Robert Mugabe

Robert Mugabe passed away this morning.

I spent four years of my professional life (2000-2004) in close contact with him. During that time, I met President Mugabe frequently. In the end, on the eve of my departure, he came back to Harare from the province, for a final meeting and goodbyes.

I was then the UN representative in Zimbabwe.  

We disagreed on many things, but we kept a cordial rapport. I am not sure he has learned anything from me. But I did, from him. Among them, on this day, I will recall a couple of them.

First, leaders should not remain for too long in power. If that happens, time changes the positives into disasters. And what people keep in their minds is the negative tail end. Many will remember Robert Mugabe for that, the tragedy the country has become under his presidency and beyond.

Time limits are essential for democracy to be sustained.

Second, politics is about the control of power. And people in power, if allowed, will do anything to keep such control. Anything, indeed. Mugabe has destroyed Zimbabwe’s economy as a way of undermining his opponents. No price was too high for him to stay in power.

That’s why the building of democracy calls for strong institutions and an energetic private sector economy. Institutions go beyond individuals and bring balance. They counter authoritarian tendencies coming from those on the top of the executive pyramid. And people must be able to find alternative livelihoods outside the State.

Mugabe was also a hero for many, in terms of Africa's liberation. Maybe, that should be the main emphasis of any comment about his life, on this day of his passing.

Italy and its fragile new government

Italy has a new government. Giuseppe Conte has been successful at putting together a coalition of dissimilar personalities. It brings together populists, left wingers, centrists and technocrats. All of them have one thing in common: a profound dislike for Matteo Salvini, the extremist. It is obviously a fragile reason to pull together. But it might work. I am one of those who sees some strength in disparity. This government might want to contradict the naysayers.

Iran, Europe and the distant US

The key European leaders are shocked by the extreme approach the US is following regarding Iran. They think the maximum pressure policy taken by the Trump Administration is outside the accepted rules of international engagement. They also find unacceptable the targeting of European interests by the sanctions unilaterally decided by the US. The issue of Iran is deepening the gap between the two sides of the Atlantic.  

Boris Johnson and his disastrous politics

A few brief comments on tonight's vote in the British Parliament.

Prime Minister Boris Johnson suffered a major humiliation. It was not just a defeat. It should be seen as the confirmation that his strategy – the one that is designed by his Special Advisor, Dominic Cummings, and the PM implements – is not keeping his own camp together. Twenty-one members of his Tory Party voted against him, notwithstanding all the promises he made and, above all, the political threats he mouthed against them. Twenty-one is a big number and most of them are very senior people with a long public career.  

The Prime Minister has shown that his understanding of the British system of democracy is not far from the one followed by Vladimir Putin and other birds of the same feather. He sees his fellow party parliamentarians as just yes-men. They are not allowed any freedom of choice. In his opinion, they are at Westminster to vote for the PM, and that’s all.

The opposition must ride on tonight’s vote and present Boris Johnson in negative colours: under the spell of mischievous Cummings; following a blind approach to a catastrophic Brexit, for ideological reasons, with no respect for facts and the civil service advice; undemocratic and deeply authoritarian; unprepared for the job of unifying the country; and a frenzied liar. Those should be the lines of attack during the coming days and weeks.

Our 2019 political rentrée

Here, in our corner of the world, the political rentrée is upon us. The summer break is now over. And this year’s rentrée will see the changing of the guard in the EU institutions. With the new leaders, old unresolved issues could gain a new breath of life.

One of such issues must be the strengthening of the EU external policy.

We must develop a stronger common approach to critical international matters, such as the many crises in the Middle East and the pressing issue of Africa’s development. In addition, we must give shape to a more independent view of Europe’s global interests and dare to seriously move towards joint defence and security efforts. 

We also need to strengthen our alliances with other parts of the world. However, we must recognise that our perception of certain key issues is not necessarily coincidental with that promoted by some of our key allies. Such differences are not just momentary. They are not simply the result of leader X or Y being in charge in one of the countries that matters to us. They are deeper, as we have walked different historical paths and have created our own way of looking at what is going on in some problematic regions of the world.

A new human tragedy is emerging

Another major humanitarian crisis is emerging fast. This time is in the Assam State, in India. There has been a population registration process there. It is now completed. It shows around 1.9 million people left out of citizenship rights. Prime Minister Modi’s officials say these people have no ground to call themselves Indians. No identification, no citizenship means, in Modi’s India, expulsion, deportation to Bangladesh, of all places. And Bangladesh, that is already coping with the Rohingyas from Myanmar, says they will not recognise these people as citizens.

A new mass tragedy in a world that likes to talk about human rights, democracy and social progress.

Italy must reform soon

Giuseppe Conte is back as head of the new Italian government. Not a very easy task that of chairing a coalition between the 5-Star Movement and the PD (Democratic Party, a social-democrat party). They can stay in power for three years, until the end of the current Parliament. They can also fall apart soon. Nobody knows. What we know is that the new government – Conte II – has many divisive issues to deal with. The country is not in a very good shape, to put it diplomatically. It calls for serious reforms. Those reforms require consensus within the coalition, a very wise approach and lots of political courage. In addition, many people think that Matteo Salvini, the League’s leader, is a better option, that he is the one that can transform Italy. He is not, in my opinion, but what matters is the Italian voters’ views. He will be leading the opposition against this new government. In the end, if Italy does not address its problems – and I have serious doubts it will – Salvini might end up back in power again. And bring with him the image of a strong and resolute man. That would be a game changer. Certainly not a good one, in the end, but it would be too late to stop him.

Boris and his master play hard ball

Dominic Cummings, who is Boris Johnson’s high priest for strategy – officially, his title is Senior Advisor to the PM – knows very well that in war it is vital to regain the initiative. To win one must master the plan and the action.

Yesterday, the opposition and all those who are against a No Deal Brexit had reached an accord that could threaten the PM’s political future. They got the ball and the agenda. That was a major menace to Boris’s power. Today, that same group lost it, thanks to Cummings and his pupil. The suspension of parliamentary work decided by Boris Johnson surprised his opponents and destabilised their game plan. That’s how strategy is played by the big people.

But the game is not over. Today’s move has infuriated many Tory MPs that were sitting on the fence. They might find the courage to pay back. That must happen in the next few days and before the end of coming week. If it does, Cummings’ canny advice to Boris might end up by backfiring. The stakes are higher than ever.

We will see.

Deception and intent

We should always remember the wise aphorism about politics. It goes like this: in politics everything could mean the opposite of what it is said or done. Our job is to try to find out what is behind the words or the deeds. Like asking, what is the point? Sharp minds do that.

Not bad, this year's G7 Summit

Several experienced international analysts raised the issue before the meeting: is the G7 still relevant? They had in mind last year’s messy summit in Canada, as well as the fact that there are serious divergences within the group, particularly with President Trump’ views, not to mention that these countries have lost weight in the world economy. They barely represent about 40% of the global output, much less than when the G7 was established, over twenty years ago.

Many concluded that the G7 Summit had outlived its usefulness. That the summit was no longer justified.

My opinion has gone in the opposite direction. I wrote in my Portuguese language blog that such meetings are still advisable. They can help. Summits give an opportunity for eye contact between the leaders. That is important, particularly at a time when so much power is concentrated in so few hands. We live in a period that considers electoral legitimacy almost absolute, even beyond established rules and practises. I am against such an approach, but the fact of the matter is that we see leaders of our democracies claiming levels of authority that come close to personal autocratic rule. In such circumstances, personal contact can make a difference. Leaders must meet frequently.

The G7 is one such opportunity.

This time, the expectations were relatively low.

But the summit in Biarritz, France, went well beyond the expectations. It has been a better meeting than we had anticipated. The final press conference, that brought together the French and the US Presidents, has showed that the dialogue avenues are not closed. Both Presidents did well when responding to the media. We could see the differences of opinion between them, but they were dealt with tact.

One could say that much of the success achieved during the summit must be put to the credit of Emmanuel Macron. That is to a large measure true. He has been able to navigate the very difficult matters that were on the table as well as the unique egos in the room. It would be unfair not to recognise President Macron’s ability and efforts. However, there is more to it. The issues on the agenda are too big and complex – we have undoubtedly a very delicate mix of global problems. And global means global, when it comes to the negatives of such issues. The mood, when discussing them, could only be a serious one. Even in the case of those leaders that tend to see the world from their own very narrow prism. That’s not bad.