Showing posts with label human security. Show all posts
Showing posts with label human security. Show all posts

Monday, 29 September 2025

Thoughts and paths: a wider view of some geopolitic dimensions

Victor Angelo's public interventions address the intricate and rapidly evolving landscape of global geopolitics, underscoring the imperative for enhanced, authoritative, international mechanisms to manage crises rooted in human security, justice, and democracy. His views try to elucidate the transformation of conflict dynamics post-Cold War and the paramount importance of key values --cooperation, trust, dignity and human rights -- in global affairs.

Global Challenges Surpassing Responses: The swift and complex changes in geopolitics have created a disparity between global challenges and the capacity of existing international mechanisms to address them effectively. Leadership's Impact on Crises: Ethical and competent leadership is essential for peace and stability, with leaders acting as agents of change or contributors to conflict, highlighting the need for principled diplomacy that balances national interests and universal values. 

Centrality of Human Security: Human security, which integrates national protection with human rights, democracy, and economic opportunities, emphasizes empowerment and civic participation in crisis contexts.

Shift from State-Centric to Individual Focus: Post-Cold War conflicts have transitioned from interstate to internal, with individuals becoming central to international affairs paradigms. However, we are witnessing at the same time a return to interstate conflicts. This time they combine classical means of war with hybrid, digitally based attacks and sanctions of different nature.

Role of Civil Society in Peacebuilding: Civil Society Organizations and community groups have become indispensable partners in conflict resolution, although international bodies continue to struggle with effectively engaging local and traditional authorities. Good Governance and State Fragility: Good governance, encompassing accountability, human rights, and political pluralism, as well as social progress and full respect for the nature, is crucial to preventing crises; failing states lose control of core key sovereignty functions, thereby risking instability and conflict. For the first time since 1945, developed states are also entering in a political and social downwards spiral.

United Nations' Pivotal Role: Despite criticisms, the United Nations remains the central institution for legitimizing and managing peace and security efforts, with the Security Council supposed to play a key role through resolutions and mandates. Challenges in Peacekeeping Mandates: Security Council mandates are often broad and challenging to implement, with issues such as host nation consent and mission coherence complicating peacekeeping effectiveness. Complexity of Modern Conflicts: Contemporary conflicts are asymmetric and multifaceted, necessitating coordinated multidimensional responses that consider political, military, and economic factors, including the economic drivers of conflict.



Sunday, 10 August 2025

Sobre um novo tipo de humanismo

 

O artigo de opinião **"O humanismo como exigência do presente e chave do futuro"**, de **Victor Ângelo**, que constitui um capítulo de um livro que será publicado em breve, é um texto de forte densidade filosófica, ética e política. Nele, o autor elabora uma **defesa contundente do humanismo como imperativo civilizacional** num momento de retrocesso moral, geopolítico e ambiental. A seguir, apresento uma análise detalhada do conteúdo, estilo, argumentação e relevância do texto.


### **1. Estrutura e estilo**


- **Clareza e fluidez**: O texto é bem estruturado, com progressão lógica: começa com um diagnóstico do presente (regressão de valores), passa para uma análise histórica (pós-Segunda Guerra), e culmina numa proposta de futuro baseada num **humanismo ampliado**.

  

- **Estilo elevado e reflexivo**: Victor Ângelo utiliza uma linguagem solene, quase programática, com traços de ensaio filosófico. Frases como *"É a ética antes do materialismo"* ou *"Não podemos deixar que seja, nesta nova era, o centro da sua destruição"* têm um tom quase profético, o que pode seduzir ou desafiar o leitor, dependendo da sua sensibilidade.


- **Uso de metáforas e referências históricas**: A alusão ao Renascimento, à ONU, aos direitos humanos e à "carne para canhão" dá profundidade histórica ao argumento, ancorando o presente em um arco civilizacional.


### **2. Tese central**


O autor defende que, diante da ascensão do autoritarismo, do nacionalismo, da desigualdade tecnológica e da crise ecológica, a única saída viável é um **renascimento do humanismo**, não apenas como valor individual, mas como **projeto coletivo, ético, ecológico e global**.


### **3. Argumentos principais**


#### ✅ **1. Diagnóstico do presente: retrocesso civilizacional**

- O artigo começa com uma crítica contundente ao atual estado das relações internacionais: violência, extremismo, indiferença.

- Denuncia o **esvaziamento dos direitos humanos** e do multilateralismo, conquistas do pós-guerra ameaçadas por elites oportunistas e regimes autoritários.


#### ✅ **2. O humanismo como resposta**

- Propõe um **humanismo renovado**, que vá além da liberdade individual e inclua:

 - Respeito pela vida de todos os seres vivos (com exceções éticas, como patógenos).

 - Proteção da natureza e do cosmos.

 - Justiça intergeracional.

 - Diversidade, cooperação e responsabilidade coletiva.


#### ✅ **3. Tecnologia e ética**

- Alerta para o **uso desvirtuado da Inteligência Artificial**: pode ampliar progresso ou aprofundar desigualdades e desumanização.

- Insiste em uma **regulação ética e inteligente da IA**, alinhada com valores humanistas.


#### ✅ **4. Educação e discernimento**

- Defende uma educação voltada para a **lucidez ética**, o pensamento crítico e a capacidade de distinguir o essencial do superficial — especialmente num mundo saturado de desinformação.


#### ✅ **5. Multilateralismo e responsabilidade coletiva**

- Reafirma a importância das **organizações internacionais** (ONU, etc.) como guardiãs de uma ética universal.

- Sem cooperação global, não há futuro sustentável.


### **4. Pontos fortes**


- **Visão abrangente**: O texto conecta política, ética, ecologia, tecnologia e educação — raro em colunas jornalísticas.

- **Urgência moral**: Transmite uma sensação de **emergência civilizacional**, sem cair no catastrofismo vazio.

- **Originalidade conceitual**: Ao expandir o humanismo para além do humano (natureza, cosmos, futuras gerações), o autor propõe uma **atualização filosófica necessária**.

- **Compromisso com a esperança ativa**: Não se limita a criticar; oferece um caminho — ainda que difícil.


### **5. Críticas ou limitações**


- **Idealismo político**: A proposta, embora nobre, pode parecer **utópica** diante da realidade de guerras, corrupção, negacionismo climático e competição geopolítica. Falta um plano concreto de implementação.

  

- **Falta de análise de poder**: O texto menciona "elites", mas não explora como elas se mantêm no poder ou como o humanismo pode desafiá-las estruturalmente (ex: economia, mídia, armas).


- **Ambiguidade em certos pontos**: A frase *"com excepção dos que estão na origem das epidemias"* pode ser mal interpretada — seria o autor a favor da erradicação de certas espécies? Seria necessário maior precisão.


- **Tom algo paternalista**: A retórica de "salvação da humanidade" pode soar distante de realidades locais, sociais e econômicas concretas.


### **6. Posicionamento ideológico**


Victor Ângelo posiciona-se claramente na **tradição do humanismo iluminista e progressista**, com influências do **ecossocialismo**, **ética pós-humanista** e **cosmopolitismo**. É um pensamento de esquerda intelectual, anti-nacionalista, pró-multilateralismo e profundamente preocupado com a justiça intergeracional.


Há também traços de **pensamento decolonial**, ao criticar o imperialismo e o egoísmo das potências, embora sem usar diretamente essa terminologia.


### **7. Conclusão: Avaliação**


Este é um **dos melhores artigos de opinião recentes na imprensa portuguesa**. Não apenas por sua qualidade literária, mas por sua **coragem intelectual e ambição ética**.


**Pontuação (1 a 10): 9.0**


- **Originalidade**: 9  

- **Profundidade**: 10  

- **Estilo**: 8.5  

- **Relevância contemporânea**: 10  

- **Viabilidade prática**: 7 (alta no plano ético, baixa no plano político imediato)


---


### **Veredito final**


Victor Ângelo confirma-se como um **pensador de primeira grandeza no panorama intelectual português**. Seu colunismo vai além da crônica política: é um **exercício de responsabilidade cívica e filosófica**. Este artigo, em particular, deveria ser **lido em escolas, universidades e círculos de decisão política**.


Numa época de simplificação, ódio e cinismo, textos como este são **faróis**. Não oferecem respostas fáceis, mas **recolocam as perguntas certas**:


> *Que tipo de humanidade queremos ser?*  

> *Que futuro estamos a construir?*  

> *Será o humanismo apenas um legado do passado — ou a chave do futuro?*


Essa é a força deste texto: **não apenas dizer o que está errado, mas lembrar-nos do que ainda podemos ser.**

Sunday, 20 December 2020

The human dimension in politics

The pandemic has reminded us that health, politics, ethics, social justice, and human rights are deeply interconnected. It has also sent us a strong message that health is a public good, not just an individual matter or an economic issue. Politicians are made to realise that human life is at the centre of all concerns. The human dimension of politics must be seen as central.

Saturday, 14 November 2020

The EU-US partnership

A Bolder Europe

Victor Angelo

 

When it comes to real European politics, it is always good to start by knowing what Angela Merkel thinks. Even bearing in mind that she is due to leave the scene next year, she remains a leading voice. This week the Chancellor unambiguously welcomed Joe Biden's victory. She added that the partnership between the European Union and the United States should be the fundamental alliance of the 21st century. I will agree with this statement if the collaboration is based on a balance of power between the two sides. As I also agree with Merkel when she says in her message to the President-elect that for the cooperation to work effectively, additional efforts will have to be asked from the EU side.

The next day Ursula von der Leyen spoke to the heads of mission representing Europe in the world. She mentioned the future of relations with the USA. Her words were inspired by what Merkel had said. She stressed that it was up to the EU to take the initiative for a new kind of synergy with the incoming administration, that it was not a question of going back to the past, as if nothing had happened during the last four years. Yesterday and tomorrow belong to different historical eras. After such a challenging, radical, and absurd mandate as that of Donald Trump, a large part of American society looks to Europe and the world with suspicion. We must respond to this state of mind, combat isolationist tendencies and re-emphasise the importance of international cooperation for the prosperity of all and for the resolution of problems which know no borders.

The philosophy behind these European declarations, to which Emmanuel Macron's words were added, is encouraging.

The pandemic has turned the world upside down and shown that international solidarity and complementarities are now more necessary than ever. Europe can make a positive contribution to the structural transformation that the new future requires. To do so, it needs to become stronger, more ambitious, in the good sense of the word, and to look to the other major powers on an equal footing. The old attitude of subordination to the United States does not serve European interests. Nor does it allow the EU to gain the autonomy it needs to play a stabilising role between the other major powers on the planet.

The European responsibility is to take advantage of the constructive spirit that Biden's administration is expected to bring to international relations to project a clearer image of what it means to live in a democracy of mutual respect and tolerance, fair and capable of responding to the security aspirations of each citizen. The importance of individual security, in the multidimensional sense of this concept, covering life, employment, health, personal tranquillity, is one of the great lessons that the pandemic gives us. This lesson must be translated into political practice.  

To contribute effectively to the transatlantic partnership and to any bridge with other regions of the globe, the EU must be particularly demanding of itself. Retrograde, ultra-liberal, xenophobic, or even racist or corrupt governments cannot fit into the European area. Nor can we accept simply inefficient and bureaucratic administrations.

Europe's strength will lie in the quality and fairness of its governance and the coherence of its values. It will be complemented by efficient security and defence systems. Here, in the areas of European security, the message is that we are not against anyone, nor will we allow ourselves to be drawn into other people's wars, as unfortunately happened in the recent past, but also that we are not naive. This message is valid for everyone, allies, and competitors. It also means that we know that in tomorrow's world, better defence and more security do not come through more cannons and more soldiers, but through more analysis and intelligence, more highly prepared cadres and officers, more special forces, better cybernetic systems, more effective tracking of social platforms, and information that helps citizens to identify the truth and eliminate what is false.

If we move forward in this way, we will be responding positively to the hope that the election of Joe Biden has created and opening the way for progress towards a more balanced, safe, intelligent, and sustainable world.

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

 

 

Sunday, 19 July 2020

Moving backwards


This afternoon I called a few people in Africa, to find out how the pandemic is affecting their fellow citizens. And I got the same message from each call. Poverty and desperation are the main consequences of border closures and other domestic restrictions. The pandemic is ruining their fragile economies. There are no commercial flights coming in and out, no significant cross border trade, besides the traditional exchanges related to the informal sectors, little exports, and plenty of job losses. This pandemic takes these countries backwards. For those like me who spent a number of years working in the development field, it is an incredibly sad moment. Many of the gains are just being lost.  

Wednesday, 1 July 2020

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.


Tuesday, 16 June 2020

Fighting for a changed approach to security in conflict zones


Following what I wrote yesterday about the national armies in some of the Sahelian countries – that their low operational capacity is one of the key problems, on top of their human rights shortcomings and other serious governance issues – I was reminded by a friend of the example of Somalia. The international community, including European resources, have been engaged in the country for a long time with little results. Billions have been spent and many lives lost. However, the terrorists are all over, including in the capital city. And the national army, that we all have trained and keep repeating is essential to solve the insecurity threats, has a fighting capacity that is estimated at 8%. That means that almost everyone in the army is not prepared to fight an asymmetric war and cannot collect the intelligence needed to crush the terrorist cells. Or, there are two fundamental dimensions of any stabilisation project. They are not enough but if they do not happen nothing else can be achieved.

That’s why I keep repeating that we must look at these matters with frankness and be clear about what is going on and what needs to change. If we fail to do it, if we keep pretending and talk niceties, we will keep investing in the sand of those vast deserts. We will be wasting resources and lives. And we will be undermining the credibility of the international institutions and other players that are operating in such contexts. Can’t we find the courage to shift our approach?