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)

 

Looking ahead, through the mist

 Translation of yesterday’s opinion piece I published in Diário de Notícias (Lisbon). 22 Aug. 2020

 

Back to the imponderables

Victor Angelo

 

The great challenge in our societies is to find and support the rise of leaders who are realistic, transformative, and convincing. This challenge is pressing today. With the summer vacation approaching its end, and as we look at the four months left to complete the year we cannot find it strange that many of us are apprehensive. We see a high tide of trouble and a low of international leadership. No current leader can go beyond the limits of his parish and propose an encouraging and credible perspective regarding what lies ahead.

The world scene will continue to be marked by the Covid-19 pandemic and, to a large extent, by American domestic politics. Not to mention other complications in our geopolitical neighbourhood, such as the growing tension between Europe and Turkey, now in the eastern part of the Mediterranean Sea, plus the endless conflicts and difficulties in the Middle East and the Sahel, starting with Mali. A list of concerns that is constantly growing and which now includes Belarus, thanks to the dictator Alexander Lukashenko, a reminiscence of Soviet times and of what the single party culture has produced as political monsters. Not forgetting, of course, the fractures within our European area, which is very fragile as a whole and with several national crises already visible or in the pipeline, as will be the case with Bulgaria and, for other reasons, Italy, where there is a very acute social malaise. The pandemic is a global inferno to which a number of local fires are added. The wisdom will be to understand what all this entails as consequences and to know how to propose a different international order. To think like that seems like a mirage. But this is an exceptional moment that challenges us and demands a different vision of the future.

Regarding the presidential elections in the United States, a friend of mine told me this week that we must be patient and wait for November. He added that he had no doubts about the defeat of Donald Trump and that afterwards everything would return to normal, including in international relations. I do not take Trump's defeat for granted. Democrats should not take victory as a bean count. There are, it is true, little more than seventy days to go before the election and the forecasts are not favourable to the President. But this is a time when imponderables can happen. The more objective and attentive analysts remind us that the country is immersed in a multidimensional crisis. It is not only the chaos in the management of the pandemic, its impact on the economy or the President's widespread and flagrant ineptitude. The Trump-Covid mix is causing a deep social shake-up, structural, with racial dimensions, poverty, and despair. It undermines the system and democracy, with the radicalisation of population sectors, especially those who believe that defeating Trump would mean tightening the siege they think exists against their interests.

Donald Trump does not see himself as a loser. He will try anything and everything to reclaim the lost ground, or, in desperation, throw the chessboard down the river. We face unpredictable times. He and his people need to continue the capture of the federal administration for another four years. Some analysts think this could lead to the president playing very dangerous games for the stability of his country and the world. And they are even more concerned when they see the blind alignment of GOP leaders, who dare do nothing to counter the president.

I am one of those who think those fears are exaggerated. The American institutions are strong enough to stop any temptation from the abyss. And the rest of the world is patient enough not to fall for provocation. Including China. But the truth is the year has been a sea of unimaginable surprises. So, for the months ahead, it's best to think of the unthinkable. That would be the challenge I would launch to a couple of European centres of strategic thinking. In the meantime, we should be careful that we continue, here on this side, to work for the best, without neglecting to prepare so that we can respond to further confusion.

 

 

 

 

 

 

Leaders must direct based on moral values

Translation of today’s opinion piece I published in Diário de Notícias (Lisbon)

This is no time for statues

Victor Angelo

A considerable number of us still see the current situation as something temporary, which scientific research, the announced financial subsidies and time will eventually resolve. I think that is a light view of the pandemic and its consequences. It does not consider the lessons learned from previous crises, which took years to overcome, even though they were not as serious as they are now.

In addition to the economic and social impact, major political fractures may arise. Confusion, uncertainty, and fears are fertile ground from which authoritarian politicians often sprout, painted as megalomaniac messiahs, with ultra-nationalist, populist and bizarrely dangerous ideas. The democratic space is under threat. Miniature copies of Donald Trump and company are beginning to appear. People who, coming from outside the political practice and without the experience of the functioning of institutions, think they have the simple and ready to cook solution that will solve all the evils of today. But, in reality, the shrewdest populists are waiting for the opportunity, which will arise, in their opinion, with the exhaustion of the response capacity of the existing social systems. 

In such a context, we need leaders who are enlightened, courageous, and capable of giving meaning to the transformations that are to come. It happens that people look around them and do not see such leaders. There is no new Nelson Mandela, no new Kofi Annan or a modern version of Jacques Delors. Immediatism and materialism have replaced the struggle for human values. The moral leadership that Pope Francis, the UN Secretary-General, and others could exercise is missing. They have stopped appearing or, when they do, they come late and talk about vague things. No one takes note.

Some people would say that only those who exaggerate are heard. I do not think so. The Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Arden, is a moderate leader whom everyone admires. She is not particularly active on the international scene because she is above all focused on her country's issues. Yet she is often quoted. Greta Thunberg and Malala Yousafzai can be mentioned as other examples of international leadership. These are respected voices that mark the global agenda. The reason, I would say in a simplified way, is because they go straight to the point, without diplomacy, nor personal fears or ambitions. They are perceived as genuine and combative. And with clear ideas. That is what is expected of those who lead.

On the other side of the coin, look at the United Nations. The last ten years have been a disaster for its credibility. The lack of authority at global level worsened after the crisis in Libya in 2011 and it experienced clear moments of deterioration in the following years. The invasion of Crimea in 2014 and the conflict in Ukraine, all done with impunity, the impasse in Syria, with repeated vetoes, the silence and inaction in the face of mass migration in 2015, the election of Donald Trump in 2016, a politician who does not accept the values of international cooperation, the lack of political response to the genocide of the Rohingyas in 2017, the exclusion of the Security Council from issues relating to Palestine, the attacks against UNESCO and WHO, are some of the milestones in the process of marginalization of the UN. Others could be mentioned, in a list that reminds us that the global institutional framework needs to be rethought. I would just add that there is no greater frustration in international life than being at the head of an institution that hardly anyone listens to.

In these things, I like to suggest we follow the example of that holy man, described in a famous sermon preaching to the fish, because people did not want to listen to him. In other words, this is by no means the time to remain silent, without drawing the lessons that the crisis puts before our eyes. A silent leader is just a statue, which these days is a danger, because the statues are being torn down.

A major shock

The current pandemic crisis is a major global disruptor. It will have a complex cluster of impacts in many areas, from the political one up to the behavioural. Some of the consequences might end up by being positive transformations. When I say that I have in mind an increase in the work from home, which saves time and keeps fewer people in crowded and long commutes. I also think of greater investments in preventive health and more equal access to basic health services. On the other hand, it will have dramatic consequences on jobs, on poverty and despair, and on the performance of major economic sectors, including the banking one. The longer this crisis lasts the more complicated the recovery will be. And we have a prolonged period in front of us. This should mean that we must do whatever we can to prevent the transmission of disease.  

The road ahead

This moment in our lives calls for prudence, tolerance, and generosity. These are the values that will take us through the deep crisis we are in. They should be mentioned in every major political statement. Leaders must be brave, truthful and be able to put across such messages. They should also be seen as caring and knowing where we are heading.

Plenty of false prophets around us

Philosophers, sociologists, and other social scientists are exchanging lots of views about the political and societal impact of the coronavirus. And many people just repeat those comments without a thoughtful analysis of what is said. Even serious newspapers do it.

My impression is that many of those intellectuals have a preconceived idea, an ideological business line they try to peddle at all costs. As such, they want us to see in the crisis the confirmation of their pet theories. A kind of "I warned you". It is a biased reading of the situation at a time when we need objectivity and serenity.

This is no time for propagandists. There should be no room for any type of false prophets.

Our objective should be to base ourselves on accepted values ​​and to propose paths which would allow reinforcing these values. Therefore, we must be clear about the values ​​that we share, and which are part of the world’s common treasure, at the international level.

We must include, not exclude. We must understand and look for better ways of living together and sustaining life on this planet. Intellectuals that transform every sentence on bump fire should get no visibility at this stage. Or be thoroughly criticised and rationally challenged.

Difficult to keep countries together

It is time to define the priority sectors that would require reform, innovation, and fresh resources. That is what some European governments are doing. Unfortunately, not all of them have engaged in such a planning exercise. They will remain further behind in terms of access to the new funding facility the European Commission is putting in place. That means more economic divergence in a project that was put together to bring equal prosperity to every member State. Development gaps, as they wide, they create the roots for dissension and destruction.   

The most important question of the day

What kind of post-covid world is it in the making? That is the key question that should be in many minds. That is the debate that needs to take place. With realism and balance, with tolerance but accepting all types of opinions. The answer is obviously a complex one. And certainly not a positive one unless we can convince the leaders to change course. I doubt. The crisis is too big and most of them just want to throw money at it to minimise its effects. That is not change, that is not innovation. It is just the continuation of the recent trends, with all their shortcomings.