EU foreign policy

The new European Commission will have to think afresh the EU’s foreign policy, including its strategic alliances. The last few years have shown that world is changing fast. The new trends are clear enough for scenario designing. It should not be too difficult to agree on possible world scenarios in five- or ten-years’ time. The Europeans must decide about the kind of role they want to play in international affairs by the end of the incoming Commission’s mandate. And what are the bridges they want to consolidate.

Assessing the Gilets Jaunes

At my conference, this afternoon, I was asked about the Gilets Jaunes, the French demonstrators that took to the streets every Saturday for a long while, starting in November last year. I replied the protest is dead. And I explained that the Gilets Jaunes missed some important criteria that make the citizens’ movements successful. Therefore, they could only fail, it was just a question of time.

One, their objectives were too broad. In addition, besides being too many and shooting in too many directions, the demands kept changing with time. That is a serious mistake.

Two, they were not able to connect with other movements, not even with the trade unions, not to mention the political parties. No connection beyond the group means no alliance and therefore, no success.

Three, they were not aware that to win you should not demonize those who are not participating. You must show you are open to them. If you call them names, they will turn against you.

Four, to be successful, a citizens’ movement must remain non-violent. That is what history teaches us. Acts of violence associated with the movement play against it. The government knew that and was able to play that card well. Just think of the many TV images that were broadcast to show how much violence was associated with the Gilets Jaunes’ rallies.

Five, civic action calls for visible leaders to be the recognisable face of it. That was not the case. Every time a new potential leader emerged, he or she was immediately attacked by many within the Gilets Jaunes crowd.

Six, the government must propose an alternative to the demonstrations. The Macron government invented a “national dialogue”. It took the steam out of many participants and sympathisers in the Gilets Jaunes.

That is my reading, that is what I shared today.

 

Supporting the women fighting discrimination and racism

Today, it is imperative to share a word of support for the US Congresswomen, Democratic Reps. Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez of New York, Rashida Tlaib of Michigan, Ilhan Omar of Minnesota and Ayanna Pressley of Massachusetts.

This is not about interfering with the internal politics of their country. It is about supporting women that fight for the right to represent their constituencies, for equality and the values that are the foundation of the free and just world that we believe in. It is also about their dignity and a serious expression of our appreciation for their courage.

At the same time, we say no to racism and ethnically based violence. 

They are under very serious pressure, coming from one of the most powerful men in the world. But, in the end, in America and many other countries, right will prevail over might.

Responding to President Trump

Some people say that when it comes to the Donald Trump presidency, the right approach for the Europeans is to stay far away. That means to limit the contacts to the formal and the diplomatic exchanges. It is another way of saying, ignore and move on.

I am not sure that is the best response. We are friends and friends should talk in all frankness. If we disagree, we should say it. If we have a different view, who should express it. No need to be either rude or confrontational. But the European leaders should be true to themselves and to their American friends.

Silence will be interpreted as fear. In the end, it will open the gate for more errors and arrogance. Firmness, clarity and elegance are better rejoinders. Both across the Atlantic and for the European citizens as well.

On Bastille Day, defence matters

On this Bastille Day 2019, I think we can draw two very clear lines.

First, the European defence must be taken seriously. Our countries share a common set of values. Furthermore, they have pooled several political decisions that show the ambition to create a joint political space. This goes much deeper than any alliance with our non-European friends, including those who have historical ties with Europe. In view of that and because at a certain point our geostrategic interests might diverge from those defined by our non-European allies, it is much wise to build our own independent capacity to fight for our ideas and well-being.

This is a step-by-step endeavour. It might take a bit of time to be completed. But it is now time to initiate its construction.

That message came out clearly from Paris as the Bastille celebrations were taking place.

The second message is about Turkey. President Erdogan has now opted for the Russian S-400 missiles. That is a major challenge to NATO and a very serious breach of Turkey’s commitment to the organisation. He must be told we do not accept his decision. He might not listen to such advice, as he will state his country’s independence of choice. OK, that is fine. But we can no longer take Turkey as a full ally. We ought to make it clear to President Erdogan and limit Turkey’s access to key military and defence information systems available in the West.

It is true we should not mix this matter with Turkey’s ambition to become a EU country. This are two separate matters. However, on the EU issue I think it is also time to be clear.

Official secrets and the media

The British Police is now investigating the leak of Ambassador Kim Darroch’s cables. The task has been given to the Counter Terrorism Command because the leak is considered a criminal breach of the Official Secrets Act.

I agree there has been a serious violation of that Act. Ambassadors and other Envoys work under special rules and conditions. They must be able to write about their assignments in full confidence and without fear.

I authored many cables during my years as head of special political missions and every time I had to be sure the matters I was reporting about – and the opinions I shared – would remain within a very limited circle within the top decision-makers. Basically, the rules on the receiving side were about secrecy and access reserved to those who needed to know.

That is the nature of diplomatic work and international affairs.

There is another dimension that the Metropolitan Police raises, and I see as of exceptional relevance. In short, the Police advises media editors and the social platforms not to publish any additional document that might be made available to them on the matter or related issue and that is covered by the Official Secrets Act.

I agree with the Police’s warning. The advice takes into account the freedom of the press. The Police is not questioning the freedom to print and to inform. It is reminding all of us that some matters are of vital national interest and should be kept secret. 

Boris Johnson and Jeremy Hunt, in their frenzy to please as many Conservative Party members as possible, have indirectly criticised that Police’s statement. They fundamentally said the press could go ahead and disseminate that type of information. It is wrong. Their statements are just opportunistic and foolish. They mislead the public. That is not what leaders are supposed to do.

Ursula and her challenges

I have now read the questions and objections that certain parties in the European Parliament have raised and addressed to Ursula von der Leyen. Most of them are about petty issues. They are far away from the key concerns that the EU has indeed to face in the next few years. Instead of asking her about the relations with the US, China or Russia, for instance, they question the comments she has made on mundane matters during the last years. Some of those questions have more to do with constraints she has faced as Germany’s Minister of Defence than with real political choices.

Von der Leyen might not have been a strong leader up to now. She might not be charismatic politician. But she is a steady person. And once in a position of greater power, as President of the European Commission – if she gets the EU Parliament’s confirmation – she might be able to stand higher than when she was just a German minister. The function can make the lady. And give her the wings that have been missing up to now.

In any case, I hope she will be voted in. I am ready to bet on the balanced approach she might be able to bring to the job. Moreover, she will be working side by side with Charles Michel, the future EU Council President. And I think this tandem can rise to the challenges that are in the horizon. And they are many and complex.

About power

I told those listening to my lecture that in today’s world we cannot give a simple answer to complex social and political issues. And I mentioned the power issue, as the most striking example. It is no longer possible to associate power with just the control of the State or the banking system, as some were inclined to do. The sources of power are varied. For instance, Greta Thunberg, the young climate activist, takes her power from her persistence and peaceful style, the clarity of her cause, and the support she gradually got from other young pupils and students across Europe and beyond. She is at present, in many ways, a powerful figure, an agenda setter that all the big people want to meet and take a picture with. It is however more than that. Her message is positively influencing the global agenda and making a difference.

Political power, in a democratic and advanced society, is the result of a struggle between different views, interests and dreams. It is a balanced outcome

The critical importance of civic movements

As I get ready to address a key civil society association that brings together several prominent NGOs and citizens’ groups on matters of geopolitics and strategy, I try to concentrate my speech on three messages.

First, in today’s world, civic movements are key agents of social change. They contribute more than political parties to real value transformation, as, among others, #MeToo, the #ClimateStrike, the #UmbrellaMovement of Hong Kong, the LGBTQ grassroots actions, or India’s people’s campaign against corruption (@IPaidABribe) have shown. Governments know that fact and that’s why they are afraid of such movements. On the side of the political parties, their leaders are yet to understand how to connect with the citizen’s initiatives without falling into populist approaches and rhetoric.

Second, I would like my audience to discuss the role of the social platforms and the interaction between such networks and traditional media. In my opinion, the networks link people and keep them informed and mobilised, but it is the traditional media that gives a critical boost to such civic initiatives and struggles. TV channels, above all, but also credible print media. When they report about what is brewing in the social media, they give the cause a lot of leverage. They add a critical element of credibility. Therefore, we should not dismiss the links between the new and the conventional means of communication.

Third, we need to understand success. What makes a citizen’s movement successful? There is now some research on the matter. It needs to be further systematised and disseminated. Special attention must be given to issues of good leadership, personal commitment, focus, simplicity and image. But several lessons can already be drawn.

Charles Michel

In his new capacity as President of the European Council, Charles Michel cannot be perceived as Emmanuel Macron’s agent. He must show, early in the game and throughout, that he is as close to the French President as he is to any other key European leader. Michel’s overriding challenge is to be his own man, as Donald Tusk has been all along. I am sure he understands it. I can only hope that Macron is also clear in his mind. He tends to boss around. He cannot do it with Michel.