The US presidential election

On this side of the Atlantic Ocean, we can’t say much about the US presidential campaign that has started to roll on. But we watch with studious interest some of the key candidates on the Democratic side. On the Republican side there is nothing to see. Donald Trump is the candidate and he will fight with his usual bravado, and contempt, to keep the presidency. Concerning the Democrats, there is a lot to keep us interested during the coming weeks. Including, of course, Michael Bloomberg. The question he raises is very simple: how much support can a billionaire buy? At this stage, there is no real answer. But he will attract a good deal of attention and lots of fire, from all sides.  

The Munich Conference and the European views

The US Secretary of State, Mike Pompeo, addressed the Munich Security Conference today. His line was very clear: the US has not moved away from supporting the European Defence, they remain even more engaged than before. In addition, he expressed the conviction that West is winning in the international arena.

His speech did not generate a lot of enthusiasm. Actually, the participants ‘reaction was very subdued. Polite, but not convinced. The audience’s quietness has shown that the Europeans have serious disagreements about the current Administration’s international politics, including the way it relates to Europe. Among other things, they judge that President Trump is not sincerely committed to collective defence. The NATO exercises, including the large one that is about to start, called DEFENDER-Europe 20, are perceived more as training opportunities for the American troops and less as a demonstration of unity among the allies. Also, those listening to Mr Pompeo have some problems to understand some of President Trump’s approaches to international affairs, in particularly, when it comes to Russia.

Furthermore, the “winning” view expressed by the Secretary of State is not shared by the European leaders. President Macron said it soon after the Pompeo speech. But it is not just the French President that espouses that stance. The German President had stated the same view yesterday, at the opening of the conference.

I take four main points from all of this. First, it is important to continue to assert the European commitment to the alliance with the US. Second, the Europeans should state their views with clarity, particularly when they do not coincide with the decisions and comments coming from Washington. Third, the EU must keep investing on joint military and defence projects. This investment should bring together as many EU countries as possible, knowing that it will not be possible to get all of them to step in, and should be presented as the European pillar of the NATO effort. Fourth, Europe must reach a modus vivendi with Russia and China, that considers the European interests but is not naïve. Russia is our immediate neighbour, which means we must agree on keeping the bordering space between them and us safe and prosperous. China, on the other hand, is a major power in the making. Europe cannot have an indifferent position towards it.  

The 2020 Munich Security Conference is not just about the West

Today started the 2020 edition of the Munich Security Conference (MSC). This is an important annual event, that brings together a good number of decision-makers in the fields of diplomacy and international security. It is necessary to pay attention to what is said at the conference, even if the topics that are discussed reflect a lot the German views and concerns on international instability.

This year the key topic is about a strange word that only a German mind could have invented: "Westlessness". For the organisers, this new concept captures two major fears. One is related to the perceived growing uncertainty about the future of the Western world. The other is about a retreating West, in the sense that our democracies are less and less present when it comes to addressing the key issues of the world.

I must confess I do not like the concept. I have written about the absurdity of still believing that we, the Europeans from the EU and the US, should be considered the centre of the world. It is the idea that our values are higher than those prevailing elsewhere. That’s old fashion thinking. Our values are only good if they strength our democratic institutions and keep people like the US President or the Hungarian Prime Minister within the bounds defined by the rule of law and the respect for minority opinions.

We live in a different world. There are now several centres of power, in different parts of the world. Diversity is the new feature. Regional interests are now very different from those the Europeans were used to. We recognise the new set of regional interests. But we expect every government, big or small, to follow without any ambiguity the human rights principles, as adopted by the UN, and to resolve any conflict through peaceful means. Basically, what this means is a return to the UN system, the reinforcement of its authority and the acceptance of the mechanisms that have been put in place during a good number of decades.

Boris and his crazy world

I would summarise today’s Cabinet reshuffle in the UK along three lines. It was a public opinion disaster, because the only thing people will remember is that Boris Johnson got into a fight with one of his closest allies so far, Sajid Javid. In addition, it demonstrated that the Prime Minister wants to concentrate the key levers of power in his office and leave very little room for policy decisions in the hands of the Cabinet ministers. And, third point, it confirmed that the real power behind the throne Boris occupies is his crazy political advisor, Dominic Cummings. Cummings is a puppet master.  

The right question

I have always admired those who are good at asking the pertinent questions. For me, that proves they are intelligent people. A well-formulated question is powerful. The other side can feel deeply challenged. And that's what we want politicians to feel. 

Leadership in Germany

Chancellor Angela Merkel and her party are losing ground. They are going through a party leadership crisis as well. On the other hand, Alternative for Germany (AfD), the extreme-right party that is host to a good number of Neo-Nazis, is getting stronger. Both facts are bad for Germany and for Europe. And to add to the crisis, we have a very weak Social-Democrat Party, a disappearing SPD.

It is a major paradox to have a political impasse and so much extremism in a wealthy and well-functioning democracy. President Clinton used to say, it’s the economy, stupid! That’s not true in the case of Germany. It’s the national identity issue that is at play. Germany has become an ethnically diverse society. That was further accentuated after the mass migratory flows of 2015. And all this has not been properly addressed. Inclusion is more than learning the language and finding a job. The German situation should make us reflect about the way rich European nations deal with large segments of the population that have different roots and look different from the traditional picture each nation has drawn of herself.

In the meantime, the country must find a credible political leader that can take votes away from AfD, not by copying some of the banners the extremists agitate, but because he or she is a balanced politician and knows how to respond to the people’s views. Angela Merkel did that for many years. But her time is now running out.

Who could be next?

Europe cannot afford to have in Berlin either a weak government or a Chancellor that is not an enthusiastic European. Confusion about the role and the future of Germany in Europe could lead to a catastrophic situation within the EU. This is a crucial issue.

Coronavirus and daily routines

The coronavirus outbreak keeps making the headlines. It is on all the major news channels and papers. There is uncertainty and that causes some level of preoccupation.

In our part of the world, there are only very few cases of people infected. Seen from the perspective of the ordinary person on the street, the disease remains a distant threat. People don’t wear masks. If one went out with a mask that would generate a lot of anxiety around. But everybody knows we live in a globalised world. The contamination can spread fast. People are also aware of the economic importance of China. In many ways, some of us are more concerned with the economic impact than with the public health dimensions.  

In the current context, let’s keep the focus on the public health aspects. The key points are to contain, to reassure and to avoid unnecessary alarm. It is also advisable to combat all types of stereotypes.

Daily routines should go on.

A New Green Deal

Economic growth cannot be achieved at any cost. In today’s world, the impact of production on environment must be part of the calculations. Growth that deteriorates the environment, that increases the CO2 emissions, that is artificially supported to keep quiet some sectors of the electorate – the EU agricultural policy is the best example of distorted and wasteful growth, and we are talking about billions of euros every year  – all that should be considered negative growth and accounted for as such. 

Almost 30 years ago, the UN Development Programme (UNDP) came up with the concept of human development. This model was much more inclusive than the old notion of economic growth. It included more than just the production of additional goods and services. It was an approach designed to add to the response to the basic needs of a population other essential dimensions that would bring social peace, equality of opportunities and people’s creativity and dignity. And gradually, it also incorporated the judicious use of natural resources and the environmental dimensions. We tried to resume it under the designation of sustainable growth, but it was more than that. There was a strong human security aspect in it as well as a resource sustainability dimension.

In many countries, lots of people have been brought out of poverty during the last three decades as well. But the environmental dimension was kept aside, not considered when planning and opening new economic avenues. And if we travel to India or China, we can immediately understand the costs those societies have to pay for not paying attention to the natural context.

The problem is that natural phenomena do not respect national borders. What starts as a national problem ends up by being an international issue. That’s what the Paris Climate Conference of 2015 tried to put on the table. Global matters require concerted international efforts. 

In terms of urgency, it is obvious too many of us that economic expansion cannot bring additional CO2 on a net basis. There is a need to mitigate and to compensate. These two words should guide the way we look at the production, distribution and consumption of goods in the future. The new economy should be about proximity, mitigation, compensation and substitution. These areas offer immense opportunities, both in terms of business and jobs. They allow us to put GDP in the shelf where history keeps the past events and imagine a new Green Deal. That’s the one of the most immediate challenges.   

Absolute power leads to disaster

Four out of the five permanent members of the UN Security Council are now led by men with absolute power. They have been able to place themselves at the apex of the pyramid, undoubtedly above the institutions existing in their countries. They exert their authority in political contexts with no real checks and balances. They decide, they command and everybody else obeys. In two of the countries, there are democratic oppositions, one should recognise it. But the recent happenings show that such opposition parties have very little room to act as balancing powers, as an alternative brake to any excess. Extreme polarisation makes the majority party act as block, as a protective barrier to the leader.

All these situations are very worrisome. Recent history, especially at different moments of the past century, has shown that autocratic leadership can be the fastest route to disaster. Dictators, big and small, need to create conflicts with foreign powers to survive and justify their policies. The process they follow is clear. They start by challenging the validity of international law and the role of multilateral organisations. Then, they try to ride on an existing sub-regional conflict by taking sides. That allows them to make the enemy identifiable. And the tension keeps growing.

It is time to clearly state that diplomacy is better than conflict. And to add that in a world as global as it is ours today, the only way to keep peace and prosperity is through increased cooperation and positive alliances. But above all, we must reaffirm that democracy and full respect for everyone rights are the best lessons we have learned from past crises.

Macron leads on defence

Today President Macron of France delivered a very long, dense speech to the top military personnel. The President shared his deep concern with the new international order, which is basically defined by rapports de force and not by international law and underlined once again the need for an autonomous European defence pillar, as well as his call for a strategic dialogue with Russia. But his main messages were about France as a global power and his country’s nuclear capabilities. He spent a bit of time explaining his approach to nuclear power, as a means of deterrence, a weapon that is there not to be used. France is the only nuclear power within the European Union, now that the British are outside.

But my deep reading of his address makes me conclude President Macron wants to take the lead in European defence matters. That could be part of his legacy. But he is very much aware that Germany is not ready to move too far in such field and that several other EU countries, particularly those in the East, think that the key dimension of our common defence passes through keeping the US fully engaged in Europe. 

In such circumstances, the French President wants to convince the Poles to adopt his views. That’s why he was in Poland at the beginning of the week. He also needs to convince the Polish leaders that European defence is a genuine concern, not just a screen to have France and Germany dominating the European military scene. There is a bit of a silent rivalry between Poland and Germany on defence matters.

Poland pays a lot of attention to its armed forces and it has become a key player in European military matters. The problem with Poland is that its leaders follow a political line that is very different from the one Macron promotes. And that does not facilitate a collaborative approach.