Reflecting on the United States elections

United States: after the confusion

Victor Angelo 

This week's subject has been the US presidential election. I don't want to get into the current discussion now. I just want to address two aspects that I think deserve more attention. 

The first is about the "beef". In 1984, a hamburger company created an advertising phrase that was immediately appropriated by the political class. The phrase was: where is the beef? In other words, beyond the verbiage, tell us what concrete proposals you are making? The question remains in the political arsenal and has a lot of argumentative force.

This year's election beef was a mixture of economic perspectives, pandemic management, and the fight for racial equality. These were the flags that mobilised the voters, beyond the deep love or disgust that each candidate raised. It became clear that citizens participate more in the electoral act when the meat is consistent, made of great causes.

The economy seems to have been the most important motivator of voter turnout. This reminds me of the famous expression used by Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign: "It's the economy, stupid! Donald Trump was, for his supporters, the best bet in terms of economic recovery. They were convinced that the covid would soon be resolved with the discovery of the appropriate vaccine. The important thing was to have an ultraliberal president in the economic area and a light foot, in fiscal matters. Trump managed to sell this image, as well as the representation of an opponent who would be in the hands of the leftist wing of the Democratic Party, i.e. who would be a puppet of what he called “the socialist radicals”.

On Joe Biden's side, the beef was in the pandemic, repeating the accusation of Trump's incompetence and lack of respect for safeguarding the lives of his fellow citizens. To this he added the fight against racial iniquities and violence against black citizens.  This political hamburger was a complete meal. But there was a catch: his opponent exploited the image of common sense and balance that Biden conveyed, and tried to turn it into a weakness. Projecting energy is part of the qualities of those in charge. So now we have a leader who needs to work on his image and show that he can combine humanism with firmness, including on the outside front. 

And we come to the second aspect. The European Union needs to draw two or three conclusions from all this.

The first is that Joe Biden, having confirmed his victory, will necessarily have to focus on US domestic politics, to broaden its support base and resolve a good part of the bipolarisation, resentment and hatred that exists in the country. In terms of foreign policy, in addition to a moderate return to multilateralism, he will have to focus on relations with China and this country’s neighbours.  It will have little time for European affairs.

The second is that a large proportion of Americans have a very different view of politics, economics and social relations when compared to the Europeans. The continuing divergence of values leads to a weakening of the alliance with Europe. The political gap between the two geopolitical areas will widen. We must therefore work harder for a Europe that is as autonomous as possible in the areas of defence and security, the digital economy, energy, and international payment systems. The blackmail that the outgoing administration has put on us, seeking our alignment with its unilateral decisions on economic and financial sanctions, has taught us that we must create our own mechanisms in these areas. 

Third, Europe must strengthen its foreign policy to gain space and independence from decisions taken in Washington. European foreign policy remains weak despite the resources made available to the European External Action Service. We must be frank and decisively address this weakness. It is a danger to be in the tow of other powers.

This election should lead to a more balanced and constructive international relationship. The European side must be able to seize the opportunity and become a stronger, more active, and independent partner. If it does, we can say thank you to Donald Trump for forcing us to open our eyes.

(Automatic translation of the opinion piece I published today in the Diário de Notícias, the old and prestigious Lisbon newspaper)

 

 

 

Reflections prior to the US election

Election day, with confusion at the door

Victor Angelo

 

Writing about the American elections, while voting is going on, is risky. Despite the opinion polls, you never know what will come out of the ballot boxes. Especially this time, when everything is different, namely the high turnout by post and in person, which has reached unprecedented levels, the uncertainty as to what will happen in eight or nine states which may fall to one side or the other, and the extreme radicalisation of important segments of the electorate. With Donald Trump in the field, the rules and analysis schemes of the past are completely muddled.

But it may be less risky to write now than tomorrow when only part of the results is known and postal vote counts have not yet been completed. Except for miracles, and they sometimes happen, tomorrow begins the confusion. In fact, I fear that in the aftermath of the 3rd of November a period of great pandemonium will arise in the USA. If my prediction is right, we will get into a mess in which it will be difficult to have a clear idea about the future. Writing about this situation of political and social chaos will require a clear-sightedness that far exceeds my ability to navigate in tormenting waters. Those who know American society well think that the storm that is coming is simply terrifying. 

The plot has been in preparation for weeks. There is a plan, nothing happens by chance. The head of the production and prima donna is Donald Trump. As usual, everything revolves around his megalomania, narcissism, and personal interests.

The tragedy may unfold more or less in the following way. Once the results of the day have been calculated, of those who voted in person today, and if these provisional figures are in his favour, President Trump will come on television to proclaim himself the winner. He will say that the votes by post, which have not yet been counted, are not valid. He will thus be trying to ignore the will of millions of Americans who have chosen the safer postal route in these times of pandemic to express their choice. Such a statement about the invalidity of votes not yet counted, if it happens, would be a colossal abuse of power, an illegality and contrary to democratic practices. But the proclamation of Trump will immediately bring his supporters to the streets of the cities of the United States to celebrate the false victory. More than extemporaneous and unjustified celebrations, these demonstrations of radicalised and armed people - this has been a record year in terms of the private acquisition of weapons of all calibres - will serve to intimidate the rest of the citizens. I do not know what the response of the democrats or the police forces will be. But I have no doubt that we will see numerous confrontations. A former colleague of mine, a New Yorker who, like me, oversaw several complicated elections in various parts of the world, told me yesterday that she is more afraid of this post-election period in the US than of anything she has seen in the dictatorships she has been through.

Let us continue the plot. In the days that follow, Donald Trump will continue to speak out against the electoral process and not to accept a verdict from the ballot box that would be unfavourable to him. The political and social confusion will then be joined by a whole series of legal challenges, which the President's lawyers will set in motion everywhere. We will then enter a phase of general upheaval. In such a situation and with the character we have, it will be Donald Trump who will end up imposing himself. It is true that the institutions of counterweight and balance of power are a guarantor of democracy and they exist in the USA. But it is also true that the president has managed to have 220 federal judges and three for the Supreme Court confirmed during his term. These judges will be able to play a key role in the legal game ahead.

The scenario I describe here is obviously pessimistic. To plan the appropriate response, one must be pessimistic at times of major crisis. It would be great if it did not happen or if it happened only in a mitigated way. I would very much like to be wrong. But seeing the shop windows in downtown Washington or New York being protected with timber panes makes me more convinced that there is reason to fear and be prepared for the worst.

That brings me back to our side of the planet. If there is institutional upheaval in the US, the shock waves will have a destabilising global impact. The coronavirus pandemic has already turned much of the world upside down. An additional shock will further complicate the international scene. Are we, here in Europe, prepared to respond to a possible serious US political crisis?

If the above scenario occurs, we will see intense diplomatic pressure from Donald Trump's representatives in European capitals. They will do everything they can to ensure that this so-called victory is recognised. They will need to show the American people that European leaders recognise their boss's victory. This is a way of adding legitimacy to their claim. On these occasions, when elections are free and acceptable, heads of state have a protocol obligation to send their congratulations to the winning candidate. We shall see who does so, within the European Union. At the moment, out of a total of twenty-seven member states, I count between seven and nine leaders who, if they could, would vote for Trump. What position will they take in the event of an election mess? And what will Charles Michel's position be? What kind of relations can be expected between the two sides of the Atlantic in a second term that would be tainted by a markedly dubious legitimacy? These questions provide a backdrop to long discussions. Let us hope that it will not be necessary to return to them in a while.

In the meantime, beyond the European position, I am also concerned about the impact of such a crisis on the future of the United Nations and the multilateral system. Like the European leaders, António Guterres will also be under pressure. What message of congratulations can you send to a president if he emerges from confusion, abuse of institutional power and legal games?

In these unique times, there is no doubt that the best solution is a clear victory by Joe Biden. 

(AI translation of today’s text I publish in the Portuguese magazine Visão)

 

 

 

The flawed electoral system in the US

Two days prior to the US presidential election, I wouldn’t dare to predict the winner. This is a very complex electoral system and also a very imperfect one. For instance, it is now feared that many postal ballots might not arrive on time to be counted. In a normal state, the delay to take them into account would be extended by a few days. That is not the case in the US. Flaws like this one will cause serious tensions among the citizens. And it will open the door to many legal challenges. This means that one of the lessons we can already draw is that the electoral system needs a very well thought-through reform. It cannot continue to have features that are common in less developed democracies.

Europe's next door threat

The caricature of a megalomaniac politician

Victor Angelo

 

My text of last week on Islamist radicalism provoked several reactions. The Portuguese friends, who have always lived in Portugal, although with many tourist trips in the curriculum, were surprised by my description of the intolerance in certain schools and in some segments of French society. This is a situation that does not occur in Portugal. Here nobody intimidates anyone by mentioning Infante D. Henrique, Mouzinho de Albuquerque or the atheist José Saramago. Friends living in the Europe of immigration - in Belgium, for example - have recognised in my chronicle situations that are familiar to them. The rejection of values that we consider fundamental and life in social silos are commonplace. They added that it takes courage to talk about these things, in a balanced way and without falling into primary and racist recrimination. I have also received messages from former co-workers, who live out their Muslim faith in many parts of the world. For them, the problem lies in the mockery, the caricatures, their interpretation as an instrument of the Europeans' onslaught against Islam.

I remembered then that at the ceremony to honour Professor Samuel Paty, President Emmanuel Macron said that France would not give up the cartoons. I understand that position. What others see as an unforgivable offence is for us a simple expression of freedom. Religion is a subject like any other. In Europe, the collapse of the idea of blasphemy began in 1789 with the French Revolution.

Recep Tayyip Erdogan clung to Macron's statement about the drawings to treat his French counterpart as mentally ill. He said it repeatedly, so that there would be no doubt about the insult. For Erdogan, the drawing of a bottom end in the air is more shocking than the inhumane persecution of millions of Muslims by the Xi Jinping regime. He does not get nervous, he says nothing about it.

We live in unique times, with one head of state harassing another, from an allied country. Erdogan's hostility towards Macron is nothing new. It began right after the French president's term began in 2017. There are several points of friction between them, starting with the French opposition to Turkey's accession to the EU and continuing in Libya, Syria, in support of Greek sovereignty in the Mediterranean Sea and more and more. There is also enormous tension within NATO, where France accuses Turkey of holding back the organisation's strategy when it comes to regions in which Ankara is directly involved.

On top of all this, I can guess that Erdogan wants to break the alliance that exists between Paris and Berlin. He is investing against France knowing that Germany, where more than four million people with Turkish roots live, does not have much room for manoeuvre to take a stand in solidarity with France. By attacking this pillar of the EU and maintaining the recurrent threat of opening the gates to a new wave of migration to Europe, similar to that which occurred in 2015, Erdogan's Turkey constitutes the most important risk to the survival of the European project.

At the December European Council it is absolutely necessary that the leaders of the member states take a tough stance against the Turkish president. In international politics, there are only two possible positions before a bully: give in and end up paying a high price, or else confront him with all the necessary diplomatic arsenal.

Salman Rushdie warns us that "fundamentalism is not about religion, but about power". Erdogan sees himself as the leader of Sunni Muslims and the guardian of the faithful in the face of the so-called European attacks. He combines megalomania with fanaticism. In collusion with the radicals of the Muslim Brotherhood and with the financial support of Qatar, Erdogan has established in several European countries a series of associations which, under the guise of religion, culture and humanitarian action, promote totalitarian interpretations of the Koran and its image as a defender of the faith.

One of the tasks of the European security services is to monitor these associations and their most influential members. It is, however, an almost impossible mission. Monitoring every potentially violent extremist, to be done properly, requires around twenty officers, twenty-four hours a day. The real answer must therefore be political and shared by all European countries. 

(Machine translation of my opinion column of today, published in the Portuguese newspaper Diário de Notícias, Lisbon)

 

 

Dealing with Islamist terrorism

 Terror or democracy

Victor Angelo

 

Almost two hundred and fifty years after his death, Voltaire remains one of the most influential thinkers in the history of France and Europe. He wrote abundantly and was an advisor to the great ones of his time. His political and philosophical thinking opened the path that would lead to the French Revolution and to the national motto that remains today: Freedom, Equality, Fraternity. His writings mocked religious dogmas, at a time when it was very dangerous to do so. They fought against intolerance, advocated freedom of expression and the separation of the church from the state. In 1736, he wrote a play against religious intransigence, which he entitled "Fanaticism or Mohammed the Prophet". In this tragedy, Voltaire criticized directly and with all the letters the founder of Islam. Personally, I read the work as an onslaught against religions, in one case, openly, in another, that of Catholicism, in a more subtle way, so as not to endanger his own skin.

Now it has become impossible to teach Voltaire in some schools in France, especially in the suburbs of Paris. Certain students, coming from radicalized Muslim families, prevent this from happening. For these people, Voltaire is the worst of the infidels, the one who dared to sully the name of the Prophet. In the past, the Holy Catholic Inquisition burned heretics in public. In the present of the Islamist maniacs, Voltaire would be beheaded. Besides Voltaire, it is a danger to talk about the Holocaust or condemn anti-Semitism, to quote the writer Gustave Flaubert and his novel Madame Bovary - a free and passionate woman, a terrible example for a radical who considers that women should be submissive and walk covered from head to toe - or try to discuss Charlie Hebdo and the caricatures of Mohammed. A good part of the French public-school system lives in a climate of turmoil, in which the violent reaction of certain students has replaced the debate of ideas. And the intimidation begins earlier and earlier. There are already stories of boys refusing to sit next to girls in maternal schools.

All this leads us to the criminal and absurd decapitation that took place last week. The victim, Professor Samuel Paty, was a brave man and aware that the mission of the schools is also to form future citizens, free, equal in rights, in solidarity, respectful and responsible. But in France, the secular school has been actively undermined by radical Islamists since 2005. A recent survey revealed that about 40% of teachers of literary, civic and humanities subjects censor themselves and do not mention in their classes anything that might provoke the anger of the most fanatical students. Therefore, my first reaction to the news of the mad act was admiration for Samuel Paty's courage and sense of professional duty. He also reminded me that the response to the terrorist threat is to behave vertically, unequivocally firmly.

But courage and firmness cannot be just individual issues. Terrorism is not the result, as some claim, of the actions of "lone wolves”. The old visionary Friedrich Nietzsche said that "everything that is absolute belongs to pathology," but in the case of terrorism, this is more the social context. We are facing an extreme identity phenomenon, a social ecosystem that makes thousands of families live in a Salafist ideological swamp. They are a minority fringe of European citizens of Muslim faith, but their actions are very destabilizing.

In situations like France - and in other European countries, notably Belgium and the Netherlands, which go in the same direction as France - it is essential to get the right appropriate political response. On another occasion, I will write about the security treatment of the issue. Politically, it is important to begin by recognizing that fanaticism, by placing a manipulated, primary, and ignorant interpretation of religion above the values of the republic, is a threat to democracy and social peace. If the democrats could not deal with terrorist radicalism, the extreme right, whether it be called Le Pen or something else, in some other country, would use that political bankruptcy to gain power. And then it would crush everyone, not just the exalted knife-wielders and their supporting communities.

(Machine translation of my opinion column of today, published in the Portuguese newspaper Diário de Notícias, Lisbon)

 

 

 

China is firing into many directions

Today’s text, translate through AI, published in the Portuguese newspaper Diário de Notícias (printed version)

 

The fragilities of a giant

Victor Angelo

 

The economic corridors that China is building through Myanmar and Pakistan are two pillars of the New Silk Road, the gigantic ambition that President Xi Jinping formulated after coming to power in 2012. Gigantic is, in fact, an inadequate adjectivization, even minuscule, given the enormity and complexity of this ambition. Moreover, the scale of the New Silk Road has caused anxieties in many circles of geopolitical decision making in Europe, America and Asia, and explains a good part of the feeling of disapproval, of even opposition, that now exists in relation to China. In politics, as in life, unreasonable ambition ends up being a source of great conflicts.

The China-Myanmar corridor is above all an investment in pipelines - about 800 kilometres - which have already been completed and which I had the opportunity to visit about a year ago. A complementary project is currently being planned, consisting of the construction of a railroad that will follow the route of the oil and gas pipelines from the Burmese sea coast in the Gulf of Bengal to Kunming, the capital of Chinese province of Yunnan. This infrastructure is intended to facilitate China's oil imports, avoiding the long and dangerous route through the Straits of Malacca and the South China Sea. Oil and gas will come from the Middle East and Africa. The railway will be part of the link, which will continue by sea, between China, Mombasa and Djibouti, two ports of great strategic importance, both as points of entry into Africa and as bases for the transit of goods to Europe. Djibouti also offers an exceptional location for the protection of navigation between the East and Europe.  Chinese, Americans, French, Japanese, Indians, and others all want to have a military presence in Djibouti. China is the only power that combines in this territory defence with economic infrastructures.

Returning to the corridor that crosses Myanmar, I noticed that the large Chinese oil, gas, and public works companies have the green light from the Burmese military and Aung San Suu Kyi's civilian government. They also consider that it is up to the Myanmar authorities to deal with the fate of the communities affected by the projects. The problem is that no one has explained anything to the people or promised any compensation for expropriations and other losses. The result, for now, as I have personally seen, is the growing hostility of different Burmese communities against the Chinese. Later, the very security of the projects may be at risk.

The Pakistani corridor is presented as the flagship in the New Silk Road universe. It begins in the Chinese region of Xinjiang and ends in the Pakistani port of Gwadar in the Indian Ocean, close to the entrance to the strategic Gulf of Oman. I did not visit this Pharaonic undertaking - an investment of US$87 billion to finance roads, railroads, power plants and special economic zones. But I see that the intention is clear. China is helping Pakistan modernize communications, power generation, industrial, and port infrastructure. In return, it has direct access to the Indian Ocean and several free zones, where it can count on Pakistan's abundant and cheap labour. It also reinforces the political and military power of a key ally in its growing rivalry with India. I know that here too, as in Myanmar and other countries where the Chinese have large-scale investment, there is the problem of acquiescence or hostility of the populations. China is seen as an ally of the regime and the regime is seen as extraneous to the interests of the people. We have again the fragility mentioned above.

There are, however, those in China who are aware of these things and know that agreements with regimes of dubious legitimacy have feet of clay. Some think tanks have already begun to debate the impact of megaprojects on affected communities in Asia and Africa, as well as the disconnect that exists between political leaders in host countries, who are in favour of Chinese penetration, and the populations, who consider their politicians to be the main beneficiaries of the investments in question. I have been surprised at the frankness of certain interventions by Chinese academics. A monolithic China, yes, but with some subtlety of tone. 

 

 

Covid and the criminal leadership

Data and acts are truly clear. Covid is a serious threat. To life and to the economy. Only a fool can pretend otherwise. And if such fool occupies a position of power, he is not only a dupe but also and, above all, a criminal.

Nagorno-Karabakh

I feel so disturbed when I watch the images of the war that keeps going on between Azerbaijan and Armenia. One of the sides publishes a lot of videos showing the targeting of the other side’s military vehicles. Often, we can see the young soldiers trying to move out of the vehicle before the strike. They rarely succeed. It is too late to escape. And that is no video game. It is about young lives being wasted. Then, there are the bombings of civilian quarters. TV screens remind us that wars are full of human tragedies.

And in this case, there seems to be no serious attempt to stop the conflict. The Russians managed to have a humanitarian ceasefire declared only to be broken soon after. It would have been important if respected. It could open the door to the beginning of a political process. Unfortunately, that is not the case.

At the beginning I expressed the view that this would be a short duration flare up. Now, I think we are in it for a long while. More lives and livelihoods will be destroyed. The world is too busy with the pandemic, the economic crisis, the competition with China and the American elections to really care about a remote corner of the world that most people have no idea where to place in the world map.

It is sad. 

Europe, Africa and China

Artificial Intelligence translation of my opinion piece published today in the Portuguese newspaper Diário de Notícias.

Europe and Africa: searching for a common future

Victor Angelo

The sixth summit between the European Union and the African Union was due to take place later this month in Brussels. The pandemic has ruined the plan. Cyril Ramaphosa, South Africa's head of state and current president in office of the AU, tried his best to have the meeting held later this year before the end of his mandate. But he did not get enough supporters for a virtual option. In fact, the lack of enthusiasm for digital screens has revealed that there are significant differences between Europeans and Africans regarding the future of mutual relations, i.e., there is still no agreement on a common strategy.

If all goes well, the summit will take place during the Portuguese presidency of the EU in the first half of 2021. I hope there will be no further postponement. In the second half of the year, it will be Slovenia that will be in the chair, a country that does not give Africa the attention that we give. It is not yet known which head of state will be at that time leading the AU - he will be one from Central Africa - but I hope that Ursula von der Leyen's counterpart will still be the Chadian Moussa Faki Mahamat. Elected president of the African Union Commission in 2017, Moussa Faki is a noble, intelligent, and balanced politician.

We should take the extra time to try to resolve the differences. The priorities in the strategy proposal are too broad, they have everything. Moreover, they give the impression of being a European agenda and not a meeting point between the visions of one side and the other. They deal with the environmental and energy transition; digital transformation; sustainable growth and employment; security and governance; and migration. The African side's reading is that Europe continues to think in terms of aid and dependence rather than economic partnerships, investment, and free trade. The European concern seems to be, above all, to put a brake on migration from Africa to Europe.

Defining a strategy that responds to the concerns of the parties, when we have 55 African countries on one side and 27 European countries on the other, is not easy. For example, the realities that exist in the western region of Africa are quite different from the challenges that Southern Africa faces. A strategy for the relationship with such a diverse continent must stay on the broad lines, define only the objectives and general political principles. It must then be completed by more operational agreements, region by region - as defined by the AU. The strategy needs to recognize the complexity of the African continent. The same should happen with Europe. Certain European countries have a closer connection to Africa than others. Speak of Africa in Poland or the Baltics and you will get a distant comment, quite different from what you hear in Lisbon or Paris.

The strategy also needs to be clearer in recognising what the common problems are and how each side should contribute to solving them. At the moment, the draft strategy suggests that the problems are in Africa and that Europe's role is to help solve them. This is an old-fashioned way of looking at it. It does not serve to build partnerships among equals. Portugal would make an innovative contribution by proposing the discussion of shared challenges and the way to respond to them together.

There is also the problem of the great elephant which, although present in the room, Europeans prefer to ignore: China. Now, China is a major actor in Africa. The African leaders, who thought that a virtual summit with Europe would not be advisable, made one with the Chinese leadership, to discuss the impact of covid 19 and the possible areas of future cooperation, in the framework of the post-Pandemic reality. This initiative should open two new avenues for Europeans to reflect on, which need to be considered before the 2021 meeting. First, to recognize that the strategy needs to be revised to take into account the weaknesses that the pandemic has revealed. Second, to analyse the role of China in Africa and define a European political position on this increasingly decisive presence. Closing one's eyes so as not to see China's massive intervention in Africa may be comfortable, but it is a bad strategy.  

 

 

World Food Programme and Peace

The laureate of the Nobel Peace Prize 2020 has been announced today. It is the UN World Food Programme. And I think it is the right decision. The WFP is a huge UN agency providing food assistance to millions of people in many corners of the world, including in the most dangerous places. The dedication of its staff is enormous. It is matched by excellent logistics: the WFP has the best logistics within the UN system.

This well-deserved recognition comes at a time when the UN needs all the support it can get. The Nobel Committee knew it. I am sure they took it into account when deciding this year’s prize.

As a humanitarian agency, WFP has a good degree of autonomy within the UN system. That is the way it should be. It is important to keep a separation line between political work and humanitarian assistance. That notwithstanding, WFP keeps a close relationship with the rest of the system, in particular in those situations where major conflicts are underway.

Congratulations, then, to the WFP, its staff, current and past.