China has come out of 2020 more daring

And the prize goes to China

Victor Angelo

 

In the big game of geopolitics, the 2020 world cup must be awarded to China. It has been an exceedingly difficult year for all countries. But here I see that the only one that really comes out stronger, after all the tests, is China. Australia and New Zealand played well, but they are in another league. They do not have by far the political weight of the champion.

The year had started badly, with the city of Wuhan - 11 million inhabitants - at the centre of the concerns. But a strong, extremely nationalistic response and a population shaped by the modern version of ancient Confucianism - those in power command, and the ones who walk the streets of life obey - has turned control of the virus into a political victory for the ruling elite. Above all, for President Xi Jinping.

And the year ended with another goal, scored in the final minutes, with the conclusion of negotiations on investment between China and the European Union. This agreement, important for both sides, had been under discussion for seven years. The drag on this was due to Chinese obstruction, who wanted to have their hands free to invest in Europe while creating obstacles to European ventures in China. Finally, and before Joe Biden took office, Beijing felt it was important to close the pact with the Europeans, thus moving them away from a more combative position that the new American administration might adopt. For the Europeans, the agreement opens the door to investments in finance, health, energy and information technology. If it is respected, it will represent a step forward in rebalancing economic relations between the two sides. The treaty also seeks to defend intellectual property rights and promote certain international labour standards, but without conviction. The Chinese authorities leave no room for manoeuvre in this area, notably in the abolition of forced labour for prisoners or ethnic minorities.

Beyond the economics, our problem with China is above all political. It concerns human rights and democratic values. And there I see no agreement on the horizon, and I guess, not in the distant future. The successes of 2020 and the accentuation of nationalism and Chinese pride, easy to press in the face of confusion in our part of the world, have strengthened the legitimacy and power of Xi Jinping. This legitimacy rests on two main pillars - economic opportunities for most citizens and the maintenance of internal order, including civic discipline. Only this week, when I spoke, as I regularly do, with my correspondents in China, I heard those two dimensions highlighted once more. In response to my references to human rights and democracy, a young Chinese woman reminded me that her generation, even those who have obtained academic degrees abroad and observed how freedoms work in other lands, makes no waves. Young people with higher education prefer to take advantage of the jobs and prosperity that remain immense in a rapidly growing China with a huge internal market. I was told that the number of applications for scholarships in the US and Europe for the next school year has grown considerably. The ambition is to obtain diplomas in prestigious institutions and then return to the market of opportunities that is China. Here, too, the Xi Jinping regime has succeeded in instilling two beliefs. One, that in the long run there will be no future for Chinese graduates who want to settle in the West, because of the growing mistrust that is said to exist there of anyone who might be seen as a surreptitious agent of the Beijing government. Another is that the future belongs to China, which will be the world's largest economy in the coming years, perhaps as early as 2028.

We enter 2021 with a China that feels more powerful and bold, even invincible. But history has long taught us that all giants have feet of clay. Xi Jinping's China, if it does not introduce a certain amount of prudence into its international relations, including moderation in the overmuch New Silk Road and acceptance of fundamental human values, may end up stumbling over its own arrogance and gigantism.  

 

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

Europe and China: a difficult dialogue

The summit call that took place today between the EU leaders and President Xi revealed a gulf of differences between the two sides when it comes to political values and the interference of the State in the economy. On the European side, reference was made to human rights as a fundamental value, as well as to the Chinese leadership’s policies towards the Uighur minority, Hong Kong, and Taiwan. President Xi did not like what he heard. But he could notice that the Europeans consider these matters fundamental and will continue to be raised in the future. At the same time, the economic relationship between both sides will continue – the trade between them amounts to one billion euros a day. And on this matter, the key issues will remain and must be addressed. The Chinese must open up to European investment and cease all kinds of political meddling in the governance of European firms already operating in China.

In the meantime, and as we wait for progress on these fronts to be achieved it is becoming clear that Chinese investments in critical European infrastructure can only be accepted if they do not put at stake the strategic dimensions of European security and stability.

The two sides must cooperate. They are key players in the international scene. It is therefore important they keep talking and be frank when doing it.

EU, Canada, Brexit and Trade Negotiations

The trade agreement (CETA) between the EU and Canada, signed today in Brussels, took seven years to negotiate. This is a long time. However, we should note that there was good will on both sides and not too many marked differences in terms of the underlining economic philosophies. But trade agreements touch many details, they are complicated, slow processes. This is especially true for the EU because the European Commission has to keep all the member states on board as the discussions progress. That’s far from being easy and it is actually becoming even more difficult as we look ahead and take into consideration the current state of the Union.

In the circumstances, and following the Brexit decision, it seems rather improbable to reach an agreement with the UK within a two-year time frame, as required by the EU treaty. We might find ourselves confronted with never-ending ping-pong. Unless both sides are reasonable in their demands and state very clearly what they want to achieve as part of a mutually beneficial compromise. The discussions call for a wise, constructive approach. But the politicians, of either side, are rarely up to that task. They see it as a fight and then everyone loses. 

TTIP premature death announcement

Sigmar Gabriel is the number two person in the German government. But he is not a member of Chancellor Merkel´s party. He is the leader of the Social Democrats and his party is in a grand coalition with Merkel´s own grouping. As we come closer to the next round of general elections in 2017, the Social Democrats seem to be now more concerned about pleasing the voters than on a serious approach to public affairs. Their eyes are popularity.

That might be the reason why Gabriel yesterday declared the TTIP – the transatlantic trade agreement between the EU and the US – as dead in the water. And in his words the fault should be laid on the American side. Their demands could not be accepted by the health-and-environment conscious Europeans, he implied.

Gabriel knows that the trade agreement with the US, which has been under negotiation for about four years, is not popular among many in Europe. And he was trying to play to their feelings. The wrong approach, I add. As a leader, he should be at the forefront of those explaining on is at stake and how important it is to be patient but firm and get it done.

Today his government and Brussels came out to say that the news of such a death are exaggerated. The negotiations go on and many chapters have already been agreed upon, notwithstanding Gabriel´s words to the contrary.

TTIP should be completed as soon as possible. It is in our own interest to have a closer commercial relation with the US. And it gives us also some additional strength in our economic discussions with the Russians and others.

Actually, as about 90% of the articles are ready for mutual endorsement, it would be possible to sign up for those and let time and further discussions take care of the remainder points. That has been my position. We do not need to have everything ready. We approve what is ready, as stage one, and move on to stage two, to complete the negotiations on what is still pending. It is a pragmatic way of proceeding. And it sends some strategic messages around us.

Obama´s State of the Union speech seen from Brussels

The European media treated President Obama´s State of the Union speech very kindly. The spin has indeed been very positive.

For most of us in the EU, Obama continues to be perceived as a very principled politician and also as a wise leader. People know the American economy is now stronger, jobs have been created in large numbers – 14 million new jobs during his presidency –, the unemployment rate has been cut in half and the government deficit slashed by three-quarters. Europeans also know that Obama has given priority to diplomacy and multilateralism when addressing international issues. Moreover, they feel that the US under Obama has not abandoned Europe, notwithstanding the new critical challenges America is confronted with in the Far East.

There is one more year to go before he completes his second mandate. In international politics, one year is a very short period of time. Most likely the transatlantic free trade agreement between the US and the EU – known as TTIP – wil not be completed before Obama´s departure. In many ways, the reasons for delay belong to the European side. But his name will certainly be associated to the effort to bring the two sides together in terms of free commerce. And shared commercial interests bring nations together and give them a mutual sense of confidence and security.

                                        

TTIP should be the object of an honest debate

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) – a potential free trade between the EU and the US – is the new rallying flag of all those in Europe who seriously dislike the Americans. As such, it is difficult to find objective assessments on the possible impact – positive and negative – of such an accord.

People attack the likely agreement from a blind position, and in many cases because that´s what they think their intellectual bedfellows expect from a leftist approach.

That´s a pity, as the TTIP is a matter that is too serious to be treated just based on anti-Americanism and on deceitful assumptions about what it means to be on the political Left.