Sunday, 2 August 2020

The US and its political crisis


An American friend was deeply concerned by the current political radicalisation her country is experiencing. She specifically mentioned President Trump’s passing references to a possible postponement of the November elections. And there was also a question about the role the military could play if the President would decide to go ahead with such major decision.

I answered as follows.

I do not think he can change the electoral rules unless there is a major event such as an internal rebellion or an external war. The military will follow the existing rules. I do not see them supporting a wild and lawless Trump. He might try a trick or two, including something about the impossibility of a proper postal vote in a situation of public health calamity, but that would not be enough to mobilize enough support within the military, the security agencies, and his own party.

I recognise that the general atmosphere is not good and that many extremists do support him. They are blind and ferocious in that support. That should certainly be a matter to be worried about. But I do not think they can go far in terms of disturbing the electoral process. That said, I also believe that the country is living a profoundly serious crisis. And it is more divided than ever. Politically and socially. It requires a complete change in the political discourse and a new type of leadership, more inclusive and more responsive to the existing dramatic inequalities.


Saturday, 1 August 2020

Leaders must direct based on moral values


Translation of today’s opinion piece I published in Diário de Notícias (Lisbon)

This is no time for statues
Victor Angelo

A considerable number of us still see the current situation as something temporary, which scientific research, the announced financial subsidies and time will eventually resolve. I think that is a light view of the pandemic and its consequences. It does not consider the lessons learned from previous crises, which took years to overcome, even though they were not as serious as they are now.

In addition to the economic and social impact, major political fractures may arise. Confusion, uncertainty, and fears are fertile ground from which authoritarian politicians often sprout, painted as megalomaniac messiahs, with ultra-nationalist, populist and bizarrely dangerous ideas. The democratic space is under threat. Miniature copies of Donald Trump and company are beginning to appear. People who, coming from outside the political practice and without the experience of the functioning of institutions, think they have the simple and ready to cook solution that will solve all the evils of today. But, in reality, the shrewdest populists are waiting for the opportunity, which will arise, in their opinion, with the exhaustion of the response capacity of the existing social systems. 

In such a context, we need leaders who are enlightened, courageous, and capable of giving meaning to the transformations that are to come. It happens that people look around them and do not see such leaders. There is no new Nelson Mandela, no new Kofi Annan or a modern version of Jacques Delors. Immediatism and materialism have replaced the struggle for human values. The moral leadership that Pope Francis, the UN Secretary-General, and others could exercise is missing. They have stopped appearing or, when they do, they come late and talk about vague things. No one takes note.

Some people would say that only those who exaggerate are heard. I do not think so. The Prime Minister of New Zealand, Jacinda Arden, is a moderate leader whom everyone admires. She is not particularly active on the international scene because she is above all focused on her country's issues. Yet she is often quoted. Greta Thunberg and Malala Yousafzai can be mentioned as other examples of international leadership. These are respected voices that mark the global agenda. The reason, I would say in a simplified way, is because they go straight to the point, without diplomacy, nor personal fears or ambitions. They are perceived as genuine and combative. And with clear ideas. That is what is expected of those who lead.

On the other side of the coin, look at the United Nations. The last ten years have been a disaster for its credibility. The lack of authority at global level worsened after the crisis in Libya in 2011 and it experienced clear moments of deterioration in the following years. The invasion of Crimea in 2014 and the conflict in Ukraine, all done with impunity, the impasse in Syria, with repeated vetoes, the silence and inaction in the face of mass migration in 2015, the election of Donald Trump in 2016, a politician who does not accept the values of international cooperation, the lack of political response to the genocide of the Rohingyas in 2017, the exclusion of the Security Council from issues relating to Palestine, the attacks against UNESCO and WHO, are some of the milestones in the process of marginalization of the UN. Others could be mentioned, in a list that reminds us that the global institutional framework needs to be rethought. I would just add that there is no greater frustration in international life than being at the head of an institution that hardly anyone listens to.

In these things, I like to suggest we follow the example of that holy man, described in a famous sermon preaching to the fish, because people did not want to listen to him. In other words, this is by no means the time to remain silent, without drawing the lessons that the crisis puts before our eyes. A silent leader is just a statue, which these days is a danger, because the statues are being torn down.


Wednesday, 29 July 2020

Empty Summer


As we get closer to August, which is the annual holiday month, we realise this year everything is different. In our part of Europe, people are not travelling that much. They prefer to stay in the vicinity of their home region. They understand that the health crisis is picking up and they do not want to be caught in a messy situation far away from their residence. I live in an area of my city that attracts a lot of tourists. This time, there are no visitors. I do not have to worry about parking spaces. But I worry a lot when I see the shops, restaurants and so on empty and the hotels closed. That is the reality this summer.  

Monday, 27 July 2020

A major shock


The current pandemic crisis is a major global disruptor. It will have a complex cluster of impacts in many areas, from the political one up to the behavioural. Some of the consequences might end up by being positive transformations. When I say that I have in mind an increase in the work from home, which saves time and keeps fewer people in crowded and long commutes. I also think of greater investments in preventive health and more equal access to basic health services. On the other hand, it will have dramatic consequences on jobs, on poverty and despair, and on the performance of major economic sectors, including the banking one. The longer this crisis lasts the more complicated the recovery will be. And we have a prolonged period in front of us. This should mean that we must do whatever we can to prevent the transmission of disease.  

Sunday, 26 July 2020

The future of China's global influence


In the race for dominance, China believes they have time on their side. They know they have the population numbers and that their economy will become as powerful as the American in about twenty years or so. They also count of their centralised and therefore more coherent approach to foreign relations. They think that political changes, party hesitations and the plurality of interests play against the US and its influence in the world. All in all, the Chinese have a more optimistic view of their future influence in the world.

I would agree but for one thing. The Chinese leaders will have to keep an authoritarian control over their population. And that might not be possible in the future. They will insist on Chinese pride and nationalistic views as much as they will try to keep improving the living standards. Is that going to be enough? I am in two minds. I see it as possible, particularly with the generalised use of digital control systems and a strong emphasis on nationalistic propaganda. But I am also convinced that the new generations might be much keener on freedom of opinion and less inclined to accept the authority of the Communist Party than their parents or grandparents.

If one wants to challenge the global influence of the Chinese leaders one must invest in keeping the country’s youth informed about what is going on in those countries where democracy is a central value.

Saturday, 25 July 2020

Europe in the middle of a big fight


Translation of today’s opinion piece I publish in Diário de Notícias (Lisbon)

I do not want to start this regular dialogue with the reader without having the pandemic as the first topic. It is true that it is a beaten subject, with many people reflecting on what the world could be like once the virus has been defeated. A good part of these reflections is inspired by the principle of the crystal ball, a technique that has been perfected over time by all sorts of fortune-tellers. Other thinkers see in the unfolding of the pandemic the confirmation of their ideological obsessions. They take the opportunity to attack left and right. For them, the pandemic confirms the death of neoliberalism or globalization, even of capitalism, they warm up by pointing out the climatic causes, they greet in advance the end of American hegemony or the failure of the European project and so on. For many of these intellectuals, futurism seems to rhyme with unrealism.

It is indeed fundamental to know how to look to the future. We are aware that the great transformations came from those who could see beyond the horizon. One hundred years after the misnamed "Spanish flu", the coronavirus pandemic is the biggest shock after World War II. It is like a global tsunami. The world is working in slow motion or even still, in some cases. What was until March a global village has become an archipelago of isolated islands. The drawbridges are all raised, in fear of the contagion that might come from the neighbour. We live in a time of anxieties and fears. However, despite the uncertainties, it is not unreasonable to predict that tomorrow's world order will be vastly different from the one we have been building until the beginning of this year. Without getting into the crystal ball game, I predict that the issues of mass poverty, as it exists in certain parts of the globe, social inequalities, in the most developed societies, the deterioration of the environment and competition among superpowers will dominate the agenda of the future.

Each of these issues brings with it a web of other questions, which show the complexity of what lies ahead. On the other hand, it is necessary to overcome the social indifference that has taken hold of people. Presently, each one is concerned only with dealing with himself. One closes oneself in one's shell to the difficulties of others. Many political leaders then draw the conclusion that what is important is what happens in the domestic space, as if it were possible to stop the problems at the doorstep of the nation, with the lowering of a border barrier. From there to the crisis of the multilateral system is a dwarf's step, made easier the more timid or confused those at the head of the international institutions are.

The competition between the superpowers worries me. I see the United States and China taking a dangerous route. The pandemic has accelerated the conflict, particularly on the American side. New tensions and constant accusations against the opponent could lead to a false step, which would have profoundly serious consequences for all of us. Meanwhile, both sides are seeking to increase the number of their supporters in the international arena. Allies is not the exact word. What each of them wants is to create a circle of vassal states, which follow the political line defined in Washington or Beijing and limit the access given to the other side. This is the growing trend in the American relationship with Europe. They are succeeding with Boris Johnson, who has just made a political U-turn regarding Huawei. And they are continuing to press other European governments in the same direction and on several other issues as well. The only strategic response, however, is to maintain a certain distance between the two opposing parties by strengthening European sovereignty. The pandemic has taught us the term social distance'. Europe now needs to learn the practice of political distance. 



Thursday, 23 July 2020

The road ahead


This moment in our lives calls for prudence, tolerance, and generosity. These are the values that will take us through the deep crisis we are in. They should be mentioned in every major political statement. Leaders must be brave, truthful and be able to put across such messages. They should also be seen as caring and knowing where we are heading.

Wednesday, 22 July 2020

The growing conflict between the giants


The US Government’s decision regarding the Chinese Consulate in Houston, Texas, takes the tensions between the two superpowers to a higher level of danger. The US is militantly engaged in a campaign against the Chinese leadership. And the Chinese have now decided to respond in kind. This confrontation is certainly not good. It contributes in no small measure to increase international instability at a time of great uncertainties. I see this course of action with great concern. And my advice to the European leaders is quite simple: keep as far away as possible from this confrontation. Say no to the pressure coming from Washington and keep a strong stance as far as China is concerned. Both sides must understand that Europeans cannot be drawn into this very dangerous competition. Actually, we must state that we see international cooperation and full respect for each nation as the key ingredients to build a more stable and prosperous future for all. If we cooperate, we win. If we show disrespect for international norms, we open the door to defeat and disaster.

Tuesday, 21 July 2020

One single point about the EU summit


After four-and-half days of negotiations, the European leaders reached an agreement on the next budget for the European Commission, covering the period 2021-27, and on the a recovery plan that should help the countries most affected by the pandemic.

There are several remarks that could be made about both documents and the process that took place. I will certainly come back to them soon. But today I would like to underline that the leaders have shown they want the EU to work and to be kept together. That is a crucial message. Nobody tried to rock the European boat. We know there were very tense moments during the summit. In some cases, some harsh exchanges took place. But all of that was about trying to bridge national interests with the collective interests of the EU. I see that as positive.   

Monday, 20 July 2020

We are being treated as vassal States


This is an exceptional moment in our contemporary history. The pandemic is challenging many of our long-held views and opening the door to a number of discussions about the future. One such discussion is about the role of values and principles in international relations.

I am one of those who thinks that big powers are putting aside the norms that have regulated the relations among nations. I see them as trying to reduce others to the status of vassal states. This is the current trend, for instance, when it comes to the United States. Washington is looking at Europe as subordinated allies, as countries that must unconditionally follow the American policy decisions in matters of foreign affairs.

European sovereignty is being threatened by such an approach.

In the circumstances, the European leaders have decided to pretend that is not the case. They turn a blind eye and just hope that as we get into next year, there will a change of leadership in Washington and, consequently, a more amicable attitude towards Europe. I am not sure. In 2021, the leadership might indeed be played by a set of different actors. But I see the trend as deeper than just a passing option linked to the Trump Administration. I sense it is structural and strategic. It comes from the dangerous competition that is growing a bit out of control between the United States and China. That competition will define the coming years. Both sides will be looking for support in the community of nations. And their natural tendency, like any giant, is to force other countries to take sides. The United States and China will be pressing others into the category of client-states. 



This is a development that the global crisis is accentuating. We cannot feign to ignore it.