Asking a few questions

A very unusual year: where are we heading to?

Victor Angelo

 

The Russian Armed Forces are currently firing thousands of shells a day at Ukraine. My friend Zulmiro, who is, and always has been, a primary communist militant, is not bothered by this volume of daily destruction. For him, every Ukrainian is a Nazi. Although he cannot explain the concept of Nazism in the year 2022, the accusation, imprecise as it is, justifies everything and tidies up the matter. It is impossible to argue with him, despite many decades of friendship. In view of this, and moving to a more general level, I ask how it will be possible to launch a process of negotiations between the Ukrainian leadership and Zulmiro's idols in the Holy of Holies, the Kremlin? That is one of the big questions of the moment. There is talk of diplomacy, but that, what does it mean?

Meanwhile, the Russian gamble continues to be on force, terror, and violation of the international order. Vladimir Putin and his men want the annihilation of the Ukrainian state and the surrender of its leaders. To achieve this, they will continue to machine gun and wipe out Ukraine. Systematically and intensely, with total inhumanity and a great sense of urgency, to weaken the Ukrainians' capacity for resistance and legitimate defence to the utmost before the promised arms arrive from Western countries.

Many do not want to look seriously at the question of self-defence, preferring, on our side, the comfortable ambiguity proper to nations well established in life. On the one hand, we help the victim and, on the other, we try not to harass the aggressor beyond the limits that could jeopardise our peace of mind. We keep repeating that we are not at war with the Putin regime, a half-truth which certainly makes him laugh with irony. He is at war with us, and he knows that the wars of today can be fought with missiles and cannons, as in the case of Ukraine, or with power cuts, cyber sabotage, disinformation, financing of extremist groups, and much more.

Self-defence raises a strategic question: either we ally ourselves with the aggressed, the weaker, or tomorrow it will be our turn. We may be on the verge of the decisive moment: to support with a new kind of intensity or just with minimal costs?

Looking further ahead, I would say that it has been decades since the international situation reached such a dangerous point as now. On top of a pandemic that has paralysed the world, we now have a combination of very serious conflicts and tensions. In Ukraine, Yemen, around Iran, in and around Burkina Faso, Libya, Myanmar, in addition to the never-ending crises in Palestine, Syria, Lebanon, Congo (DRC) and others.

In the most developed countries, people are coming out of the peak of the health crisis with a very acute consumerist fever. The issue of global warming, and the accelerated destruction of nature, has disappeared from the radar of citizens and the speeches of politicians. Even Greta Thunberg, who had mobilised global attention in the period before the pandemic, can not make herself heard.

Then came war, thanks to the imperialist and dictatorial madness of Vladimir Putin. I am sorry to say to the analysts who talk about these things that this is not a geostrategic issue. Putin wants to be the Tsar Peter the Great of our times, when he may end up being seen as the little Hitler of 2022.

Meanwhile, the tension between the US and China has entered a far more dangerous phase. And the impoverishment of the most vulnerable countries, something that has disappeared from the fat print of newspapers, is accelerating. In Sri Lanka, the Sahel countries, Central America, Haiti, and Pakistan, to name but a few. And the economies of the richest nations are increasingly living off the debt of future generations, amidst inflation that shows the mismatches between production, imports, and consumption patterns. Meanwhile, multilateral organisations continue to lose strength and image.

We are at a crossroads of critical uncertainties and serious risks. Where are we heading to? And where are the visionary leaders capable of proposing common-sense paths?

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper. Edition dated 18 June 2022)

 

What next regarding Aghanistan?

We can't sweep Afghanistan under the rug

Victor Angelo

 

Mario Draghi, the Italian Prime Minister and current leader of the G20, is convening an extraordinary summit of the group for October 12, with only one item on the agenda: Afghanistan. This is an urgent meeting that cannot wait for the annual summit, which is scheduled for the last two days of this month. The concerns about Afghanistan are essentially twofold: the humanitarian drama, already much worsened at the moment, but which will become catastrophic with the imminent arrival of winter; and defining the conditions necessary for the international recognition of the Taliban regime.

The European Union has meanwhile approved a humanitarian package of 200 million euros. Other aid is urgently needed, not least because the donor community pledged more than a billion dollars on September 13, in response to an appeal launched by António Guterres. But, as always, promises are one thing, but their materialization is another. In addition to logistical difficulties and insecurity, the humanitarian agencies need guarantees of neutrality from the Taliban. This is the only way to ensure that food aid, medical and health care, and educational support reaches those in need without exclusion on the basis of ethnicity, gender, religion, or power relations.

Still in the humanitarian area, there are three other major issues.

One is the payment of salaries to civil servants and security forces who have not been paid for months. I don't think there is a willingness at the G20 level to finance this. Recently, my former colleague Jan Egeland, a recognized voice in the humanitarian field and who now heads the prestigious Norwegian Refugee Council, wrote an open letter on this subject to the UN Secretary-General. It called for mechanisms to be put in place to find a solution to pay salaries to the Afghan civil service, as was already largely the case under the previous government. The letter was a follow-up to his recent visit to Afghanistan and his shock at the widespread poverty. 

Another issue concerns the electricity supply. Millions in Kabul and the country's largest cities are at risk of being left in the dark. With the onset of winter, this could be yet another cataclysm to add to all the others. Afghanistan imports about 70 percent of the electricity it consumes. Uzbekistan, Turkmenistan, Tajikistan and Iran are the suppliers. With the Taliban victory and the administrative chaos that followed, payments for electricity imports have ceased. If the situation does not change soon, it is very likely that some of these countries, especially those that were part of the former Soviet Union and have no sympathy whatsoever for the extremists in Kabul, will suspend supply. If this happens, popular unrest will take on a new dimension. 

How long Afghanistan will need exceptional humanitarian aid is the third big question. Assistance must have a time horizon. The country needs to build an economy that allows it to import the energy and basic commodities it cannot produce, and to have a reasonable standard of living. The economy should not be based almost exclusively on opium production.

Recognition of the new regime, including its representation in the UN, will depend on the position that each G20 member adopts. Recent events show a tendency to establish occasional contacts, while at the political level there will continue to be talk of values, human rights, national inclusion, or the fight against terrorism. And to show a lot of mistrust towards Taliban governance. As time goes by, if there is no extreme migratory crisis or terrorist attack that affects the Western world, the new Afghan regime, whether recognized or not, could be just one more to add to the list of repressive, failed and forgotten states.

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper. Edition dated 8  October 2021)

 

 

The future of politics must be based on values

They do not fit into our future

Victor Angelo

 

I recognise the concerns that many thinkers express about what the world will be like in the aftermath of the coronavirus pandemic. A large proportion say that this crisis pulverizes our societies and disrupts democracy and the alliances that bind us to other peoples, promotes a tendency towards isolation, nationalistic selfishness and the loss of the points of reference that gave meaning to international relations. Thus, the world would emerge fragmented from the crisis, with each country more self-centred, more autocratic, and with the institutions of the multilateral system rather weakened.

I propose a different reading of the route we are now taking. I believe that the crisis gives us the opportunity to strengthen the humanist dimension that has been lacking, both in domestic politics and on the international stage. We will certainly be poorer economically, but we can become much richer politically. It is a question of good leadership and strong citizenship movements. The pandemic has reminded us that people are the essential end of politics. Not people in a general and abstract sense, but each of us, simultaneously in our individuality and as members of the social space to which we belong. Politics must place a stronger emphasis on protecting and respecting our fundamental rights, starting with the right to dignity, health, security and diversity, as well as creating the conditions for everyone to develop their potential as best they know how. 

I believe that the pandemic drama has prepared a good part of the citizens for a new kind of awareness as regards their relationship with others and nature. I think it has made us more measured in our ambitions. We are faced with the possibility of renewing political practice. That is the main conclusion I draw from the present situation. It is also the line that guides my vision of the future. Politics tomorrow must mean a continuous struggle for human rights, for democratisation, for smoothness in public management and for more solidarity. We must build on the maturity we have acquired during this period of shock. If this happens, the credibility of politics will be enhanced, multilateral cooperation will be cemented and we will be in a better position to tackle what I consider to be the three biggest global challenges of the decade: the fight against poverty, the defence of freedom and the regeneration of the environment, starting with the mitigation of climate change.

Indeed, none of this should be new to us Europeans. Article 2 of the Treaty on European Union clearly defines - and happily worded, which is not always the case when it comes to legal commitments between states - the values that constitute the fundamental foundations of our common project, including the centrality of the human dimension of politics. But politicians, who are generally very skilful in the games of opportunism and in the ambiguity of consensus designed to please Greeks and Trojans, do not always support themselves as they should in that article of the Treaty.

In these circumstances, it is essential that the European Commission's budget for the period 2021-2027 and the exceptional plan for economic recovery, which must respond to the challenges created by the pandemic, recognise the essential need for each Member State to respect the letter and spirit of the aforementioned Article 2. Budgets and democracy are the two sides of the same Europe. Here there can be no tricks or juggling of words and misunderstandings. The Hungarian vetoes of Viktor Orbán and the Polish vetoes of Jaroslaw Kaczynski, now also supported by Janez Janša, the Prime Minister of Slovenia, are unacceptable. Let us speak clearly. Orbán is a despot at the head of a clique that many accuse of kleptocracy. Kaczynski is a backward man who exploits feelings from other times. Janša is a small brain man: he was the only European leader to congratulate Donald Trump on his electoral "victory". They all manipulate public opinion in their countries and will not change as long as they retain control of power. We cannot let these gentlemen think that the EU is just a source of money, unrelated to a policy of democratic values and rights. Any compromise on this issue would mean that we would not have learned anything from the cultural revolution that the pandemic crisis is offering us. 

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

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.  

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.  

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.

We are going back the big way

If I had to select a piece of today’s news, I would go for the WHO Director-General’s warning that the pandemic is still growing in many parts of the world. It has now reached every nation. Many countries are now at a standstill. In some of them, even internal travel is not allowed.

Poverty is expanding rapidly in developing countries. The world is losing what it gained in decades of development assistance. It hurts to acknowledge such a fact, particularly for someone who spent decades in the development line of work. The only hope is that once the pandemic is under control the know-how that has been created in those countries all these past years will be mobilised for a quick recovery. For that to happen, those countries will need major capital injections. The international institutions will have to be the key advocates of such assistance.

The trend is negative and must be stopped

Their power resides on the capacity to build collective fear. In different parts of the world, some governments are taking advantage of the pandemic to create extreme anxiety among their people. Then, they make sure, through all kinds of media platforms, that they are perceived as very decisive, able to take tough decisions to save as many lives as possible. Some of those measures go far beyond the necessary, from a public health perspective. They basically have a political purpose, to strengthen those in power. In addition, such radical measures allow the governments to hide the weakness of their national health systems, their extremely poor capacity to respond to emergencies. The truth is that many governments are just inept and cannot find the balance between an adequate health response and the mitigation of poverty. That incompetence and the political dividends they expect to draw from tough decisions are just ruining their countries. We are going back to a world that will combine despotism, increased inequality, and desperation. Can we accept that trend? The answer must be clear and strong.

A very unequal new world

One of the most damaging consequences of the pandemic will be the augmentation of social inequalities. Some people will not be particularly impacted by the economic crisis that results from the measures taken to combat the Covid-19. They will experience no real change in their lifestyles. But the others, many of them, will see their income disappear or be dramatically reduced. They will be the new poor, finding themselves in desperate conditions. Their numbers will reach new heights, causing a totally distorted social reality and extreme instability. Such a situation will be explosive. The new poor are not used to navigate the poverty waters. They will feel left behind. We should expect if nothing is done to mitigate the misery, a very serious political challenge.

The balance that must be found

There is fear and growing poverty, in most corners of the world. We witness uncertainty and despair. The pandemic is killing people and destroying livelihoods. These are the two critical dimensions that must be tackled as a matter of great priority. Both are very urgent matters. The wise leader is the one that can strike the right balance between them. And who knows how the balance should evolve. That means, among other things, that an absolute and prolonged lockdown, with no economy, is not a balanced approach. It is not even necessary if there are enough masks to go around and the appropriate human behaviours are followed.

I just learned, for instance, that Argentina has decided to close its commercial airspace up to September. That is too long and certainly not a sage decision. A country like Argentina, which is already in an awfully bad economic shape, should approach any drastic decision with lots of prudence. The same, elsewhere. I mention Argentina as just an example.

Preparing for a new world

It’s time to start thinking about the shape of the world that is emerging in front of us. This pandemic is a deeper and wider challenge than what the politicians want us to believe. Tomorrow’s world will not be just a resuscitation of yesterday’s living styles. Some people say it is a call for a new paradigm. I would say that it is more than a call. It’s a must. Too many people will be excluded if we do not change the way we look at human security and dignity.

The world is next door

During the weekend, I spoke with friends living in Africa, South East Asia, Australia and the Pacific, as well as in Rio de Janeiro. I also have many friends in other parts of the world, from San Diego where dear Christine leaves to Helsinki, and so on. Had I chatted with them too, and I would have gotten the same report. Large chunks of the world are either closed or on a go-slow situation. Even remote places like Bougainville, an Autonomous Region of Papua New Guinea, is on lockdown. This is just an incredible reality. The world is getting poorer by the day.  The debt levels, both public and private, are growing by the hour. Elections are being postponed in many corners of the planet, except for a few cases, including Mali, that voted again today in the second round of their legislative assembly.

In many developing countries, the lockdown approach can’t work. People need to go out every day because survival is a daily chore. Moreover, in their cities, they live in large numbers in small and unfit dwellings. Overcrowding is the rule. There is no way they can follow the instructions about hygiene and social distancing. Extreme poverty means extreme fragility. And the health services have no capacity to deal with the disease. It’s a major problem. People are afraid but they know they have no other choice but to keep on moving. Fate, my friends remind me, is the currency of the poor. It’s the only thing they have in abundance. And after listening to that, I feel so disturbed.  

Bamako sunset

Thanks to a friend and the digital technology, I could watch the sun setting below the horizon of Bamako, the capital of Mali. The Niger River reflected the last rays of light of the day and sent me a message of beauty, tranquillity and vastness. Not far, the image showed one the arteries of the city, as busy as it is customary on a Sunday end of the afternoon. We talked about the virus – five registered deaths so far in the country. But we know how difficult it is to record the true cause of death in a country like Mali. Fine. The important point, for me, was to learn that life goes on as usual in the city and elsewhere. The UN mission, and the embassies, are following the prevention protocols. But the ordinary Malian is focused on what keeps him busy every day: to find enough resources to buy food and other basic needs; and to worry about the security of his family and his own, especially in the central and northern regions of the country. And those concerns are there to stay. People have very little time for the virus, as they had no time for the legislative elections that took place last weekend. The turnout in Bamako was around 10%. That says a lot. And it reminds us that we might live in a global village, but some corners of that village spend their time just trying to survive, virus or no virus.

Again about India and the pandemic

Yesterday I wrote a few lines about India’s decision to confine her citizens. It’s a 21 days lockdown for 1,3 billion people. Many, in my part of world, cannot understand the magnitude and the complexity of such a decision. They do not know that hundreds of millions in India have no regular job. They live in cities and struggle, every day, to get some sort of casual work, that will give them enough rupees to buy the daily food their families and themselves need. That is how the informal sector operates, each day being a new beginning. And most of the people survive within the informal, occasional economy. If the economy is brought to a standstill, as it is now the case, that means no means of survival. It is just dramatic. Then, the solution is to try to go back to their ancestral villages and do some very basic farming. That’s what has happened in the last days or so. Millions have travelled back, in crowded buses, lorries and on the few trains that are still operating. As they moved back, one on top of the other, they might have caught the virus from their fellow travellers. If so, that means the virus has been passed on to an incalculable number of people and brought from the cities to the rural areas. That would be mass contagion. We will see. But we can be at the gate of a major public health problem in the largest country on earth. It would give the pandemic crisis a new, terrifying dimension. I can only hope this scenario is not going to happen.

Davos messages

From today’s reports about Davos (WEF 2020), I take home two important observations. One, that we should always keep in mind the two billion people that are the poorest in the world. The bottom 2 billion. They can be lifted out of poverty if there is political will. And they are the ones that will be the most impacted by climate changes and environmental crises. The second one is about the political leaders. They must show a new level of commitment and leadership. They cannot just think about the next elections. They must learn how to speak to the people about the future and positive change. Values must prevail over opportunism.

Notre-Dame and the response of the wealthy

Many people have shown sincere astonishment and expressed deep shock when told that a small group of French billionaires and some big corporations have pledged close to one billion Euros to finance the restoration of the Notre-Dame Cathedral. People compare such largesse to the poor response given to recent humanitarian appeals.

The gap is indeed abysmal and difficult to understand.

I do not pretend to know the minds of the very rich. But I have met a few. And they are indeed much more willing to give money to the arts, the protection of the natural world, the advancement of scientific research, and other broad issues than to alleviate poverty and address social issues like the plight of the homeless or drug addiction. Patron of the arts is a tradition that comes from the aristocratic times. It occupies a very high position in the status ladder.

Moreover, it is also my reading that many of those who became outrageously wealthy believe that poor people are responsible for their own fate. They kind of share the moral high ground those who have been successful in life love to place themselves. From those heights, they look at everyone else as people who have not been able to create their own life opportunities or have just accepted their condition without fighting back. Many rich people – and I am only referring to those who are generous enough to pay for big causes, I am not talking about the greedy and the corrupt – are convinced that poverty is an individual responsibility. They do not say it loudly. But they think people should have tried harder. They also believe that the social security systems are good enough to take care of those in dire need.

I am not trying to justify their approach, please be sure of that. I am just sharing an interpretation. My point is simple. If we do not comprehend the reasons, we cannot contribute to a meaningful change of the behaviour.

Additional notes on the Yellow Vests

In yesterday’s writing, my main point was we cannot ignore the social dissatisfaction some French citizens experience. I had particularly in mind those who live in the sprawling, huge and hastily urbanised areas that ring the most prosperous cities of France. These citizens are wrongly called “suburban people” – an expression that hardly hides the disdain the professional, city-based elites feel towards those persons. The fact is that most of them live in big agglomerations, but those are little more than sleeping areas. The rest of their lives is spent on commuting, long hours wasted in crowded public transportation systems or on congested roads. Everything is far and stressful to reach: work, schools, medical facilities, public services, even the shopping malls. The only people they know are like them, sharing the same frustrations and the same fatigue.

They also know this is a life condition that will continue forever, at best. There is very little hope in the air. The prevailing sentiment is of being trapped. Vulnerable as well. They also believe that they are just ignored by the more fortunate fellow citizens and the political actors. The elites don’t care, that’s the judgement that is often mentioned.

But there two other questions I must raise. 

First, that violence and destruction are not acceptable. There is no justification. Those who practise such acts must be punished. And we all must say no to violence, no to chaos, no any type of public rebellion. 

Second, that these rallies should cease and dialogue be given a chance. President Emmanuel Macron has launched a consultative process that is rather ambitious. It touches some very key issues. And it’s also an attempt to look at democracy and representativeness from a less formal and distant perspective. It’s important to participate in that initiative. It will also show that there is maturity there where it might seem absent for now.

Day 13 for the Yellow Vests

Today it was the 13^th Saturday with Yellow Vest demonstrators in Paris and other French cities.

It’s obvious the movement is still able to gather a good number of people. We can say so even if the total number of protesters today was smaller than in past weeks. The variety of reasons that bring the activists to the streets explains the numbers.

This is not a rally of dunces, as some would like us to see it. There are extremists in the ranks – militants from the far-right and from the far-left. They are trying to ride the social malaise. And they feel happy when they see cars burning or the State authority being challenged. But the majority of those on the streets is composed of people that face daily hardships and want to benefit from a safer economic environment. They are simple people, and they raise the key question about how to organise the society in developed nations at a time of big digital transformations, combined with international economic competition and the emergence of masses of skilled workers in other parts of the world.

Poverty in the EU

Recent data shows that one in 10 European workers lives in a household that is statistically classified as poor. This is undoubtedly a high percentage of people. They work but their income is not enough to cover the full range of their basic needs. Very often, they are the only source of income in their nuclear family because they are single or divorced people with small children at their charge.

Childcare is an expensive line in the European families’ budgets. As such, if there is an entry point for any programme aiming at addressing poverty, this is an obvious one. Social systems must be geared towards providing better help to parents. Childcare and schooling, from a very early age up to the end of mandatory education, must be free – and some additional cash made available – for those parents that have low levels of income. That would be money well spent, both in terms of poverty reduction and the education of the new generations. It would also have the benefit of reducing the chances of poor people being tempted by populist politicians.

2019 European elections

The elections for the EU Parliament will take place in May 2019. No need to tell you that no political party has invited me to run. Fine! Actually, I am not a member of any party and have no close friend as a party leader. Those are two very strong reasons.

But, if I were campaigning for such election and had to chose one single message to focus the agenda, I would build it around protection. The EU citizens must be sure that the political leaders are concerned and give priority to people’s security. And I would make sure that security would be understood in a wider sense. It’s not just physical security in a traditional way that I would be talking about. It’s protection against a span of risks, including new forms of poverty and other related social hardships.

The European common project must be perceived to be about a Europe that protects. And about safeguarding values and standards of leaving. Values might be considered as easier to defend. That would be a mistaken view. They are as threatened as the rest. Therefore, the message about protection calls for a comprehensive view. At the same time, it must be simple to explain and easy to catch.

This is true throughout the EU, notwithstanding the economic differences and the cultural specificities of each country.