Do not underestimate Trump´s chances

The snags Hillary Clinton is facing – obvious today again as we got the results of the primaries in Kentucky and Oregon – do not augur well. She will have an extremely tough time fighting against Donald Trump´s populist campaign. Hillary will win the Democratic nomination, no doubt about that, but she will need a very well planned battle plan, and a different personal style, closer to people´s day-to-day preoccupations, if she wants to have a chance to win the presidential election.

It is not going to be easy at all. Trump is now changing his methods, softening his discourse, building friendships all over, and making sure he looks as a top class statesman. At the same time, he will remain a major attraction for many average people who are tired of traditional politics and life-long professional politicians. It is important to recognise he will be a formidable opponent. He is in this game to win and he knows one or two things about defeating political old hands. Just ask the other guys that were competing against him in his own camp. He should not be underestimated at all. 

Progress on Syria and Libya: it should be possible

The efforts being led these days by John Kerry and Sergey Lavrov regarding Libya and Syria should be recognised. They are spending a good amount of time in Vienna and around. And they have also been wise in terms of keeping the UN on board and at the centre of the processes. If they keep this kind of engagement we should be able to see some progress. Actually, when it comes to Libya, it is now obvious that things have started to move in the right direction. The EU should come out clearly in support of these efforts. That should be done as a single voice. Through the EU High Representative, if possible.

Libya needs a more coordinated EU assistance

Key countries committed to help Libya to overcome the chaos created in October 2011, when Muammar Kaddafi was overthrown by a Western coalition of countries, met today in Vienna to look for ways of supporting the Government of National Accord (GNA) that is now in place in Tripoli. The GNA is led by Prime Minister Fayez al-Sarraj and has the support of the UN. It´s however facing major difficulties. There are two other rival governments in the Eastern and Central areas of the country as well as dozens of small armed groups all over. The terrorist group Islamic State is also heavily present in a growing number of places.

The EU could play a major role in the stabilisation process. Italy should take the leading coordinating role on the European side. But Italy is very unclear about its own policy approach to Libya. It had suggested it would deploy Italian troops under the UN banner. Now, the government in Rome says it is not prepared to go that way. Fine. But at least they could bring together the EU States and advocate for a common political position. That´s very much needed as France, the UK and others are on their own in the country and working with separate armed groups and factions. Such actions do contribute to add further confusion in Libya. There is therefore room for fighting for a unified EU position. Why is Italy so hesitant? 

Still on corruption: aid transparency

Aid transparency ranking:



Data compiled in the Aid Transparency Index and released by Publish What You Fund in April 2016.

Only 10 donors, responsible for only a quarter of all aid, are hitting the mark in terms of transparency of their funding programmes. We know that transparent aid flows do significantly contribute to increase accountability in recipient countries. And we also have spent the last 25 years listening to excellent lectures on good governance, as delivered by excellent representatives from donor countries and agencies. 

I believe the table speaks for itself. 

The powerful smell of corruption

Today´s Anti-Corruption Summit brought together a few political leaders and some NGOs. 

David Cameron, the convener of the meeting, says the gathering has been a success. I would not go that far. He might have obtained some domestic gains out of it, I would not dispute that. However, I would also add the summit was simply one more step towards a more transparent international order. 

But we are still far away from the goal. It would be a serious mistake to try to fool ourselves about this. Many countries are led by extremely corrupt political elites. Those elites might have paid some attention to the final communiqué of today´s meeting. They will keep a close eye on the implementation of the conclusions. But they know they have many alternatives besides London. Including in other parts of Europe, of course. 

Being positive on Europe Day

Every 9 May, the EU celebrates Europe Day.

This year we might conclude there isn´t much to be happy about. Martin Schulz, the EU Parliament boss, in an interview to a Portuguese daily newspaper, compared Europe to a bicycle with “flat tyres”. Basically, it would mean it has to keep moving but there is no air in the rubbers, the wheels can´t move properly.

I think we should be a bit more positive nonetheless. At least today.

The EU is still one of the most attractive places to be in the world. For its quality of life and for its standards of living. Also, because it is a space of liberties – yes, plural – and rule of law, as well as a continent of peace and security. It is still pretty predictable in terms of one´s human rights. And, in international relations, it is a major actor in the fields of development and humanitarian assistance.

These are some remarkable dimensions that one should emphasise on this day.

On the UN´s top race

The British would certainly veto any Argentinian candidate, if there was one for the post of the UN Secretary-General. The Falklands, the islands the Argentinians call Malvinas, would be the reason. That´s how these things are decided. 

The 2016 Charlemagne Prize

The Charlemagne Prize is an annual award that recognises outstanding efforts in favour of a stronger EU. This year´s winner is a special one for a few reasons. He is not a European citizen. Furthermore, he is not directly involved with European politics and actually he does not want to be seen as too close to just one region of the world. And he is above all a religious leader, known as Pope Francis.

But he is also a moral beacon to many. And a candid speaker about the plight of immigrants. He has strongly advised the EU leaders to be more responsive to the massive arrivals of refugees and immigrants. He himself has been to reception centres in Italy and Greece as a way of calling the politicians attention to the predicament of those who are stuck out there.

All this is highly valuable. However, the issue remains a political one. The Pope´s moral appeals have no real impact on politicians that see the issue has core to their national interests and also for their own survival as government leaders. The immigration and refugee matters are essentially political. They are one of the most definitive challenges to the unity of Europe. They call for political vision, for clarity about the overall goal, what really matters for the future of Europe, the options, and the consequences of each choice, all of this far beyond the remit of a prize, even one as important as the Charlemagne award.

It´s their fault, isn´t it?

It´s a bit strange to see people who have been at the core of the EU as leaders for many years to come out now and criticise the way Europe is moving. Or is it a new type of self-criticism and I am not getting it?

There is no Syrian ownership of the peace talks

The Syrian Geneva process is clearly owned and directed by foreigners: the US, Russia, Saudi Arabia and somehow the UN, through its Special Envoy. The Syrian side – the many parties to the conflict – are sitting in the margins or squarely outside, far out. They are not committed to the process, one should add. And if that is the case I do not see how such an exercise can achieve any meaningful and durable results.