No to a "post-human rights" society

In the context of this year’s Munich Security Conference, it has been said that we are living in a “post-human rights”.

In my opinion, that’s an unhelpful concept. It sends the wrong message. Human rights should remain the very basic and indispensable foundation of today’s politics. We might see all other conventions being challenged by different types of strongmen in power. That’s most worrisome. It’s as serious move towards the past. But, at least, human rights should remain as the last fortress, the last strong tower of values.

In the end, everything in politics and our daily lives is about respecting the dignity of everyone, man or woman, boy or girl. If we do not firmly stand for that, if we accept a “post-human rights” reality, even just as an intellectual frame of analysis, we can say goodbye to the moral and legal achievements and progress of the last 70 years or so. That’s not acceptable and it should not be taken as a “modern concept”.

Sahel and the Islamist threat

Another link on the Sahel security situation:

https://africacenter.org/spotlight/the-complex-and-growing-threat-of-militant-islamist-groups-in-the-sahel/

The Sahel is important

https://www.securityconference.de/en/media-library/munich-security-conference-2019/video/parallel-panel-discussion-security-in-the-sahel-traffick-jam/

The link will bring us to the panel discussion on the situation in the Sahel that took place today at the Munich Security Conference. 

Mark Rutte on the EU

"And I’ve said many times before that I believe the EU is stronger when a deal is a deal.  In the EU there can be no haggling over democracy and the rule of law. We must always draw the line when fundamental values come under pressure, as they have in countries like Poland and Hungary.But a deal is also a deal when it comes to the euro and the Stability and Growth Pact. Because here too, bending the rules can erode the entire system, and we cannot have that. To me the whole idea of the EU is a group of independent member states working together to bring each other to a higher level of prosperity, security and stability. Unity is the source of our capacity to act in the outside world."

Churchill Lecture by The Netherlands Prime Minister Mark Rutte, Europa Institut at the University of Zurich

Speech | 13-02-2019

Munich and the annual security debate

Once more, the conflict between Israel and Palestine is not on the agenda of this year’s Munich Security Conference. 

This annual conference started today and runs up to Sunday. It’s a key international meeting on security. 

This year, Syria and Ukraine are again on the menu, as it is the insecurity situation in the Sahel, the nuclear weapons issue and the security dimensions of climate change. The exclusion of the Palestinian crisis from the debates is deliberate, of course. For many, it’s too delicate a subject. For others, and I am among those, it’s a never-ending conflict. Better move on and deal with those that have a chance of being resolved.

Theresa May and Valentine's defeat

Today, Prime Minister Theresa May lost another Brexit vote in Parliament.

It was not a “meaningful vote”, as the British like to say when the motion is only symbolic. But it’s full of political meaning. Basically, it shows that the Prime Minister cannot count with the hardliners within her Conservative party.

Moreover, here in Brussels the vote is seen from two complementary angles: first, Theresa May is not in a very strong position to negotiate any kind of clarification or addition to the existing draft deal; second, she can only avoid a catastrophic no deal scenario if she negotiates with the Labour Party. Therefore, there will be increased pressure on her to do so. She might resist it, she might even find such option as difficult as swallowing the bitter pill, but in the end, she must think in patriotic terms, not just in a partisan manner.

But can she do it? That’s a big and very serious question mark.

EU Parliament and Italy

Yesterday, Giuseppe Conte, the Italian Prime Minister addressed the EU Parliament in Strasbourg.

I do not share some of the views he expressed. However, I would assess his speech as moderate and pro-European.

The Prime Minister talked about immigration – a very central theme for his government but also for the rest of Europe. And about the need to go back to reinforced solidarity among the European States, as well as about defence matters, foreign policy and the EU at the UN. He emphasised that cooperation with North Africa and the Sahel are a priority for his government and invited the EU to be more coherent and proactive towards those two neighbouring regions. But above all, Conte reminded the MEPs that the connection between the EU institutions and the citizens is crucial. Too much emphasis on economic measures without considering the people’s views is wrong, that was basically his opening point and one of the key messages. It’s an opinion that reflects the view that there is a serious gap between the citizens and the elites. We might see that as a populist slogan, but I think it’s important to pay attention to it.

Giuseppe Conte represents a government that is politically distant from the mainstream parties that control most seats in the EU Parliament. Therefore, as many had anticipated, the responses that followed his speech were distinctly negative. The star MEPs focused their critical interventions on some of the recent decisions taken by Conte’s powerful deputies – Matteo Salvini and Luigi di Maio. These are the strong players in Conte’s government. The MEPs gave no truce to Conte on account of those two.

In my opinion, that approach was the wrong one. Conte’s statement was a constructive attempt to build a bridge. His effort should have been recognised. Nevertheless, the MEPs decided to push the Prime Minister into his usual corner, and punch him, instead of offering a helping hand and try to bring him to the centre-ground of the European preoccupations. I judge the MEPs showed little maturity. Once again, they were more concerned with theatrics and sound bites, trying to project a tough public image, than with looking for sensible action.

The Prime Minister must have gone back to Rome with a strengthened impression that key European politicians, in the EU Parliament, do not understand the political realities his country is going through. They prefer to put Italy in the dock.

That's poor political judgement.

Theresa May and her negative delaying tactics

As I listened this afternoon to Theresa May’s statement at Westminster – and to the following parliamentary debate – I could only conclude that the Prime Minister has no concrete alternative plan to the existing draft Brexit Deal.

Moreover, she is not credible when she sustains that “the talks are at a crucial state”. There are no real talks taking place. And there is no plan to that in the days to come.

The Prime Minister is just trying to gain time. Not that she expects a miracle to happen in the next couple of weeks. No. Her hope is that in the end the British Parliament will approve the Deal, with some cosmetics added to it, but basically the same document that she has agreed with the EU last November.

To believe in an approval because the MPs will have their backs against the wall is a very risky bet. Also, it’s distinctly unwise. In the end, it might bring all of us closer to a No Deal Brexit. Such possible outcome would have deeply negative consequences both to the UK and the EU. Only open fools, like David Davis, Boris Johnson and Jacob Rees-Mogg, can believe that a No Deal situation is a good option for the UK.

It’s time to bring the Prime Minister back to earth and stop the delaying tactics.

As a footnote, it’s quite shocking to see that idiotic belief about the positives of a No Deal being militantly supported by some mainstream British media. For instance, by The Telegraph, the well-known right-wing daily newspaper. This media behaviour is clearly the result of a mixture of chauvinist madness with commercial opportunism – trying to sell newsprint paper to the retrograde Conservatives that constitute a good share of the British market. It’s abundantly irresponsible.

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.