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.

No to public disorder

The French National Assembly is debating a new law drafted to address the issue of violence during public demonstrations. It’s known as the “anti-casseurs law”. “Casseur” is the name given to anyone who breaks or wrecks things. The new piece of legislation aims at preventing the destruction of public and private property by hooligans and other ruffians, people that take advantage of legitimate manifestations to create hell.

In France, a number of politicians and intellectuals see this new law as restricting the freedom to demonstrate. But the fact of the matter is that fringe groups are systematically taking advantage of genuine street protesters to behave destructively. That cannot be accepted. Law and order in public places must be kept. If not, we are creating the conditions for extreme-right movements to ride on chaos and gain political space. The democratic values, in France and elsewhere in our part of the world, require a firm hand when dealing with violence and looting. Anarchy, if untamed, leads to dictatorship.

There is fog in the land

I accept the accusation made by the British government against the Russian leadership. Those leaders are most likely behind the chemical attack against the Skiprals, father and daughter. But there is a fundamental question that has not be attended to. What is the reason for the attempted murder? And I could add two more interrogations. Why now? Was the father still active in matters of intelligence?

If these questions get no answer - and probably they will remain unanswered – then we will be just trading in fog and obscurity.

On cyber as a weapon

Cyber attacks, when organised by an adversary State, must be taken very seriously and considered as a new type of armed aggression. Particularly when matters on national sovereignty and critical institutions are the target. To be soft on that will open the door for more daring and more damaging hostility. Better be clear and firm. The challenging State must be undoubtedly made aware of the consequences such attacks might bring on its own national interests and on its leadership. 

President Obama´s Ebola call is vital

The decision taken by President Obama regarding the deployment of about 3,000 military personnel to Liberia to help the country to fight Ebola is a game changer. It has placed the epidemic in its true context as a grave menace to the political stability of the country and the neighbouring states, as well as a major human security threat. It is the survival of the entire region that is at stake, its peace and unity.

Ebola, as I have said in these pages in the recent past and also in my Portuguese language columns, is much more than a public health challenge. It has, of course, health dimensions that none can ignore. It is destroying very fragile national health systems, as it is already the case in Liberia. But it is above all a national and regional security threat for West Africa.

The countries concerned need all the help they can get.

Unfortunately, very few countries outside the region are taking the issue with the attention it requires. Maybe that will change a bit now that the US President has given Ebola the prominence it requires.

Security obsessions

The US say, through the National Security Agency (NSA) that President Obama was not aware that Angela Merkel’s telephone had been “monitored” by American spies. Nobody would believe it, of course. But this is the right answer to be given, at this stage. It offers everyone a way out.

And tomorrow public opinion will have moved on to other subjects. Merkel and Obama will carry on. They will reaffirm they are allies. Some token gestures will be made. They have little choice but to be seen pulling in the same direction.

And NSA, on its own, will continue its job as well. And, as usual, in a very obsessive way. There might be an enemy behind the hundreds of millions of calls and mails they catch every day.

Forget the reform of the UN Security Council

The reform of the UN Security Council has been on the table for the last 20 years. And there is been no progress. The Permanent 5 (P5) are the ones blocking the change that should take place. They have the veto power and believe that their standing in the world is above every other nation. How can that be? How can France or the UK believe they yield more power than India or Brazil? 

It is now quite obvious that the reform will not happen in the foreseeable future. As an alternative, it is important to reinforce the authority and the legitimacy of other international groupings of nations, such as the African Union, the EU or the Arab League. Their capabilities to deal with matters of peace and security, as well as with economic coordination and development should be seriously enhanced. 

EU defence

An objective estimate of the potential threats to Europe’s security – Europe in the sense of EU – is still missing. Such estimate – which is like an anticipation of the key risks to our collective security – needs to be made by a combination of civilian and military specialists under the direction of a civilian personality. It cannot be done by the soldiers alone. It is also impossible to do it without associating the best minds within the military. And people tend to forget these very elementary principles. 

A new ball game in town

The social media networks have become major tools when it comes to rallying people and bringing them to the streets. Twitter, Facebook, Whats App, blogs, and many others –the list is very vast –, have been used in the Arab Spring revolutions, in Turkey, and now in Brazil, to disseminate political messages and call for demonstrations.  All of them are free, easy to access, and very common among the young and the urban folks. These two categories of people are, by far, the main source of opposition to any government in the world. In addition, social media tools work better with very short messages, very direct and therefore very easy to apprehend and internalize. 

Too big a machinery for tiny gains

National security is a critical function of any state. But it has to be carried out in a reasonable and legal manner, with full respect for the rights and liberties of the citizens. It should not become an obsession, an over-riding set of operations that want to cover everything, collect all kinds of information, employ disproportionate means and spend extravagant amounts of money.  

What we have been told during the last few days shows that in the area of national security it is very easy to go over the limits and be guided by the interests of those who work in the sector rather than by the nation’s interest.

It is also pretty easy to drown in an ocean of useless information, that is collected just to justify the size of the machinery, and lose sight of the targets that really matter. 

On terrorism

Terrorism remains a major threat in some corners of the world. Our duty is to condemn all forms of terrorism anywhere and remember that the fight against terrorism is above all a police task. The role of politicians and intellectuals is to advocate for the police to be given the means to do their job, within the law and with full respect for the rights of the citizens. .

Then, after the police work, it is a matter of effective administration of justice.

My experience, sometimes in difficult conditions, has taught me that those who try to fight it through military means or by ways of political concessions are taking the issue from the wrong end. 

EU Budget: too long a period at a time of uncertainties

I should write about the EU budget 2014-2020, as approved today by the EU Council. And add that even if the total amount matters, what matters more is how money is allocated. How much money goes for the big issues that have a strategic impact over the future of Europe? That’s the key question.

And what are those issues?

First, those related to the economic disparities between different corners of the European space. How can we unite the Continent when some countries and regions are kept far behind in terms of development and the gap keeps increasing?

Second, investments in science and technological research. The future of Europe has to be built on a knowledge economy, not on steel and textiles. Unless, of course, if the textiles are at the sharp end of the creative industries, both in terms of design and advanced materials…

Third, funds and programmes for youth employment promotion, youth education for the jobs of the future, preparing a youth with a European mind-set and a global outlook.  

Fourth, internal security, including cyber-security, and security co-operation with the neighbours of the EU.

Fifth, a common external policy, including an effective development aid agenda and enough resources for humanitarian relief and response.

These are the budget lines we need to look at, as a matter of priority.

Having said that, I am also very concerned about a process that approves financial resources for a long period of time – seven years – when we live in a world that is changing rapidly. It is good to have a long term vision but it is better to have a system that is flexible and can be adjusted to respond to new challenges as they develop. I do not think the EU budgetary process is tailored for that. 

On people and power

The world's political environment has changed rapidly since the beginning of this century. This is in many ways related to the massive access to information and the widespread usage of low cost, accessible means of communication. The democratisation of information enhanced the citizen's awareness, self-esteem, sense of force, public participation and leverage.  Everybody is connected, has an opinion and is not afraid of voicing it, if necessary. Fast, power seems to be a click away from each individual. It has become accessible. This means, for many, a new approach towards power as people got convinced that politics is an easy job, accessible, and that they could as well as be the prime minister of their own country or the secretary-general of the UN. The symbolism and distance of power have been lost and the street turns out to be the new seat of authority.

The fact of the matter is that political leaders can no longer ignore public opinion. Even to pretend to be listening is no longer enough. If you are in charge, you better be on guard and listen!

This change has also influenced the way international affairs are conducted. Here, as in national politics, we notice the emergence of a different approach with the individual – men and women – at the centre of the global concerns. Let's take as an example the area of security, as this is a field where the concepts of sovereignty and national security, which are vague and distant for each person, have always dominated. As we moved deeper into the new century, the emphasis on human security, which is about protecting each one of us from all kinds of threats, gained ground and became an important component of the international debate.

In different words, the individual is now the main feature of the new political paradigm, both on the domestic and the international front: the citizen matters more than ever. Policy is defined taking each one of us in mind. At least, it should be, if one wants to remain in power. 

The first decade of the 21st century ended up by being deeply traumatised by the 9/11 events resulting in key western countries becoming heavily engaged in military campaigns in faraway lands, such as Iraq and Afghanistan. In my opinion, these are the last large scale interventions of the West, the final manifestations of a world that is no longer sustainable and acceptable, as sovereign debt, defence cuts and new international power relations make it clear. 

The 2000s was also a period when the different regions of the world gained greater political awareness of their own characteristics and sought to take charge of their own agenda. The launching of NEPAD, in 2001, is an illustration of such trend: Africa decided to change the way it related with the outside world. From then on, the objective became to take care of its own problems and be able to set its specific path towards the future. 

This is also a time of power shifts leading to the consolidation of new centres of influence. The old world’s authority is being challenged by the emerging powers.

As the French philosopher Michel Foucault used to say, power is not a fixed commodity, but a dynamic relationship that constantly changes. It is changing fast today.

Europe and Russia

Yesterday’s discussion on European defence at the Madariaga Foundation left out the issue of Russia. Nobody mentioned Russia, either during the presentations or the discussions. 

I found it difficult to understand, particularly when we see the positions President Putin takes towards the West.  I know there is a NATO partnership with Moscow. But I also suspect that the partnership is not going well at all and that the trend is to face an Eastern neighbour that sees itself more as a competitor than a partner. 

A reference report on Cyber Security

The Commons Defence Committee of the UK's Parliament just released its report on Defence and Cyber-Security. It is a document that should be read carefully. 

In the report it is said the cyber threat to UK security could evolve at "almost unimaginable speed". The Committee questions whether the Government has the capacity to deal with it.

It is available at the following sites:

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmdfence/106/106.pdf

http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/cm201213/cmselect/cmdfence/106/106vw.pdf