Salvini will become Trump's man in Europe

The Italian people will decide what next, when called to vote for a new government. That’s how our democracies work. It is however quite clear that one of their potential choices, Matteo Salvini, is an anti-European Union, for reasons he knows better than anybody else. He is also an extremist, fully supported by the most reactionary sectors of the Italian society. Many voters might think that he represents the kind of leadership the country needs. But there are also large sectors of the public opinion that see him as the wrong type of choice, someone that can bring disaster to the country. And that disaster could happen quite soon, it is not just a question of long term.

From a European perspective, if Matteo Salvini becomes Prime Minister that is bad news. He will carry division, xenophobia and ultra-nationalism to the European debate. Consensus building will become even more difficult than it is today. He is the enemy from inside. There is no bigger enemy than the one that lives among us.

He is also the strongest ally of the EU’s outside enemies. Some analysts mention his subordination to Vladimir Putin’s money and interests. That is dangerous enough. Putin’s agenda is to destroy the European unity. But I see an additional peril. He will become President Donald Trump’s agent within the EU, in the Council meetings and every time a key decision that might contradict the American policy is on the table. President Trump is no friend of the EU. If I were asked to prioritise the outside leaders that are hostile to the common project, I would start by referring to his name as number one. And I would add that such antagonism is particularly risky, as it comes from the leader of a country that has very close ties with Europe and a strong presence in some of the EU countries, not to mention that it is the most powerful nation on earth. President Trump and his circle will be making good use of Salvini’s duplicity and radicalism.

These are indeed new challenges. They certainly require a different understanding of the old established practises.

Italy and its political clowns

It would be an exaggeration to say that Italy has become a fragile democracy. The governing coalition might be collapsing tonight or tomorrow, but the State institutions are functioning. The President has the necessary prestige and authority. The judiciary system works. And, in general terms, I think we should recognise that public service is experienced and can be competent, if left alone.

It is the political class that is in deep crisis. It has been like that since Berlusconi´s time, in the 90s. His Forza Italia was a joke, inspired by his own example and megalomania. And it created a lot of additional party clones, as time went on, including the populist 5 Star Movement. It has also opened space to the ultra nationalist movements to flourish. 

In this context, the real challenge is to see the emergence of different type of political leaders. Unfortunately, that seems to be a very remote light, at this stage. 

The dangerous game between the US and China

The ongoing conflict between the US and China is reaching new levels of danger. It would be a mistake to see it as just a trade dispute. This is about rivalry on all fronts. The US President and his circle have a clear objective: make sure China does not become a menacing strategic challenger. Their strategy is based on two premises. First, if they manage to slow down the economic power of China that will have an impact on the country’s internal stability, making it more difficult for the Chinese to be a major world power. Second, they are convinced that the Beijing leaders will blink first and yield to the American interests. In the famous game of chicken President Trump seems to be playing, the one who gives up first loses.

In my opinion, both American premises have shaky foundations. China is on course to be a be a global power and they will keep that ambition on a steady road. The economic growth is strong enough – over 6% per annum – to ensure it will happen. They will be able to fully challenge any other country, including the US, by 2030, at the latest. Secondly, the game of chicken is always a disaster. It will certainly be a disaster if the other player is China. Its leaders cannot yield to the Americans. They will play with prudence, but the end game, on their side, is to respond to confrontation with their own type of confrontations. That is disaster in the making. That is the reason we should not take the current crisis lightly. And that is why I think we need a third-party mediation as soon as possible. The only problem is that I can’t see any actor or institution being able to play such role.

Japan and South Korea

A couple of friends are not paying attention to the growing tension between Japan and South Korea. I am telling them this is a serious development. And that we must be talking about the matter with a louder voice.

 I know this is August, but there is no holiday taking place in that very sensitive part of the world. Japan does not like the way South Korea is approaching the North. They are also worried about South Korea’s policy towards China. However, above all, there are two major factors that make the mixture particularly complex: hard nose trade competition, as perceived by Tokyo, and old anti-Japanese sentiments that permeate throughout the Korean nation. 

All that are dangerous crisis factors. They would call for wise efforts from both sides. Unfortunately, we are far from that, at the present stage.  

  

TV shows that create the conditions for demagogues to win

People who spend too much time watching soap TV programmes should not be allowed to vote in elections that go beyond the affairs of local administration. This is certainly a shocking statement and of course, I do not mean it. Everyone has and should keep the right to vote. That is what democracy is about. Every vote matter, be it the one coming from a high-level scientist or from a uneducated person.

My initial phrase aims just at opening the debate about the influence of superficial TV shows on people’s views of their country and the world. I am one of those who is convinced that the competition between TV channels is narrowing down people’s capacity to have a full and intelligent view of their surroundings and the world at large. TV shows are contributing to the development of a majority of voters that do not understand what is going on, do not care about the common good and, in the end, become vulnerable to the crude rhetoric of people such as Donald Trump, Vladimir Putin, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, Jair Bolsonaro or Rodrigo Duterte, to cite just a few of them.  

These politicians take advantage of such alienation. They are experts at proposing basic answers to complex issues. They know people can identify themselves with a simpler view of things.

The democratic combat is therefore about fighting banality and stupidity on TV. The younger generations are no longer as connected to traditional TV as the older ones. They prefer to make use of their cell phones and get their information through them. It is not always a good option, but in general is better than TV and their ridiculous treatment of the news and minor issues. But older age groups are still very dependent on what they get through the TV channels, in a classical way of accessing information and entertainment. They are the people that need to watch better TV programmes. They also deserve it, as an expression of respect. 

Big corporations should be under pressure to withdraw publicity that is linked to substandard TV shows. That is a way of approaching the matter.

August blues

At this time of the year, a good number of people in the Northern Hemisphere are on leave. This is the peak period of the Summer season. But this year, I see some differences. Many people are worried. They look at the international politics scene and do not like the current trends, the surprise decisions, the conflict approach that seems to guide some of the leaders. There is a good deal of uncertainty. That might end up by having an impact on international peace, in addition to the one on the economic situation. Then, people look at the type of weather we are experiencing, the news about the nature, the whales, the Arctic, and wonder about the future.

I do not want to be pessimistic in August. But there is no doubt that things are taking a shape that does not announce easy days ahead of us. It would be inappropriate not to register the apprehensions that one can discern. As it would not be right not to call for a different kind of leaders.

IMF and the EU's ambivalence

The best people that could compete for the leadership of the IMF, following Christine Lagarde's departure, are not from Europe. They are from Mexico – Agustin Carsten, who is currently the General Manager of the International Bank of Settlements –, from Singapore –Tharman Shanmugaratnam, Chairman of the Singapore Monetary Authority and Senior Minister –, and from India – Raghuram Rajan, former Governor of the Indian Central Bank.  These three are head and shoulders above the names the European are putting forward as their candidates. In a better system of global governance, one of them should be the next Managing Director of the IMF.

But, again, it will be a European. This has been the game for the last seven decades. The US gets the top job at the World Bank and Europe goes for the IMF. The European will be chosen because of EU’s political considerations – the balance between the different regions of the Union – and that will be it. It might end up by being someone competent. But certainly, if we give credence to the short list that is under consideration, an intellectual pygmy compared with the names I mention above, from other parts of the globe.

This would have been an opportunity for the EU to show to the world that it means business when it talks about the reform and the strengthening of the institutions of global governance. But the EU leaders do not want to walk the talk. They prefer a narrower view and respond to their EU internal politics first.

It is a bit of a shame, isn’t it?

No Deal, soon in a street near you

31 October is not too far away. But it is far enough for us to be able to say what is going to happen to the UK’s Brexit. However, it should be clear, at this stage, that the No Deal is very likely. If, in the end, we get to that point, it is obvious that the relations between the EU and the UK will reach a very low point. It will take a lot of time to recover from such a fall. And that will also have an impact on other forms of cooperation between the two sides. It will certainly be, if it happens, a most defining moment in the history of modern Europe.

The extreme urgency of addressing environmental matters

If there is anything this Summer is teaching us, I would say it is about the urgency of addressing climate change. It has been an abnormal season, in most of Europe and elsewhere. Now, the extensive forest fires in Siberia and other Arctic regions have given us additional evidence we have entered another epoch in human life. Our duty is to join our voices and political pressure to those activists and to the scientists that keeping underlining the gravity of the current trends. The change must occur now, and it ought to be deep and resolute.

We have no longer the luxury of ignoring the issue. And that’s the message that people like Greta Thunberg are fighting for. Now, we must make the politicians and corporations act.

Boris and the crime agenda

As he stepped into his new job of Prime Minister, Boris Johnson promised to recruit 20,000 additional police officers. That number matches the reduction of the police force in England and Wales since March 2010. Many do not find the police service attractive enough anymore, if one considers pay, working hours, duress and the level of risk. And England and Wales have seen the crime rates explode during the last years. London and many other cities are no longer safe places. This remains a major failure of the recent government.

If the new Prime Minister manages to change the security situation, he would have collected a major political prize. If I were in his shoes, I would spend a good deal of my time trying to address the issue. There, as in any other country, the citizen’s safety should be a priority. The citizens want to see the government committed to such task.

This could be a central theme of the future electoral campaign that very soon Boris Johnson will be compelled to call. He wants to leave the EU by 31 October, to take the steam out of the Farage Brexit Party. And then, as soon as he is out, call for fresh elections. But he might have to dissolve the Parliament before 31 October, if the opposition to a No Deal is larger than his own supporters. In any case, elections are in the horizon. Besides Brexit, it seems that security might be the big theme. The only problem is that a No Deal Brexit – and we are now very close to that option – will disrupt so many aspects of the British life that he might be consumed during the electoral campaign by those issues and unable to deal with the security crisis that is going on.

Boris Johnson has interesting times ahead of him. I am not entirely sure he will be able to cope.