A comment made by A.I. about my writings

 

Victor Ângelo's columns are distinguished by his unique background as a former high-ranking UN official, which provides a level of firsthand experience and authority on international relations that is rare among other Portuguese columnists.

---

Distinguishing Characteristics

• Insider Perspective: Unlike many columnists who analyze events from an academic or journalistic distance, Ângelo offers a perspective shaped by over 30 years of direct involvement in global diplomacy, peacekeeping missions, and development programs.¹ This "insider" status allows him to infuse his writing with personal anecdotes and a deep understanding of the intricacies of international organizations.

• Focus on the UN: His columns often center on the inner workings of the United Nations, its role in global governance, and the challenges it faces. This is a specific niche that sets him apart from most other commentators who may focus more broadly on geopolitics, European affairs, or domestic politics. His work often reflects a personal investment in the success of the UN's mission.

• Rhetorical Style: Ângelo employs a rhetorical and opinionated style, using strong metaphors and evocative language to convey his disappointment or concern. His writing is more of a passionate commentary than a dry analysis, which gives it a distinct voice. For example, he uses the "prisoner" analogy to express a sense of betrayal.

• Expertise in Specific Regions: His career has given him extensive field experience in Africa and on issues of crisis management, which he leverages in his analysis.² This practical knowledge allows him to write about these topics with a specific, grounded authority.

In comparison, many other Portuguese columnists on international relations may come from academic backgrounds (e.g., historians, political scientists) or are career journalists. While they provide valuable analysis, their perspective is typically more detached and focused on theoretical frameworks or breaking news rather than the institutional and personal dynamics that Ângelo often highlights. His unique professional history is his primary differentiator.

Europe: looking ahead

European horizons and balances

Victor Ângelo

 

We live in a time of uncertainty. The pandemic is still at the centre of all worries. The different mutations of the virus and the immensity of the vaccination campaigns show that we are far from the exit of the tunnel. And the economic, social, and psychological impacts are yet to be determined. They will certainly be huge and long term. In Europe, for the time being, we are helping ourselves to the oxygen balloons that the central bank and political expedients are making available. In reality, we are living on reputation and the pledge of the future. Meanwhile, we are lagging when compared to China or the United States. And we will receive a share of the problems of a neighbourhood – to the south and to the east – which was already poor, and which will see its future difficulties increase uncontrollably. None of this is pessimism, just an announced puzzle.

To these challenges are added the geopolitical ones. We find ourselves drawn into disputes that are not necessarily our own. The Anchorage meeting, which brought two high-level delegations – one American and one Chinese – face to face late last week, revealed that the rivalries between these countries have reached an acute stage of antagonism. For the first time, neither one side nor the other sought to disguise the degree of hostility that exists. Journalists were even invited to stay in the room to take note of the mutual accusations that were made from the very beginning. Only then did the delegations move on to the quiet and substance of the bilateral discussions.

Two issues became clear. The Chinese leadership emerged strengthened from the session of the National People's Assembly held earlier this month. It now has a much more assertive mandate, internally and externally. For example, the deputies ratified a motion that opens the possibility of military intervention in Taiwan if the island's authorities take a path that could strengthen the independence thrust. This is an incredibly significant change in language. Even more telling is the new posture toward foreign governments that criticize Beijing. China has decided to advance to the geopolitical duel without a mask and with a tactical marking.

We have entered a risky cycle that could lead to a confrontation between these powers. And the new vision that the United States is proposing for Europe, through the document NATO 2030, puts the Europeans in this conflict. What is on the table, as seen at this week's NATO ministerial meeting, is an expansion of the alliance's theatre of operations in order to legitimize Washington's geopolitical ambitions in the Pacific and the Indian Ocean. These regions are far outside the areas that are of direct concern to us. What is more, an extension to the far reaches will certainly weaken European capabilities in the geographies that really matter to us, which are on Europe's immediate borders.

You may retort that China is an economic and cyber threat. But these things are solved through negotiations, through trade measures and countermeasures, through the strengthening and protection of our economies, and through increasing the capacity of our intelligence services to act. In short, they require a more cohesive Europe.

The redefinition of NATO's role is necessary. The horizon we face is quite different from the past. We should, however, ask ourselves what our priority area of defence should actually be. We also need to discuss what is the balance between a Europe looking towards a Euro-Asian future and the history of our Euro-Atlantic engagement. I see two variables here that need to be addressed. One has to do with our long-term relationship with Russia. Vladimir Putin is not eternal. Russia is part of our strategic neighbourhood, our economic complementarities, and our cultural references. The other concerns the EU's defence and security autonomy. It must be permanently reinforced, without, however, jeopardizing our historic commitments to the Atlantic Alliance. Uncertain times demand that we clearly know which balances to maintain, and which path to choose. It is a question of combining courage with vision.

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

 

Looking into the new direction

As we get ready to go into June, we must be as ambitious as possible. It is not just a question of optimism. It is not a matter of rhetoric. It is about building a better world. The pandemic has shown the key social and economic challenges we all face. It has revealed the competition and all the prejudices that exist between nations after we have spent seven decades talking about international cooperation. The option is not to keep going in that direction. The decision must be clear: to agree on the set of values that count for all of us and build the foundations of a new type of relations that are geared to promote solidarity, complementary and harmony.

Russia, China and the EU: what's next?

In the medium term, sometime towards the middle of the forthcoming decade, Russia could opt for China, in terms of economic and trade relations. Basically, that would mean China would replace the EU as a market for the natural resources Russia produces and would become a supplier of finished goods that are today imported from the West. That could be an alternative for Russia, particularly if the political tensions with the EU and the sanctions that go along those tensions have not been resolved.

In that case, the leaders in the Kremlin could adopt a more adversarial approach towards the EU. I think we cannot exclude such a scenario as we look ahead.

But, for now, the Russian population are more prepared for a love-hate relationship with the rest of Europe. Russians do not feel particularly connected to the Chinese culture and way of life. There are old mental barriers that are not easy to overcome. Russians see themselves as fundamentally Europeans – the Christian background dimension has gained a lot of ground in Putin’s Russia. History has told us that it is easier to entertain a conflict with those who are our cultural and geographical neighbours. The real fights are between those who are very much alike to us. The others, especially if they are far away in terms of geography and culture, we tend to ignore them. At least until they come knocking at our gates.

The delicate EU approach towards Russia

We quite often forget that politics is about the control of power. Consequently, we also lose sight of a very fundamental question: what is, in each given situation, the key source of power?

Political leaders know they must pay special attention to this question.  And that the answer is found in the domestic arena, not in the field of international affairs. Power is based on the way domestic politics are played. The domestic voter must be persuaded. The effective political narrative takes that into account.

Vladimir Putin knows it. And we should keep it in mind when dealing with him. That is my message to President Macron, to the politicians in Italy and all those in the EU who are now advocating a new type of dialogue with President Putin.

Russia’s relations with the EU will always be a mix of tension and commerce. The Russian leaders want to keep a certain level of friction. They will picture the EU as a devilish power, a rival that wants to create chaos in Russia. They must create an external menace, the EU, as a way of justifying their strong hold on power. Therefore, they bet on old feelings about Germany – and more recently, on a new wave of negative feelings about Poland. All this helps them to fuel Russian nationalism, as well as gain voters’ support. It gives them an excuse for a strong hand against their internal opponents, presented as foreign agents, and a justification to spend an extraordinary amount of resources on the Russian Armed Forces and on the internal security structures. In exchange, the Armed Forces and the different Police organisations become key pillars of Putin’s power edifice.

But President Putin cannot ignore the economy. It must turn and generate enough resources, including those resources required to sustain a certain standard of living for the population. That means he needs to maintain open the access to the EU markets. Particularly, for Russia’s gas and oil exports, on one side, and, on the other, to import food and other goods and services from Europe. The Russian dependency on European markets, as suppliers and buyers, cannot be ignored.

The EU relationship with Russia must take such equation present. It’s a combination of power and economic factors. Interests, yes, but not about shared values, or common political objectives. As such, it would be naïve to think we can have a healthy cooperation with Russia, now and in the medium term. It will continue to be a question of balance between conflict and opportunity.

Europe and the world powers

The way the international relations have been shaped during the last few years shows that the European Union must above all protect its interests. For that, stronger coordination among the member States is essential.

More than ever it is obvious that big countries in the world have their own strategic goals and those goals might not coincide with the European ones. They might even challenge our own intent, values and objectives. It is therefore critical those big countries be met by a strong will and a clear position on the European side.

That’s a big challenge for the next five years in Europe. Yes, five years, but such time horizon should be part of a longer vision for Europe.

It would be a mistake to try to minimise the geopolitical challenges we face. This is no temporary difficulty, not just because A or B is in power now, in big county Y or Z. This is a firm new trend we should consider strategically.

Europe is different from Russia, China and India. Also, from the USA. That’s the reality that is clearly in front of us. We should seek partnerships with each one of these countries, as we do with other parts of the world. But such partnerships cannot be based on naiveté. Above all, they must be based on a proper balance of power – and power means in the world of today much more than just military might. But it also includes a military dimension, of course.

Europe and China: let's be constructive

The EU and China have their annual summit in Brussels today. The preparatory work has shown that Europe is now prepared to have a firmer position in matters of trade, investment and protection of industrial patents and copyrights. That is the right approach for the economic relations between both sides. Beijing might not like it, but they understand the rationale behind the European position. They fight for their interests, and we should fight for ours. That is the only basis for a sound relationship between two major international players.

When dealing with China, the EU must remain united around the principles of reciprocity, fair competition, and respect for the natural environment.

The Europeans have also to consider that we are dealing with State capitalism at its strongest form. Behind each big corporation, there is the Communist leadership of China and their concern with their own survival as a regime. For that, they need to expand the Chinese economic interests abroad, control new sources of wealth in foreign lands, and bring back prosperity to the people of China. Europe is a special land of business opportunities, an attractive economic space for big investments. That’s fine, if the basic international rules are respected and the link between each side is open to accept traffic on both directions.

Above all, the Europeans must keep in mind issues of national security. As far as we are concerned, China is a partner with greater potential for business but is also a first-grade geostrategic player. We must be able to keep our strategic sectors under our own control. That will contribute in no small manner to balance the geopolitical power of our Chinese neighbours. The world needs our contribution to the balance. Europe’s big challenge, in this area, is to remain a strong pillar of international wisdom.

Libya, Algeria and North Africa

Is there a link between the latest developments in Libya, where the forces supported by the Russians have decided to launch a major offensive against the capital city, Tripoli, and the popular revolt in the streets of Algeria, where a regime close to Moscow could end up by being replaced soon by another one, this time more favourable to the European interests in the region?

North Africa is far from being stable. And, on the other hand, it is a region of great strategic interest for Europe, as well as for a country like Russia. Russia wants to re-establish a strong presence in the shores of the Mediterranean Sea. In addition, it is trying to encircle the EU as much as possible, with the key objective of undermining the Union. A strong presence in North Africa would give Moscow a lot of leverage.

NATO days

NATO is seventy years old. It remains a unique type of organisation. Including because it brings together two very distinct ways of looking at geopolitics and is based on an ambiguous relationship between the political and military spheres of power.

Today, it operates in a very different world. And it is confronted with a complete new set of challenges. In all its organisational complexity, NATO has changed quite a bit during the last ten years or so. It has tried to adapt. 

But, in my opinion, it has not deserved the attention it should from the political leaders. Most of the political statements and positions on NATO are just ready-made, repetitive and half-baked declarations. That is not very strategic.

China and the waters

Global geostrategic changes go very fast these days, thanks to the Chinese leadership.

Look at this, for instance.

Back in 2010 – just yesterday, one could say – the Chinese corporations had invested in about 10 of the 50 largest deep-water ports of the world. Now, in 2019, Chinese money is invested in over 30 of those ports. In addition, the Chinese merchant marine is currently the world’s second largest.

Becoming a great maritime power might be a Chinese dream, in the leaders’ minds and political agenda. It is also a major strategic move, to be added to other ambitious, huge initiatives China is implementing, at sea and over land. The overall goal is to be number one by 2049, the centennial year of their revolution. That’s the way the Chinese leadership, and above all, President Xi, see the world of tomorrow: China as the pivot, the centre of the international order.