"Vivência e Reflexões Geopolíticas": a book that should be widely read

 Vivências e Reflexões Geopolíticas ("Experiences and Geopolitical Reflections") is a book by Victor Ângelo that offers a unique perspective on global affairs, blending his personal experiences with professional analysis. Rather than a formal academic text, it is a collection of reflections informed by his long and distinguished career.

Here's what you should know about the book and its author:

About the Author and His Perspective

Victor Ângelo is a highly respected Portuguese diplomat who spent over three decades working for the United Nations, including serving as Special Representative of the Secretary-General. This background is crucial, as the book is a product of his on-the-ground experience in various conflict zones and complex geopolitical environments, such as Sierra Leone and the Central African Republic.

His writing is described by critics as clear, direct, and non-academic. He is known for cutting through complex issues with a straightforward style that makes geopolitical topics accessible to a wider audience.

Main Ideas and Content

The book is a mix of memoir and geopolitical commentary. It uses Ângelo's personal "vivências" (experiences) as a foundation for his "reflexões" (reflections). Key themes include:

• The Role of the UN: He provides a first-hand account of the United Nations' role in managing and resolving conflicts, offering a candid view from inside the organization.

• Contemporary Conflicts: The book analyzes major international issues, including the war in Ukraine and the tensions between the West and China, drawing on his expertise to offer context and potential solutions.

• A Call for Reform: Ângelo is a strong advocate for the reform of the UN Security Council, an idea he has discussed in various public appearances. This theme is central to his work.

In essence, the book is valued for its unique blend of personal narrative and professional insight, providing a grounded, practical look at the challenges and complexities of modern international relations from the perspective of someone who has been in the room.

The European recovery

Today, Chancellor Angela Merkel and President Emmanuel Macron stated they will advocate for the establishment of a €500 billion recovery fund. In their view, the money should be raised in the international capital markets by the European Commission, as a common pot aimed at helping the Member States seriously affected by the Covid-19 pandemic. The disbursements would be approved by the Commission, following the criteria that are yet to be established. It would also be the Commission that would have the responsibility to pay the markets back, meaning, the principal and the interests or dividends.

I am not sure this will work. Austria’s leader, Sebastian Kurz, has already voiced strong objections to such an idea. He does not want to see a recovery mechanism that is dispensing grants to the States. He is for loans. Loans make the leaders a bit wiser than just getting free money, he seems to believe. We can expect that other voices will join his own.

In view of this, my position is that most of the money should be channelled to fund joint multinational projects that would reinforce the European system and would have an impact on the EU’s strategic self-sufficiency in matters of public health, bioresearch and other critical emergency response mechanisms. The pandemic has taught us that the health sector is vital, not only for medical reasons but also because of its impact on the functioning of the economy. We cannot no longer talk about strategy without including the strengthening of our common capacity to deal with epidemics, critical hospital equipment needs and essential medicines. Money should also be spent on common logistics and rapid deployment networks.

It is also clear that the recovery fund must be operational soonest. There is urgency. We are not yet at the end of the crisis. The intensity of the pandemic can have a new surge at any moment. We must be better prepared this time. In addition, the economy of the most affected countries needs resources that would encourage new investments, in greener areas, and in matters that address the issues of income and social security. The priority should go for those projects that are fundamental for a stronger Europe and that are not too much dependent on resources and means of transportation we do not control.

This is a time to think differently. The fund, if it is thoughtfully planned and wisely administered, can become a tool for transformation and progress. The alternative is for it to become a reason for further divisions within the European space. Nobody wants that to happen.

Iran and its allies at sea

What a present, just before the end of the year! Irony apart, the joint naval exercise that has just taken place in the Gulf of Oman and brought together Iran, Russia and China aimed at sending a very powerful message to the US and its allies. And it did.

The Oman sea lane is especially important for China’s strategic interests. It is, in my opinion, a top priority among China’s lines of communication with the world. That’s why they decided to participate. They wanted to demonstrate their navy’s modernity and outreach. For Russia, it was an opportunity to show they are back as an international maritime power. Both countries wanted also to send a message about stability in the region, meaning, their political commitment to discourage any strike against Iran, because it could have extraordinary consequences for a large part of the Middle East.

And in the case of Iran, the message was clear: to show they have powerful allies. Therefore, they should be left alone.

We must also note this exercise was a new one. It had not happened in the past.

Boris and his master play hard ball

Dominic Cummings, who is Boris Johnson’s high priest for strategy – officially, his title is Senior Advisor to the PM – knows very well that in war it is vital to regain the initiative. To win one must master the plan and the action.

Yesterday, the opposition and all those who are against a No Deal Brexit had reached an accord that could threaten the PM’s political future. They got the ball and the agenda. That was a major menace to Boris’s power. Today, that same group lost it, thanks to Cummings and his pupil. The suspension of parliamentary work decided by Boris Johnson surprised his opponents and destabilised their game plan. That’s how strategy is played by the big people.

But the game is not over. Today’s move has infuriated many Tory MPs that were sitting on the fence. They might find the courage to pay back. That must happen in the next few days and before the end of coming week. If it does, Cummings’ canny advice to Boris might end up by backfiring. The stakes are higher than ever.

We will see.

Leadership and renewal

I spend a bit of time talking about leadership in the context of strategy formulation and implementation. The quality of the leader determines the excellence of the strategy. Very often we forget that fact. We look at the strategy but do not consider the merit of those in charge of designing it, of talking about it to do the convincing part, and of its operationalisation.

We have also to keep in mind that leaders emerge, and grow but that one day, they must go and leave room for the next generation. The rotation issue is an important one. It keeps the creativity on. Therefore, true leaders must prepare the new crop that will end up by taking over. This is an evidence that is often ignored. By the leaders themselves, first.

China and the waters

Global geostrategic changes go very fast these days, thanks to the Chinese leadership.

Look at this, for instance.

Back in 2010 – just yesterday, one could say – the Chinese corporations had invested in about 10 of the 50 largest deep-water ports of the world. Now, in 2019, Chinese money is invested in over 30 of those ports. In addition, the Chinese merchant marine is currently the world’s second largest.

Becoming a great maritime power might be a Chinese dream, in the leaders’ minds and political agenda. It is also a major strategic move, to be added to other ambitious, huge initiatives China is implementing, at sea and over land. The overall goal is to be number one by 2049, the centennial year of their revolution. That’s the way the Chinese leadership, and above all, President Xi, see the world of tomorrow: China as the pivot, the centre of the international order.

Adversaries and enemies

Always blame your adversary but concentrate your fighting power on your enemy. 

Our neighbour, Vladimir Putin

Again, on defence, it’s clear to us in the EU that one of the key military objectives of Russia is to look stronger than they really are. That’s why they spend so much human and capital resources on mixing facts and fiction. Part of their strength is indeed a fact. On the other side, a good deal of it is just a story that is being told to scare us. It is the Potemkin Village approach. It has a long history in Russia. But it produces results.

The Russian armed forces are ten years ahead of us, in the EU, in terms of cyber warfare. That’s for sure a reality. The rest, it is yes and no. But the truth is that they keep compelling us to increase our spending in military matters. In this kind of game, we cannot take risks. We better be prepared.

Fake, constructed or true, the fact of the matter is that the threats coming from Vladimir Putin must be taken seriously. And he knows that. Smart fellow, he is. And we, in many ways, look like amateurs. Just kicking the ball when it comes in  our direction.

On matters of War

War without a concomitant, serious, persistent search for a political solution to the conflict is not morally justified. It´s unacceptable state terror. It´s a crime against the people. 

Putin´s resourcefulness

Russian President understands that one of the most important points in competitive geostrategic action is about confusing the adversary. The principle is clear: do not let the adversary understand how you plan and think. He managed to do it again this week, when he decided to withdraw most of his military operational forces from Syria. And on top of it, Vladimir Putin left everybody trying to guess the reasons for his decision. That´s the icing on the cake.

There are several readings for Putin´s move. To them, one should add more, meaning that we cannot underestimate this leader. It would be a serious mistake. 

Learning from Putin

During the last many days I have been fully taken by a major military exercise. As a civilian and someone who has a very good number of years on the shoulders, the exercise leaves me a bit worn out, by the end of the day. But it is interesting to see how the top officers respond to a complete set of new challenges that in the world of today go far beyond just military means.

The military campaigns have changed and today´s world calls for a different approach to operational design. Plans have to be complex and combine a good number of actions, many of them within the civilian realm.

In many ways, Putin is one of those political leaders that fully understands the new ways of waging “war”. To pay detailed attention to his modus operandi gives us a chance to learn a few techniques that make sense.

The only problem is that we might learn some methods from him but cannot agree on his approach to international relations. 

2014 priorities

I have been asked to look into 2014. That´s the routine question that is always raised as we approach the New Year. And then we list a number of things that need to be looked at during the next twelve months.

I also did it this time. The list is long, notwithstanding the deliberate effort I made to keep it short and as focused as possible. I added, as a justification that we live in complex times. But that´s not a very convincing reason. We have to be clear about the critical issues, the ones that really make a difference and then give them priority attention.

Can we bring the list down to two or three key issues, in terms of EU internal policy, and another two or three, when it comes to external policy?

That would be the true test of strategic focus. 

We need to strategically engage with Algeria

EU has not paid enough attention to Algeria. Or, this country remains a key player in North Africa and has a critical influence on the Sahel and on the fight against radical armed groups. Furthermore, Algeria is pivotal if we want to promote greater cooperation in North Africa as well as a stronger partnership between the region and Southern Europe.

I very much advocate for a serious debate about engaging Algeria. That would clarify the lines of engagement between us and that country. And it would also make it clear that such link is important for our common interests. 

Relations with China require a EU common approach

Prime Minister Cameron´s visit to Beijing reminds me that there is no EU coherent policy regarding the relations with China.

It is true that there was a recent – about two weeks ago – summit meeting between Van Rompuy and Barroso, on the European side, and the new leadership of China. But it was more of an empty formality than an exercise on strategy. The Chinese play the game and seem to be very interested in a stronger relationship with the EU. But in fact, they are much more interested in their bilateral relations with a small handful of European countries. They know that national sovereignty feelings are coming back within Europe and they understand that better than the concept of a lose community of shared interests.

But the Chinese are difficult and complex parties to any agreement. They have a very strategic and subtle view of international partnerships, particularly with the West. That approach cannot be matched by a piecemeal approach, on our side, by a short-sighted view of each country´s interests. More. The Chinese leaders will take advantage of the competition that is now shaping the relations among the EU member states.

Are we poets or just fools?

EU has chosen the path of confrontation with Russia, when it comes to Eastern Neighbourhood policy. 

Politics is of course about choices. 

It is also about having a clear strategy, once the choices have been made. 

Choices without the appropriate strategy are just empty wishes. They belong to the realm of either the poets or the fools. 

A changing Middle East

We understand better the current negotiations in Geneva between Iran and the P5 plus Germany if we take into account two factors.

First, the economic situation in Iran. The sanctions against Tehran are biting and their oil is also losing the leverage it used to have, as the world moves into other sources of energy and other techniques to generate oil. All this is having a serious impact on the Iranian economy. The regime knows that a very urbanised and young country as theirs cannot accept austerity for too long. The leaders´political survival requires a compromise with the key western countries as well as with Russia and China. They know it.

Second, for the West, a long view of their strategic interests places much more emphasis on improving the relations with the Arab and Muslim world in the Middle East. The turmoil in Iraq and now in Syria is a serious menace for peace and stability in the region. It is also a very important generator of extremism and religious fanatics. In the end, the Muslim populations of that part of the world have a much greater weight than Israel. For that reason, we are seeing a gradual shift away from Israel´s positions and a clear intent to improve the diplomatic relations with the Muslim states in the region.

The regional geopolitics are changing fast. 

The strategic interest of the Middle East is tapering

The Middle East, defined in broad terms to include both Egypt and Iran, and the countries in between, remains the most unstable region of the world. It includes very dramatic and intricate crisis, such as the ones in Syria, Palestine, Lebanon, and very fragile governance regimes, such as the ones in Jordan, Iraq and Bahrain, without mentioning Saudi Arabia, which many consider to be experiencing the initial symptoms of instability. It is also home to serious ethnic and sectarian conflicts, as the Kurd situation, which concerns several countries, the rivalries between Sunni and Shia power elites, and the proliferation of extremist groups illustrate. The region is also deeply affected by Israel’s policy towards the Palestinian people.

View from the West, the region has lost a good deal of its strategic importance. Oil from the Middle East can now easily be replaced by oil from other parts of the world, including the US and Canada. Oil is therefore a much weaker argument when looking at the Western interests in the region. Religious fundamentalism and its violent manifestations are still a reason to pay attention to the region. But even in that domain, home-grown fundamentalism in the EU and the US are now getting more attention than distant threats that might be taking roots in the Middle East.

Also, from a trading perspective, the region is perceived as a small market, notwithstanding the wealth available within some of its leading circles.

The trend is therefore to switch the attention away from the Middle East to other parts of the world. 

Strategic accidents

Just travelled back from a meeting that had strategic issues at the centre of the debate. And I could see that very often strategy design is just based on coincidences, on facts that happen at the same time and are taken as indications of the way to follow. Strange! I ended up by calling that “strategizing by accident”.

And also came to the conclusion that in politics that’s often the case. You “build a strategy” on facts that are happening and that you never thought of. Politicians just ride the wave and call that “strategy”.