Looking at Afghanistan's future with great sadness

Afghanistan: So many sacrifices, for what?

Victor Ângelo

 

Coming in like a lion, and then, exiting like a baboon. Perhaps this popular expression does not fully apply to the withdrawal of the American troops and their NATO allies from Afghanistan. It is, no doubt, an inglorious exit after almost twenty years of enormous human and financial efforts. The way in which they abandoned their main military base in Bagram, about an hour north of Kabul - in the dead of night, leaving behind an indefensible and unmanageable situation, namely a prison with more than five thousand prisoners linked to terrorism - has a dramatic symbolic value. It signifies impasse, retreat, and abandonment of the Afghan government and people to their fate. In a word, defeat. With Taliban fanatics gaining ground across the country, the withdrawal will allow them to reach Kabul before the rigours of winter. This is the ideal time of year for military campaigns in Afghanistan and the way is open for the assault on power.

There are many possible reflections on all this. At this moment it is especially important to understand the reasons for the American pull-out. Afghanistan has lost the strategic interest it held for years, when the fight against Islamist terrorism was considered a priority in Washington. The United States now thinks it is sufficiently protected against such threats. This is where they have a huge difference with their European allies. The Europeans continue to see terrorism as a major danger and view the Taliban offensive with great apprehension. But the Europeans in NATO had no choice but to uncritically align themselves with the American position.

For Washington, Afghanistan has come to be seen as an endless war and as a distraction from the new and now far more important focus: China. And it sees the rivalry between the two superpowers as resolved in the region where Afghanistan is located. This is why it does not want to waste any more time and resources in this geopolitical space where China already has the subordination of the two countries that matter most: Pakistan and Iran. The China-Pakistan economic corridor, which ends at the Pakistani port of Gwadar, on the Arabian Sea, is perhaps the most relevant project of the New Silk Road. In Beijing's eyes, it is guaranteed. On the other hand, Iran signed a long-term economic agreement with China in March 2021. Chinese investments are expected to reach $400 billion in the coming years. It is Iran's passage into China's orbit. In the middle will remain the Afghanistan of chaos and radicalism, but without the capacity to harm Chinese interests in the region. The Taliban are dependent on these two neighbours, especially Pakistan, and should not act against their interests.

But beyond the strategic games, there are the people, victims of a cruel conflict, poor but resilient and dignified. They are deeply concerned, as are many of us here in Europe. First, because a regime based on a primitive vision of life in society has no regard for human rights. It treats all people, starting with women and girls, in an incredibly oppressive and inhuman way. We cannot remain indifferent to the extreme suffering that is looming for millions of Afghan citizens. Second, because potential terrorists in Europe will find in the resurgence of Taliban tyranny a new balloon of oxygen. Third, because radical killers operating in the Sahel and elsewhere in Africa, in countries that are part of our historic alliances, will be able to gain new opportunities for support.

One lesson that will be drawn from all this is that you cannot count on support from Westerners. That support comes and then disappears, in the dark of night, according to convenience, the direction of the political wind and the priorities of those who live far from the problems.

To think that these are some of the outcomes of the long and painful Western intervention in Afghanistan can only leave us desolate. Above all, we are left with a bitter feeling of failure and impotence. Of a Europe that is submissive in foreign and security policy, in a world where it weighs little and counts for less.

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

 

 

A new chapter in the international scene

Biden on the trapeze and the world on the tightrope

Victor Angelo

 

Much of what is decided in the circle of power in Washington has a global impact, whether you like it or not. I apologise for starting this text with this banal observation. But it is a fact that American policy continues to weigh more heavily than any other in international strategic and economic relations. So, with the entry into office of the Biden administration, the international scene has begun a new chapter. It is a profound change of course in a positive and democratic sense. For the time being, it heralds the hope of a calming of the tensions created over the last four years and which have put the dynamics among the world's major players on a potentially explosive level. The dialogue should replace the policy of confrontation and the abuse of force.

But we are living in a time of great questioning. The mobilisation of tens of thousands of paramilitaries to ensure the tranquillity of the ceremony for the new president to take office is a clear indication of the seriousness of the internal contradictions that exist in American society. Joe Biden has a balancing act waiting for him. He knows that the hostility fomented by his predecessor and amplified by several leaders who sit in Congress or by commentators who appear on certain television channels, is fierce. It is even more dangerous because it has generated in the minds of many fanatics a demonisation of their opponents. In the sick logic of some of these crazy people, the next step is violent action, trying to take any opportunity to shoot to kill democracy. This possibility is a risk that the Secret Service will have to consider on a permanent basis. 

In seeking a broader view of what might happen following this turning point, I note that no one can convincingly predict the contours of what lies ahead. It can only be said that the world of tomorrow will be different from what we have known so far. Anyone who thinks that everything will return to where we were in 2019, before the pandemic, or in 2016, before Donald Trump's presidency, can only dream of the past.

The chapter that now opens combines a certain amount of optimism with a long list of uncertainties. On the eve of Biden's inauguration, I took part in an international discussion on the prospects and challenges ahead for the coming years, and there was no clarity of ideas. Anyone who looks to the future with intellectual honesty can identify a number of clues, but in the end, has to confess that everything is uncertain and hazy.

The only points of agreement concern the coronavirus pandemic. First, we all accept that the pandemic is a huge challenge, which conditions everything else. It must therefore be treated as the priority of priorities. This requires an exceptional mobilisation of political attention and all necessary means. The second area of agreement is on the imperative of international cooperation. Countries in the North and South, as we euphemistically put it, must all collaborate to make vaccines accessible to each person. The fight against covid must be a bridge of union and cooperation between peoples, not a line of major fracture. It would be a tragedy of incalculable consequences to emerge from this crisis with a world even more divided between rich and poor, and unfortunately, this possibility exists. Thirdly, there is also agreement on the duration of the crisis. We cannot entertain the illusion that everything will be resolved within months. The logistical issues, the financial difficulties, and the shortcomings in infrastructure, especially in the poorest countries, the changes that the virus is undergoing, not to mention the behaviour of some people, all call for time, diligence, patience, and prudence. These are the messages that must be stressed.

Uncertainty is a source of fear, insecurity, and conflict. It is conducive to the emergence of crazy politicians, who reduce the complexity of facts to two or three sentences, and solutions to a pair of slogans. That is why we must be vigilant and combat all forms of demagogy and political lies, which feed all shades of populism.

 

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

 

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)

 

 

This year's strange General Assembly

The 2020 UN General Assembly has started. Unfortunately, due to the pandemic, the world leaders will not be travelling to New York for the General Debate, scheduled for next week. The debate will be even less participatory than in the past. They will be sending pre-recorded videos with their statements. But the most important dimension of the General Assembly, the side meetings between leaders, will be missing. Personal contact is critical in world affairs. Its absence makes all of us more fragile. It makes cooperation less pressing. At a time when we need augmented cooperation between the nations. These are indeed difficult times.

We must be able to convince

The cooperation between nations has been seriously impacted by the current crisis. Each country decided the best way to battle the pandemic was to close the borders and focus on the its domestic issues. Such an approach can somehow work if the country is wealthy with a modern, extensive, and diversified economy. Australia is a good example. Even Norway, at a much smaller case, can also be mention as an example. But every country, rich or poor, depends on international trade, investments, or development aid. These three areas have lost speed. They will take quite a bit of time to recover. But above all, we must insist that today’s and tomorrow’s world can only address the issues of recovery, peace and security, climate change, and poverty, if countries cooperate and see themselves as part of a community of nations with a common destiny. The United Nations System and all the regional arrangements must regain their credibility. The challenge in this case is to be able to lead the narrative about a better world. It must be a convincing one, based on a constructive and balanced approach. Most of the visions that are being shared are not seen as balanced. They create a lot of fear in the minds and hearts of those who control economic power and the information networks. That is the reason why they do not get to the front pages. It is time to be a bit smarter when talking about the world we all need to put in place.

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.

China, Europe and the others

This is the wrong time to behave like a bully in the international arena. The Chinese Foreign Minister, Wang Yi, seems to know it. He appealed for a better relationship between his country and the US, now that we are at the door of a new Cold War, to paraphrase what he said. The words that call for cooperation instead of competition are the right words. He for sure is aware of that. And I am sure he is also mindful that for the time being the relationship with the US will not improve. Actually, it is possible to forecast deterioration. That is certainly not good. But he and his fellow leaders in Beijing have a chance to show that they mean business. They can establish a better relationship with the European Union. The Europeans are ready for that if it is a more balanced and equal one. Let us see if the Chinese are also willing. That could have an incredibly positive influence on the trade, global affairs, and the image of China in the world. There are negotiations going on between Brussels and Beijing. They should be concluded by September and send the right signal.

The forthcoming confrontation

Tomorrow’s world should be better than yesterday. We should be able to learn a few lessons from the major crisis the world is in at present and organise ourselves in a more reasonable and humane way, as we overcome the pandemic. We should become better at international cooperation, at joint research and more responsive to the environment and poverty challenges. That might not happen, some might even say it is an impossible dream, but we must keep repeating it. The message cannot be silenced. In the meantime, we can expect major changes in international relations. The main fight will be between China and the US. As I see it, and as I fear it, we are getting to a point of no return, meaning, they both must battle the other side to be able to survive as superpowers. They both have the vocation to be competing superpowers, with two vastly different visions of the world politics. As such, they are heading towards an open confrontation. That is an extremely dangerous new development. It must be stopped. And that can only be done if we have a strong European Union, that can bring a new equilibrium to the international scene.

Dreaming ahead

I have been asked that question, but I try not to respond to it. And then, they ask it again, my opinion about which country is likely to gain from the current dreadful crisis, in terms of geopolitics and dominance. They want me to say China, others they expect me to mention the possibility of an open confrontation between China and the US, and some people are ready for an answer that would foretell the end of the European Union. All this is very negative. There will competition after the crisis, as there has been before it, but I think it is too far-fetched to predict war or the demise of the EU.

Competition aside, the crisis underlines the need for a greater level of international cooperation and complementarity among the nations. We live in an extremely interconnected world, as we can see from the expansion of the pandemic to every corner of the planet. Unfortunately, some leaders are not getting the message. They have decided to fight a global threat through erecting national barriers. My hope is that this will be challenged once the crisis is over and that we will be able to make it clear that it is better to cooperate. That is certainly a debate that must take place at that time. We should not go back to the past.

Competition has been the model. We must go beyond that. Call it history. As we look into the future and learn from today’s difficulties and consider the next challenges, including the environmental one, we should be moving towards a new stage, that will put the emphasis on joint action and human cohesion. That could be one of the positive results of the present-day drama. It is idealistic, I accept the observation, but we must base ourselves on new dreams.  

The required leadership is lacking

When the challenge is huge and its evolution unpredictable, the best approach is to concentrate all the efforts on containment. You limit the fire as much as possible. That means reducing the impact of the challenge and look for ways and means of controlling it. It also implies we mobilise everyone that can be called upon. The issue concerns everyone and each person can play a role in addressing it. That must be the message the leaders should bring forward. The collective effort. It’s a phase by phase combat but it is also part of a broader plan to resolve it. That must be said and repeated until every citizen gets to understand what is at play and the direction the leaders are taking.

This time the challenge is unique, profound and global. It requires a good combination of local actions and international cooperation. It concerns all nations. As such, we must put a much stronger emphasis on a concerted response. That emphasis and that type of action are still missing. Those who have the authority to call for that must act now. They have to move beyond their current timidity. Hesitation is not acceptable.

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.

A new ball game

I find the current realities in international affairs a great opportunity to re-think the way the global political architecture should be organised, the existing alliances and their worth, the responses to conflict and civil wars, and the issues of leadership and responsibility. We are witnessing a new play. Its rules are yet to be decided. But first, we should draw some key lessons from what is taking place in front of our eyes.

A new deal in international affairs

It would be unfair to live in the centre of the European Union and have a pessimistic view about the future of mankind. But it would also be unreasonable not to accept that for many, in many parts of the world, daily life is a gigantic challenge, a crushing trial. The point is to find a balance between our prosperity and the dramas many have to go through. In my opinion, the first step towards such balance is the one that recognises that walls and barriers will not keep their problems away from us. What keeps our safety and way of life is a value-based approach towards international cooperation and mutual respect. That should be the message the leaders should take as their key policy line.

Challenging times

I went back to the notes I wrote at the beginning of last year and noticed I had pencilled that 2016 would be a year of political renewal. Well, it has exceeded the expectations, but not in the sense I was expecting.

What can I say about 2017?

What a strange question to be raised in mid-March, when the year is already moving fast.

Still, I think I can write that this is the year that is going to challenge many of the lessons we have learned in the past. That might sound pretty worrying. But it is above all a call for those who believe in principles and international cooperation to show they can respond to the danger and have the intelligence and the courage to bring us back to reason.

When the generals write open letters

Over 120 US flag officers – generals and admirals – wrote an open letter yesterday to remind the key leaders of Congress and the top people in the Trump administration in charge of foreign affairs, defence and security that national security is a complex issue. It calls for a comprehensive approach that goes well beyond the military means and the armed response.

In today´s world, national security and the protection of key strategic interests are above all done through means of healthy diplomatic relations, efficient development cooperation and other external programmes that combat poverty, exclusion, disease and bad governance.

As such, these top commanders urge the Administration and the representatives of the American people to keep the investment of public resources on those programmes that fall under the State Department and have been designed and improved over time in order to more effectively prevent conflict in other parts of the globe.

This is a position that calls for wide support. It is the modern way of looking at international relations and of promoting peace and stability. Its relevance is even greater because it is stated by people that know about matters of war and peace. They understand the limitations of the use of armed forces. They are also people who have seen the world. They know what they are talking about.

The link to the letter is the following: 

http://www.usglc.org/2017/02/27/over-120-retired-generals-admirals-on-state-and-usaid-budget-now-is-not-the-time-to-retreat/

Global leadership

A very simple question for the weekend: now that the new President of the US is manifestly not capable – or not interested, you chose the most appropriate word – of leading the world, who is going to fill the empty space?

Humanity will continue the common quest for peace and prosperity. That´s the way things are today, when there is greater conscience about the issues and a stronger popular determination to move forward. But where can we find the global leadership that such endeavour requires?

You might think of two or three possible names, of course. The question is then: do they have the right level of authority? Do they have the leverage that the leader of the most powerful country in the world used to have?

Let´s think about this. 

Still on corruption: aid transparency

Aid transparency ranking:



Data compiled in the Aid Transparency Index and released by Publish What You Fund in April 2016.

Only 10 donors, responsible for only a quarter of all aid, are hitting the mark in terms of transparency of their funding programmes. We know that transparent aid flows do significantly contribute to increase accountability in recipient countries. And we also have spent the last 25 years listening to excellent lectures on good governance, as delivered by excellent representatives from donor countries and agencies. 

I believe the table speaks for itself. 

A new approach to politics

The positive response many Europeans are giving to the mass influx of would-be refugees might have many ways of being understood. For me, it underlines an emerging widespread aspiration to see human values guiding political decisions. People are telling their leaders that basic principles of humanity matter above everything else when the crisis is too big and the suffering too high.

In many ways politics in our part of the world lost touch with the lives of the poorest and weakest segments of society. We got used to believe that economic growth, combined with a good degree of political expediency and a fair dose of opportunism, would give everyone a chance to make a living. 

In addition, we have accepted globalization on the material fronts but not on matters that might compromise our standards of living. We keep asking every nation to open their borders as we try to keep our own frontiers well protected. And we don´t mind to give some help to those in need as long as that happens far away from our doorsteps.

Now, here in Europe, that way of looking at the world might be about to be challenged. Ideology is getting back into politics. And the ideas that are about to shape our future political views are above all about being more reasonable and more open to others. It´s a new kind of responsive politics.

Development matters

It´s time to bring the international debate back to the development issues. We cannot forget that there are still many men, women and children out there that need drinkable water, basic health, elementary education, real jobs and full respect for their human rights. But we tend to put that reality aside and just focus on two or three current affairs matters. Greece, for instance, has taken so much of our attention. We did not lose sight of the Greeks ´ situation but we lost sight of the misery and despair that make the daily life of more than two billion people in many parts of the world. It is time to be reasonable again and also to regain a sense of the proportions. 

Africa´s security: a collective and national effort

The issues of national and people´s security remain a core problem for several African States. 

Boko Haram is the most visible example of a country´s weak security systems. Nigeria has large military and police forces and services. It has been one the most assiduous participant in UN peacekeeping operations. But when challenged by a domestic group of extremists and fanatics it became obvious that big numbers do not mean effectiveness. 

Nigeria and many other countries will have to reform the armed forces and ensure a better coordination between the military and the police services. The reform includes a greater emphasis on professionalism, discipline, good management of the resources and better links with the citizens.

 Better security is also related to a regional response. The cooperation within the framework of the African Union and the Regional Economic Communities calls for an acceleration of the current efforts and a greater commitment to collective defence.