Brussels is absent

The European Union can only survive in the hearts and minds of its citizens if it is perceived as political project that promotes freedom and prosperity, protects the people and facilitates solidarity among the different nations. If it fails to do so, it will lose the support and will become a very fragile meeting point of contradictory national interests. With the current crisis, these goals are being challenged. That is certainly not a very good foundation for the future. In addition, the new leadership of the institutions gives the impression of lacking the necessary weight and audacity. They certainly are very honest people. But that is immensely insufficient at a time of profound shock and division. I am certainly worried by the current lack of visibility and initiative coming from the institutions.

Stay at home

This is an exceptional time in our modern history. It’s an extremely dramatic moment for some, and a very challenging menace for the humanity. But there is hope. The cooperation in terms of medical research is greater than what people are being told. It’s just a question of time. And we cannot run out of time. That’s why it is very important to isolate, to stay at home, to delay the contagion. People are getting this message. There was a survey today in Francophone Belgium and close to 90% of those who answered to the question said they are coping well with the mandatory stay-at-home rule. I think these results also reflect what is felt elsewhere, in other parts of the world.

COP25 and the people

COP25 has ended. Madrid can return to a more normal life. And the delegates can go home. For many of them, this climate summit would have been a major disappointment. For a few others, the meeting was as vague as they wanted it to be. That is the game of big international politics, to promise the world, and then backtrack, and implement as little as possible. 

Actually, there is a major contradiction between climate action and power politics. Climate requires a long-term view and commitment. Government politics is about the short-term, the eyes on the next election. These two perspectives cannot meet. Political leaders cannot lead the way as far as this issue is concerned, unless they feel the pressure coming from the citizens' movements. The strength of these movements is the only hope we have. In some countries, they matter and then the leaders listen. But in many other nations, the power is too concentrated in the official channels and mechanisms that it leaves little space for the citizens to be able to organise themselves.

The climate emergency needs not only the mobilisation of the citizens but also very clear proposals that can be easily accepted and owned by the people. In many ways, it seems necessary to change the narrative. The citizen knows what is taking place, the effects of climate change. The storms, the heat waves, the wildfires, the disappearing ice cover, all that. What they want to know is what are the concrete measures that must be effectively taken and be assured that those actions will not compromise their job security and the key aspects of their standards of living. They also want to know where the money for implementation will be coming from. 

That’s the story that must be told now. It is not enough to apprise people that the new technologies will generate more jobs. They do not believe it, unless we find the words and the examples that are most convincing.

The climate emergency will not be won if we do not get the people mobilised. That is the real front of this combat at this stage.  

Tomorrow or today?

Tomorrow, tomorrow, tomorrow. A very political word. Also, a tactical concept, a guide for inaction and avoiding hard decisions, moments of truth.

Or, so often, tomorrow should take place today, make it happen. That’s leadership.