particular, to the young leaders that have been at the core of the movement. Xi and his circle cannot be perceived by the citizens of other Chinese cities as being confused, unable to respond and condoning mass protests. Their power is based as much on keeping the grip on people as it is on economic well-being.

In view of this political culture of power, the response they are preparing must be extraordinarily worrisome.

Supporting the women fighting discrimination and racism

Today, it is imperative to share a word of support for the US Congresswomen, Democratic Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts.

This is not about interfering with the internal politics of their country. It is about supporting women that fight for the right to represent their constituencies, for equality and the values that are the foundation of the free and just world that we believe in. It is also about their dignity and a serious expression of our appreciation for their courage.

At the same time, we say no to racism and ethnically based violence. 

They are under very serious pressure, coming from one of the most powerful men in the world. But, in the end, in America and many other countries, right will prevail over might.

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.

Hong Kong and the fire wall

The people of Hong Kong are very brave. In addition, they might be giving some sleepless nights to President Xi and the leadership circle in Beijing. Xi Jinping and his inner group are probably asking themselves if this type of mass movement could one day happen in any of the big cities of Mainland China.

We might think that is a very remote possibility. That mass demonstrations will not occur in the Mainland. That the Communist leaders will keep strengthening the police and security controls, as they have been doing. They will also black out all the information regarding the protests in Hong Kong, as they did today and in the last few days.

But one never knows. There are many giant cities in China and lots of people are now travelling abroad and seeing other realities. Including many young Chinese professionals, who have studied abroad or are still studying in Japan, Thailand, Australia, Europe, Canada and the US.

Beijing might say all this unrest is caused by foreign powers. But they know that is not the case. I trust the leaders do not believe in their own discredited propaganda. They are very much aware that things are changing rapidly all over the world and that no fire wall can keep the human aspiration for freedom on just one side of the barrier. Sooner or later, they are afraid, the opening of the wall will happen.

Undemocratic leadership

It’s a grave mistake to refer to autocrats as “illiberal leaders”. They are undemocratic political monsters that managed to get to positions of power because they manipulated their country’s public opinion and were able to ride on the most primary sentiments one can find in some nations that are experiencing deep crisis. The media and the academic circles must call those leaders what they are: demagogues, totalitarian, despot, or just dangerous populists.

Mario Soares: a great European

Today, at the age of 92, Mario Soares, the former President and also Prime Minister of Portugal, passed away. He had been a symbol of freedom and democratic values during his days in politics. Furthermore, he was a firm believer in the unity of the European nations. Soares was convinced that Europe can only move into the future if it remains in peace with itself, mutually supportive and united. He was also an excellent example of leadership: unusual, not afraid of speaking his mind, and always connected with the feelings of the majority of the citizens. It is time to honour his memory and exalt his example.