Boutros-Ghali: a diplomat with strong views

Boutros Boutros-Ghali passed away early in the day. And I feel compelled to say a few words of homage about my former boss. I served as his representative in The Gambia and later in Tanzania. And I want to remember him as a man of courage. He was not afraid of speaking up to the permanent members of the UN Security Council. Actually, he said one day, after he had left the UN, that he regretted not having been aggressive enough with the members of Security Council. In his opinion, the Council had not responded appropriately to the major crises of the time, Rwanda and the Balkans. But we cannot say it was his fault. He was very clear in his messages. In the case of the US, he had some difficult encounters with President Bill Clinton and his senior officers. He insisted but failed to convince Clinton that the situation in Rwanda was extremely serious. Clinton did not appreciate Boutros-Ghali´s critiques. And the mandate was not renewed. The power of the veto did the job

Erdogan and Putin

The tensions between Turkey and Russia are peaking. And this is an extremely worrisome development. In the case of Turkey, the Russian support to the Assad regime in Syria and the recent progression of Syrian Kurdish fighters, who are getting closer to the border are North of Aleppo are both seen as a matter of acute national interest. Regarding Russia, the destabilising of President Erdogan´s political power is a matter of retaliation – and revenge is deeply important in the political traits that define the Russian nationalistic soul – as well as a major chance to undermine the NATO alliance. In such circumstances, the stakes are very high for both sides. And the escalation seems unavoidable, with an incredible array of dramatic consequences. More so because the leaders of each side have an immense political ego. They are more inclined to fall whilst fighting than to accept compromise. And that´s the best recipe for a greater tragedy in the region and beyond.   

Cameron´s doomed days

As we come closer to the next summit meeting of the EU Council, on 18 and 19 February, the Brexit issue gets more attention. It will be one of the heavy subjects on the table during the meeting. And I am afraid David Cameron will not get more concessions from the heads of state and government than those already suggested by Donald Tusk. It will be difficult for him to manage that. The popular media in the UK thinks that Tusk´s proposals do not go far enough. That opinion will have a significant impact on the voters. And I am getting convinced that Cameron is going to be one of the great losers of all this process. His political future is very much at stake. He will not be able to survive a contrarian vote.

"Cessation of hostilies"

After today´s announcement of a “cessation of hostilities” in Syria, some commentators have shown a lot of scepticism about the effective implementation of such an agreement. The doubts are even stronger because the declaration was basically a joint statement by the US and Russia, with no apparent or implicit involvement by the Syrian parties to the conflict. 

My position on this proclamation is clear. I want to believe that the Americans and the Russians are indeed committed to creating the very minimal conditions for the political negotiations to take off the ground. I also think they would like some kind of humanitarian assistance to be facilitated. Assistance is urgently required in many areas of the country. Some pause on the war would make it possible to reach many of those in need.

As I am ready to accept the good faith of the declaration, I should also add that we are still far from the beginning of a true peace process. But at least there is some movement now and one has to clutch whatever little candle of hope is flaming. Even when the flame is pretty tenuous. 

Political inaction on shore

On the mass movements across the Mediterranean Sea, we know where the immediate problem lies. It is in the coastal cities and towns of Turkey. The smugglers of people across the water do their business in those places. That´s where they should be stopped. Not at sea. They do not board the boats the migrants and refugees use to cross. They remain in Turkey. Dealing with them is above all a matter for the police. But the question is not related to police´s inaction or lack of means to operate. It is very much associated with politics. The police follow their political masters. And the masters, for reasons we can guess, have decided to let it go. 

We decided to ignore South Sudan

South Sudan has now joined the list of the forgotten crises.

The country was the darling of the international community three or four years ago. In the meantime, it experienced a very serious civil war, hundreds of thousands of displacements and a plunge into political chaos. In many ways, such violent crisis could have been prevented if the UN and the key partners of the country had played a more courageous supporting role.

Now, South Sudan is trying to move out of violence. The needs are huge. Including, to start with, the ones related to basic humanitarian assistance. But the donors are not responding. The UN Humanitarian Coordinator has just revealed that the humanitarian appeal for South Sudan remains outside the radar screen, nobody is paying attention to it. Indeed, he stated that only 2% of the required humanitarian funds have been raised so far.

It is time to be a bit louder about South Sudan again.

Merkel´s words on the Russians

I commend Angela Merkel for her very strong words condemning the current Russian military operations in Syria. That´s the type of statement we would like to hear from other EU and US leaders. 

In addition, let me be clear about the Russians. We need them to resolve the Syrian tragedy. We should recognise their role in the region. But we should also add that their ongoing policy options and actions are wrong. They only contribute to dramatically augment the suffering, to expand and prolong the humanitarian disaster and to make the Damascus regime believe they can win the war. 

Aleppo

The Russian forces deployed in Syria are now focussed on getting the city of Aleppo and its surrounding areas under Assad´s control. That´s were their current main effort is. Not on the Islamic State terrorists. As they do that, tens of thousands of people move out of the area and try to seek refuge in Turkey. This gives the Russians another reason to go for Aleppo: it ends up by increasing the pressure on the Turks. And, as we know, the Russians have an axe to grind with Turkey. This is a way of doing it. All this aggravates the geopolitical tensions and makes a political solution even more remote. Actually, at this stage I see almost no chance to get the Geneva talks back on the agenda. The bet seems, once again, to be on a military response to an inhumane chaotic situation. 

About the Syrian donors´meeting

One facet of the recent big pledging conferences, like the one of yesterday in London, convened to mobilise resources for Syrian refugees, is that most of promises never materialise. Countries make commitments, and in some cases, very substantial ones. But the disbursements, in many cases, are well below the pledges. And in other cases, countries do announce contributions that never materialise.

One of the reasons is that the monies that are declared during the conferences have never been discussed with the country´s finance minister. They come out of the foreign minister´s mouth. He or she might be a very influential and strong politician. But in the end, funds are the prerogative of finance ministers.

I have seen many disappointments after these types of meetings. One gets the impression that the call was very successful only to realise later on that most of funds never materialise. That creates frustration. It also gives room for very serious misunderstandings between the authorities from the receiving countries and the intended beneficiaries. The latter do not see the support promised and then get to believe that the money was misappropriate by the administering authorities. 

Cameron might lose the referendum on the EU

My column of today in the Visão magazine on line is about the relations between the EU and the UK. The text is in Portuguese, of course. My point is that the proposals made by the President of the European Council, Donald Tusk, should be supported. Some EU leaders think that Tusk has gone too far in terms of concessions. It is not really the case. He has been able to put together some generic rules that can be used by Britain and by any other country. They are based on David Cameron´s demands but do not give him everything he had asked for. Now it is up to the British Prime Minister to be able to convince his party and the voters that there is enough “reform” to justify the continuation of the UK within the EU. And that´s a big challenge. At this stage, I am afraid the referendum will be lost. Brexit is today a possibility. Cameron has to fight very hard to prevent that.