Bolsonaro and Trump

Jair Bolsonaro and Donald Trump have been duly elected. The democratic procedures in their respective countries have been followed. At least, at a level that made their elections acceptable by their countries’ institutions. The point is that democracy is fine, but it can result in the election of fools. Bolsonaro and Trump are two daring fools. If you dare, if you know how to insult everybody else, you might get there. They have taught us that lesson. We should say thank you for that and then, make sure they are not re-elected.

The Sahel and its major challenges

The poor people in the Sahelian countries are now facing three major menaces to their survival: terrorism, covid-19, and hunger. All three are growing by the day. And I was listening to reports coming from the region, I thought the people are very resilient and combative. They do not give up. But the combination of these three threats is an immense challenge. I noticed that Africa was mentioned in today’s EU summit. The European leaders know what is going on in Africa, in particular in the Sahel region. But they must take the initiative in the international fora to mobilise exceptional support for the Continent. Medical assistance and food should be prioritised. They are much easier to deal with than the security dimensions. However, security cannot be ignored. It has become a major issue.

A war economy or just words?

You call it a war, but you keep acting as if there was no need to reorganise the entire production to win the war. When you are at war, your economy must become a war economy. If not, you are not a good leader and you cannot connect your words with the reality that must be put in place. 

They can't drink oil

      The collapse of the oil price has several major implications. It is an economic tsunami. For the oil-producing developing countries, in Africa and elsewhere, it means an extraordinary loss of revenue. That’s the case for Nigeria, Angola, Congo, South Sudan, Algeria, Libya, Indonesia, Mexico, Brazil, Venezuela, Iraq, Iran, and so on. It adds fuel to social instability in those countries. It brings, at least, a new level of poverty and hardship to their populations. For the developed countries, it carries serious capital losses for the pension funds and other sovereign funds that were heavily invested in oil corporations and all the other companies that deal with bits and pieces of the oil industry. For all of us, it discourages new investments in renewable sources of energy. The bottom rock oil price makes any renewable too expensive to contemplate at this stage. 

The oil consumption is at present very low, because of the lockdowns that are implemented all over. But also, because the United States has continued to pump vast amounts of oil. They are now the largest producer, with 12.3 million barrels per day. President Trump could have compelled the industry to reduce daily production. There was a recommendation to cut it by 2 million barrels per day. He decided not to act because he saw this branch of the economy as a key pillar of his political basis. There are 10 million oil and gas sector jobs in the US, plus many billionaires that inject money in the Republican camp.   Now, he is promising them billions of dollars in subsidies. Public money being wasted when the solution was to reduce exploitation. His political choice has a huge impact on the domestic taxpayers’ money and on the world economy. It is inexcusable.

They say that misfortunes never come alone. Indeed.

Preparing for a new world

It’s time to start thinking about the shape of the world that is emerging in front of us. This pandemic is a deeper and wider challenge than what the politicians want us to believe. Tomorrow’s world will not be just a resuscitation of yesterday’s living styles. Some people say it is a call for a new paradigm. I would say that it is more than a call. It’s a must. Too many people will be excluded if we do not change the way we look at human security and dignity.

The world is next door

During the weekend, I spoke with friends living in Africa, South East Asia, Australia and the Pacific, as well as in Rio de Janeiro. I also have many friends in other parts of the world, from San Diego where dear Christine leaves to Helsinki, and so on. Had I chatted with them too, and I would have gotten the same report. Large chunks of the world are either closed or on a go-slow situation. Even remote places like Bougainville, an Autonomous Region of Papua New Guinea, is on lockdown. This is just an incredible reality. The world is getting poorer by the day.  The debt levels, both public and private, are growing by the hour. Elections are being postponed in many corners of the planet, except for a few cases, including Mali, that voted again today in the second round of their legislative assembly.

In many developing countries, the lockdown approach can’t work. People need to go out every day because survival is a daily chore. Moreover, in their cities, they live in large numbers in small and unfit dwellings. Overcrowding is the rule. There is no way they can follow the instructions about hygiene and social distancing. Extreme poverty means extreme fragility. And the health services have no capacity to deal with the disease. It’s a major problem. People are afraid but they know they have no other choice but to keep on moving. Fate, my friends remind me, is the currency of the poor. It’s the only thing they have in abundance. And after listening to that, I feel so disturbed.  

The big fight ahead of us

Besides the public health dimension, the main risk associated with the current world crisis is called isolation. Peoples have moved behind national borders and felt that was the only way to get safe. Before this calamity, there was already a growing mistrust on regional associations and multilateral organisations. In a few countries, the politicians were getting dividends out of that distrust. They were throwing fuel at it. I am afraid we might see a lot more of that as we get into the next stage of this global challenge. That would destroy the multilateral system, the UN and its main agencies, and other entities such as the European Union. At least, it would contribute to further marginalise them, making them irrelevant, walking ghosts.

Our response must address that menace. We must find the words and the platforms that would make our voices heard. It´s not going to be easy. But we should not expect any easy times ahead of us. We must be prepared to fight for international cooperation. We must be able to win over the leaders that want to take advantage of the crisis to build new walls.

The US leadership

These days, for a European, to watch American TV is painful. And deeply troubling. The country is going through a major crisis, a very complex one, that combines serious health challenges with widespread economic hardship. Both challenges are immense. On top of that, there is a leadership tragedy. The President has lost the support of key State governors and of the country’s intelligentsia. The messages coming from the White House and from the key States are full of contradictions. There is no common direction. Many lives are lost every day, in the most developed country in the world, a good deal of them because there aren’t enough medical resources available, others because of poor policy guidance. The President’s press briefings look like boxing matches. He spends hours repeating the same simple sentences, the only ones he can articulate. It’s most unfortunate that the pandemic happens when the leadership in Washington is so incompetent and shallow.

I should not be writing about this, because I am not a US citizen. It is up to the country’s voters to decide whom they want next. But as we live in a period of global crisis, we tend to look in the direction of the US for leadership. That’s the reason why I write about the matter. We need the US to lead. And what we see leaves no room for optimism. One of the few positive things is to see the resolve of politicians like the New York Governor Andrew Cuomo, a Democrat, or the Ohio Governor Mike DeWine, a Republican, as well as the California Governor Gavin Newsom (Democrat) and the Maryland Governor Larry Hogan (Republican). There are many more in action and doing the right things, but I just mention a few of them, in a balanced manner. The problem is the lack of clarity and support coming from the Federal government.

Another positive development concerns the medical research that is taking place in the US with a view to beat the virus. That research is done in collaboration with foreign institutes. That is certainly very encouraging. It brings together the best minds in the universities, philanthropic foundations and the private sector.

In the meantime, billions of dollars have already been spent in support of small businesses and individual workers. That is good but it is a short-term answer. The durable approach is to make the health system stronger, affordable to all, intensify the health education campaigns and re-open the economy as much as it is possible. For us, in addition to all that, we would like to see the US taking the lead in the UN Security Council, at the political level, and being much more engaged with WHO, at the technical level. The US must go back to the multilateral system. Its place is in the global scene, not simply in the Rose Garden.

Leading the international response

It is massively wrong to criticise the World Health Organisation (WHO) at this stage. We are still in unknown territory and unchartered waters as far as the Covid-19 pandemic is concerned. We don’t know what is going to happen in Africa and in other parts of the world, where the health systems are extremely weak. WHO has a technical presence in those countries and lots of experience in assisting them. As such, the wise thing to do would be to strengthen its operational capacity. That means that its authority must be recognised, and additional resources mobilised. To weaken and destabilise the organisation, as President Trump is doing, is unacceptable. We do not expect the current US President to provide the leadership it should, as head of the strongest State on earth. Donald Trump does not understand the world we live in and the role the US should be playing. But, at least, he should keep quiet as far as WHO is concerned.

The sad thing is that we are confronted with a devastating global calamity at a time there is no real global leadership. The US is getting more and more confused with its internal politics. The turmoil is amazing out there. Elsewhere, in the other regions of the world, there is no visionary leader, nobody of gigantic stature, capable to call the international action. The Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Arden, is sometimes mentioned. She is indeed an example. But her country is too small and too far out for her to be able to play a global role. All the other potential leaders are too busy with their own national situation – or messing things up, as it is the case with Narendra Modi of India.

I see a role for the UN Secretary-General. But I also recognise that his voice must be amplified by the international media, for that role to be effective. And that is not very easy to achieve at the moment.

Time for exceptional leadership to step up

This is a time of great anxiety. It’s a global challenge. It would require global political leadership, men and women in decisive positions of authority that would come together and would address the crisis with a single voice. It is not enough to have the G7 or the G20 finance ministers talking about debt relief and access to tremendous amounts of theoretical money. It is also not enough to get statements from the IMF, the WB or the WHO. Even the UN Security Council, if it could agree on a resolution, that would be good but insufficient. We need the key heads of State and government to agree on a joint declaration that would be some guide of roadmap out of the crisis. It would send an exceptionally important message of togetherness, cooperation and hope.

Unfortunately, we are very far from such a common position. The world is leaderless and more fragmented than ever.

If we can’t have a global message, why don’t we try to agree on a common European position at the leadership level? Is it too difficult to formulate a joint way forward, that would be larger than just talking about the post-crisis recovery, something of a shared vision about the kind of European society we would like to build together, after such a unique test?

The moment calls for leadership that can unite people and envision tomorrow’s world.