Fashioning "Global Europe" for the 21st Century (Originally published 01/10/13)

It’s not enough to talk about the European Union's standing and influence in today’s rapidly changing world: the EU needs to thrash out a new foreign policy adapted and responsive to 21st century challenges.This is urgent.  True, EU leaders, foreign ministers and senior official often engage in bouts of hand-wringing over Europe’s “loss of influence” and declining presence on the global stage.  This is often followed by a resounding thumping of chests as everyone agrees that Europe is – after all – still an important and relevant international player.  It’s not that simple, however.Europe certainly has much to offer. The EU single market attracts goods, investments and people from across the globe.  European technology helps the world tackle climate change, urbanisation and other 21st-century challenges, European design excites fashionistas the world over and tourists flock to European cities to enjoy good food, wine and visit exquisite monuments.Europe’s ‘soft power’ resonates when it comes to peace-making and reconciliation, trade, aid and the promotion of democracy and the rule of law.  With Croatia now in and others lining up to join, the EU retains its zone of influence in the neighbourhood.  And as the Eurozone crisis gives way to recovery, however fragile, global concerns about Europe’s economic performance are easing.And yet.  There is no doubt that the EU’s star does not shine as brightly as it should in many skies.  EU-watchers who once – too optimistically – believed that the Lisbon Treaty and the creation of the European External Action Service would lead to a more forceful EU foreign policy are disappointed.Their disappointment is even stronger when it comes to European security and defence policy.  Many believe that because it has no army, navy or air force at its command, the EU will always be a second class international actor, handing out cheques but not pro-actively influencing global events and decisions.No appetite for military actionEurope’s partners know that while governments in France and Britain may still have an appetite for military interventions in response to international crisis, their citizens – and Europeans more generally – certainly don’t. Significantly, Germany, Europe’s most powerful economy and an industrial machine that’s the envy of the planet, has made clear that it is not overly interested in taking on global responsibilities of the military kind.Germany is viewed by many as a reluctant giant which, as one newspaper recently put it, seems content to lurk in the shadows. German Chancellor Angela Merkel is fond of saying that Europe must become more competitive as China and other powers rise. “The world doesn’t sleep,” she said recently. However, she hasn’t coupled that with any grand visions for a continental revival.Within Europe, the doomsayers — of which there are many — insist that the Eurozone crisis and the impact of economic stagnation on European societies have accelerated the loss of EU influence in the international arena.China, India, Russia, Brazil and others are often seen in the EU as fierce rivals who want a ‘full-scale reversal’ of their relationship with the West by demanding better representation in multilateral fora and a stronger voice in global governance. Others argue that Europe should be more assertive and more self-confident when dealing with the cheeky new kids on the bloc.It was partly to respond to such concerns that the EEAS was set up three years ago to act as an EU foreign ministry — and certainly the EU flag is now more often seen flying across the world. But in today’s competitive world of rising powers, new alliances and increased geo-strategic competition, the EEAS is still seen as under-performing.Much of the criticism is levelled at Catherine Ashton, the head of the EEAS and the EU’s de facto foreign minister. It has to be said, however, that Ashton’s role is a difficult one and constrained by the limited space she is allowed by some of the EU’s bigger member states, including Britain and France.Pressure for a more effective foreign policyThe good news is that some EU countries want to go further. The foreign ministers of Italy, Poland, Spain and Sweden argued recently that Europe needs a strategic framework to help it navigate a more complex world. The famous question posed by Henry Kissinger, the former US national security adviser and secretary of state, about the dialling code for Europe has, by now, by and large been answered, the ministers said.“The critical question is no longer how to reach us, but instead what Europe should say when the phone rings,” they complained, adding: “we now have the hardware of institutions in place, we need to focus on the software of policies that makes the entire thing operate in a clear and credible way.”

The ministers are right: Europe needs a new strategic framework to help it navigate a more complex world than the one that existed in 2003, when Javier Solana, the former EU “high representative” for foreign and security policy, drew up the first-ever EU strategy for living in a globalised world.

Such a new blueprint for “global Europe” need not be long and complicated.  It needs to start by recognising that the world has changed dramatically in the last decade - and include recommendations for a few pivotal changes in policies and attitudes.

While the 2003 document centred on traditional security threats, the focus should now shift to  non-traditional challenges – climate change, energy and food security, maritime piracy, cyber security - which must be tackled urgently.

The EU has strong expertise and experience in all these areas.  But concerted international action on these and other issues requires that countries and organisations build new networks and alliances.  It means working with like-minded nations but above all also cooperating with non-like minded countries.  It means talking with others, not haranguing or talking down to them.  And this means a change of EU diplomatic tone and style.

Respect for emerging powers

Global competition for influence has increased as China, Russia, India and Brazil become more assertive and more vocal on the global stage.  The EU may have “strategic partnerships” with these countries, but the agreements need to be reinforced and strengthened – and the EU has to learn to treat these nations with respect and use their insight to readjust its worldview.

Working only with the big guys of the emerging world is not enough.  The new world order is being fashioned not just by China and Brazil but also by countries like Indonesia and Mexico, Kenya, Australia and organisations such as ASEAN.  The EU  needs urgently to upgrade its ties with these nations and bring them on board as  partners.

The compelling need for better global governance in today's still-chaotic multipolar world demands such cooperation.

Relations with Turkey are an albatross around the EU's neck.  They need to be repaired urgently in order to allow for real consultation on regional and global flash-points.  Europe's relations with Turkey are under close scrutiny the world over, with people questioning just why the EU remains so reluctant to open its doors to such an important regional and international actor.  The answers are not edifying.

The EU's international and moral standing are conditional on its ability to build an inclusive society which celebrates diversity instead of fearing it.  Europe cannot condemn discrimination against minorities in Pakistan and Myanmar if its own track record in dealing with such issues is not above reproach.

Democracy and human rights

Europe's values - democracy, the rule of law, human rights (to name a few) - are important and should be promoted more actively across the globe.  But those doing the promotion should do so with sensitivity and humility.  The message is too important to be drowned out by arrogance.

While often irked by EU hectoring and lecturing on human rights, many countries are anxious to learn more from Europe about regional integration, reconciliation and reform.  Europe's "soft power" lies in its ability to teach an anxious world about conflict management and peace-building.

The point has been made most sharply by Asian leaders like former Indonesian foreign minister Hasan Wirajuda who have warned that the gains of the "Asian Century" are at risk because of unresolved historical conflicts and abiding mistrust in the region.

Ironicially while the new world order demands the establishment of networks and coalitions, the EU will become a more significant power if it builds on its uniqueness as a foreign policy actor.  As such, while the transatlantic relationship is vital and important, hanging on to US coat-tails, especially when it comes to Asia, is not a good option.

The Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership certainly has its value in terms of jobs and growth on both sides of the Atlantic but it would be unfortunate if it is seen as the West "ganging up" against the rest.  For the moment, that is how China and other Asians see it.  The EU should act urgently to correct that impression - and invest more in the outcome of the Bali ministerial meeting of the World Trade Organisation in December.

Civil society actorsForeign policy today is not just the exclusive preserve of diplomats. Civil society actors, social media, sports personalities, artists, academics and think tanks are now an essential part of the game.  The EU's new global outreach must include such thought-leaders.  As the Arab Spring has shown, dealing only with governments is no longer an option.As Javier Solana, the EU’s former ‘high representative’ for foreign and security policy said recently, in today’s world of flux, the nature of power is changing. Power was once measured in the size of armies and population, not in terms of GDP per capita, reputation and whether you get to host the Olympic Games.  It is also about ideas, innovation, art and culture.It is worth remembering that while military force and interventions can provoke regime change, in the end, all parties — the victorious and the defeated — have to come to the negotiating table and find political solutions. And this is something the EU and Europeans are very good at.It is often argued that further EU integration will lead to a united, coherent, and effective European foreign policy. This is true of course.  But the integration process remains slow and painful.  The need for a smarter and more forceful EU foreign policy is urgent.

Democracy in Pakistan: Tough Lessons (Originally published 22/01/13)

There are two views on recent events in Pakistan. For some, Pakistan has shown its true colours as a chaotic and disorderly failed state. There were border skirmishes with India, more deadly extremist sectarian violence in an already deeply troubled province, rumours of a “soft” military coup as an unknown “Sufi cleric” and his followers demanded an end to corruption and —not to forget — another judicial demand that the prime minister be arrested on charges of graft.For others — admittedly in a minority — these and other equally strange developments were signs of a “maturing” and thriving democracy, of a people waking up to their rights as citizens and a vivid illustration of the strong independence of the judiciary.Finally a “people’s revolution”, Pakistan’s version of Egypt’s “Tahrir Square” in the streets of Islamabad, exulted some commentators. Hush, it’s another army conspiracy to derail democracy, said others.Both narratives have been expounded with equal force. They leave observers hungry for more information and less glib explanations, more facts and less fiction. However, now that the turmoil of the last few days appears to be over — at least temporarily — it’s wise to reflect on lessons learned.First, the rapid sequence of tragedy in Balochistan and farce in Islamabad hasn’t helped Pakistan’s already battered reputation.This is not just important for reasons of PR but also because Pakistan desperately needs foreign investment. No one is going to put money in a country seen to be always a mere heartbeat away from a suicide bombing, a terrorist attack or a deadly explosion.Le Monde, the influential and much-respected French newspaper, recently described Pakistan as “the sick child of South Asia,” noting in a scathing article that “there is something desperate about Pakistan”. As soon as the country shows signs of improvement, things go badly wrong, the article underlined, adding: “frankly we would love to be able to give some positive news about Pakistan … but the task is impossible.”Le Monde is not alone. Despite admirable attempts by Pakistani diplomats and others to put a positive gloss on recent developments in the country, it really is not easy to be upbeat about Pakistan.Secondly, yes, it is certainly good news that the current democratically elected civilian government looks set to complete a full five-year term. But 66 years after independence, should that be a reason for serious reflection or a cause for celebration?Third, can democracy really be reduced to the organisation and winning of elections? Yes, true, free and fair polls are crucial but shouldn’t the focus also be on what happens after the ballots are counted and the new — or old — leaders speed off in their limousines and move into their luxury houses?There is no doubt that citizens want to vote. But after the elections, they also expect good governance. They want a government that can deliver food, water and electricity. They want a roof over their heads. They want access to proper schools and hospitals and they want to work.Pakistan’s beleaguered politicians have failed the governance exams for decades and the generals who swagger in periodically have not done much better. It is important to fight corruption but equally crucial to insist on good governance and the delivery of basic services.Fourth, justice and politics do not mix. It’s heartening to see that Pakistan’s top judge has emerged as a modern-day Robin Hood. But the public probably wants justice in Pakistan to be about more than the issuing of regular arrest warrants to serving prime ministers.Fifth, the tragedy in Balochistan provides more damning proof that Pakistan must get its priorities right: the real danger comes from extremist groups which regularly foment sectarian violence and have very effectively used terrorism to destabilise Pakistan and Afghanistan. A government must provide protection for all religious groups on its territory. The inability to stop attacks on Shias, Ahmadis, Christians, Hindus — and women — represents an unacceptable failure of governance.Six, it makes no sense to start another vicious circle of Pakistan-India tensions over Kashmir or any other piece of land. Both countries have too much at stake to engage in another round of accusations and counter-accusations. The corrosive language of confrontation must be replaced by cooperation.This is important not just for Pakistan and India but also for South Asia as a whole. The region lags behind in meeting most of the anti-poverty Millennium Development Goals, its children are undernourished, women discriminated against and disease and illiteracy are rampant.Trade within the region is a mere fraction of what it should be. As Southeast Asia has illustrated, the future belongs to countries that can stop fighting and start cooperating to meet region-wide challenges. The 21st century is about building effective regional blocs, not sustaining regional animosities.Finally, as shown by the flurry of tragedies, dramas and mini dramas over the last week, the run-up to the elections is going to be a tumultuous time. There will probably be further storms in more teacups, more violence and all kinds of evil attempts to derail democracy in Pakistan.Seen from the outside, Pakistan does seem to be trapped in an unfortunate cycle of mishaps, misplaced hopes and unhappy accidents. There is general consensus that the country’s resilient, hard-working and long-suffering people deserve better than what they have ever received from soldiers or politicians. For many, the only true and uplifting narrative about Pakistan is one that speaks of the strength and fortitude of its people.

Democracy is hard work, says Indonesian leader (13/12/11)

For a quick insight into Indonesia’s ambitions of exerting regional power and global influence, visit Bali in December when the laid-back luxury beach resort morphs into an animated hub of discussion and debate on democracy, human rights and the rule of law.Delegates to the Bali Democracy Forum are a motley crew: the meeting held last week brought together representatives from over 80 countries and hundreds of observers. The conference’s title – “Enhancing Democratic Participation in a Changing World: Responding to Democratic Voices” – may not be catchy and some of the speeches were tedious. But the message from Indonesian President Susilo Bambang Yudhoyono remains strong and unequivocal: Asian countries must match their economic success with democracy and political reform.The focus this year was inevitably on the Arab Spring. The Indonesian President warned that based on his country’s experience, there were no quick fixes. “It is safe to assume that in the early years, things will be more difficult before it gets better…Democratic success has to be built, earned and improvised every step of the way. Indeed elections are only one of the tools of democracy and building a mature democracy takes a lot more than holding elections.”Launched in 2008 to encourage discussion and exchange of views on democracy among Asian countries, annual meetings of the Bali Democracy Forum have become a potent exercise in Indonesian public diplomacy.The Forum has grown in credibility and prestige over the years, spotlighting Indonesia’s democratic record since the fall of President Suharto in 1998, and the country’s increasingly vocal and visible aspirations to become Asia’s prime normative power and champion of political reform and democracy.The message from Jakarta is strong and clear: Indonesia matters – in both Southeast Asian and on the global stage. The country’s new breed of gutsy and self-confident politicians and diplomats are breaking with the cautious approach of past administrations by working hard to give Indonesia a stronger regional and international voice.Indonesia’s transformation from dictatorship to a modern and robust democracy in the past decade is no modest achievement – and through the annual meetings in Bali, Indonesia wants to spread the gospel on democracy.Indonesia’s foreign policy ambitions are not new. The country has long been active on the regional and international foreign and security policy stage. However, President Yudhoyono, now serving his second and final term in office, has given a new boost to the reputation of Southeast Asia's largest economy and most populous nation, successfully portraying it as one of Asia’s most exciting countries with constructive contributions to make within the region and on the global stage.Helped by men like former foreign minister Hassan Wirajuda, Indonesian diplomacy is now in full gear, its officials no longer content to watch from the sidelines as regional and world leaders step up engagement with China and India.Mr Wirajuda, a gentle and affable man, with a sweeping vision and experience of the world tells me in Bali that Indonesia wants to share its experience with Arab countries in transition. “WE can learn from each others’ mistakes,” he says.The focus has to be on social justice, on fighting corruption on not allowing a monopoly of power. “Governments have to be sensitive to the aspirations of the people,” he underlines.Significantly, Turkey, seen as a model for mixing Islam and democracy, was also present at the Bali meeting.In the last few years, Indonesia has taken its place in the G20, become a force to be reckoned with in the Association of Southeast Asian Nations (ASEAN) and adopted a moderating role within the Organisation of the Islamic Conference (OIC).Jakarta’s efforts at fighting terrorism and radicalization are watched carefully by its neighbours as well as the United States and the European Union.Long-term prospects are bright. Indonesia’s economic growth rates – expected to remain around the 6 per cent mark in the near future – continue to impress. Demographics are excellent; 44% of its population is under 24, meaning a growing workforce in years to come. Basic literacy rates are at 90% (although education still needs a lot of investment). The country is resource-rich. It's a major exporter of soft commodities such as palm oil, cocoa and coffee, as well as coal.But it's not just a geared play on commodities. The economy is mostly driven by domestic demand, with consumption accounting for around 60% of GDP. Indonesia is also strategically located: half of world trade passes by its northern maritime border, giving the country a strategic role in ensuring safe and secure international navigation.Small wonder then that US President Barack Obama, Chinese President Wen Jiabao, Indian Prime Minister Manmohan Singh and Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard are among leaders who have recently trod the red carpet in Jakarta. The US and Australia are seeking to sign ambitious cooperation pacts aimed at enhancing ties with Indonesia, clearly seeing the country as a counter-weight to China's growing influence in the region.As the driving force behind many Asian regional integration initiatives. Indonesia is often held up as an example to be followed by neighbouring Burma/Myanmar, a role that Jakarta does not shun.To fulfill its regional and global ambitions, however, Indonesia will have to put its domestic house in order. Indonesians tell me the country remains riddled by corruption and religious extremism is still a problem. Few doubt that Indonesia needs to make faster progress in addressing issues like freedom of expression, military reform, police brutality (especially in Papua), treatment in prisons and of minorities.“We remain vigilant as Indonesia is not totally free from the prospect of new communal conflicts flaring up,” the Indonesian President told delegates at the Bali Forum, adding: “The more we guarantee human rights for our citizens, the more durable our democracy will become.” It is a lesson for many countries, not just those living through the so-called “Arab Spring”.

Saudi women and the Arab spring (Originally published 30/09/11)

There’s good news and bad news for advocates of women’s rights in the Arab world: Saudi Arabia has announced that women in the country will for the first time be able to vote and stand in municipal elections in 2015. The bad news is that they will probably have to walk to the polling stations.

Only hours after there was general applause for Saudi King Abdullah’s “revolutionary and historic” decision to give women the municipal vote, a court in the country sentenced a woman to 10 lashes for challenging a ban on women driving in the kingdom.

True, the punishment has been overturned by the king. But the entire episode does not say much for the status of women in Saudi Arabia - and the king's chances of even ensuring a slow, snail-paced reform of his country.

It is indeed a pity that the world’s richest, most influential and most powerful Arab state continues to treat half of its citizens as irresponsible children who cannot be trusted to become full-fledged adult citizens of the 21st Century.

The Muslim world would be a very different place if instead of fighting against modernity and equality, the Saudi monarchy used its riches and influence to promote equal opportunities, freedom and democracy.

For the moment those looking for inspiration in reconciling Islam and modernity have to learn lessons from Turkey or Indonesia.

Many Muslim countries squirm in the Saudi grip – complaints against the spread of Wahhabi values are rife in Malaysia, Indonesia, Pakistan and elsewhere – but most people are reluctant to denounce the encroaching Saudi influence on their lifestyles. Indonesian scholars of Islam are the exception.

It is women who bear the brunt. Life for women in many parts of the Muslim world is not easy. There is discrimination at home and in the work place, multiple constraints and traditions to follow, rules and values that have to be respected, men who have to be “obeyed”.

The contagion is spreading to Muslim communities in Europe where France and Belgium have recently enacted legislation banning women from wearing the burqa.

Saudi Arabia is the worst offender. Women are not only veiled and segregated but cannot work, own property or even open a bank account without their father’s or husband’s permission.

Despite the king’s decision to over-rule the court, women are also denied the right to drive.

Women are key actors in the demand for change and reform that continues to convulse the Arab world. They must be supported in their determination to have a voice and a role to play in a post-revolution Middle East.

It’s happened before: women take part in a revolution but are instructed to stay home and stay quiet once the upheaval is over.

King Abdullah certainly deserves credit for his decision to give women the right to vote, to run in municipal elections and to be appointed as full voting members of the Majlis Al-Shura, a government advisory group.

It is a first step toward moving his country into the modern world but it is not nearly enough

No time to waste in stopping Syrian violence (Originally published 20/04/11)

Syria’s decision to lift the 48-year old state of emergency should not stop the European Union from pressing for more change and reform in the country. President Bashar al-Assad must be warned to halt any more action by security forces against protestors, whether in Homs, Deraa, Damascus or elsewhere.

There is no time to waste. It is still not clear if the lifting of the state of emergency will quell protests. But since protestors are now demanding wide-spread change and reform, it is likely to be a question of too little, too late.

Quick action is needed not just to enhance Europe’s battered credibility as a foreign policy actor and ensure stability in Syria, a key regional power. After Libya, it is about making sure that another Arab awakening does not descend into tragic violence.

The Syrian Interior Ministry’s ominous warning to protestors that there is “no more room for leniency or tolerance” has to be taken seriously. Europe cannot sit back and allow a repeat of the Hama massacre of 1982 when 20,000 civilians were killed by Syrian security forces.

This time lack of European leverage in the Middle East cannot be used as an argument. The EU is not without clout in Damascus. Syria, unlike Egypt and Tunisia, is not an ally of the United States. It is part of the EU’s neighbourhood policy, a recipient of EU aid and trade concessions.

The EU is Syria's largest trade partner with total trade amounting to approximately €5.4 billion in 2009, covering 23.1% of Syrian trade. Brussels and Syria are close to signing an association agreement. It’s now time to use that leverage.

Reports from Syria indicate that at least 18 protesters have died in clashes since President Assad on April 16 ordered a newly-appointed cabinet to make changes to defuse dissent. Anti-government protesters have held demonstrations for the past five weeks and clashed with Syrian security forces on Fridays after the weekly Muslim prayers. At least 130 people have been killed in the unrest that started in mid-March, according to Human Rights Watch.

The turmoil poses a serious challenge to Assad, who inherited power from his father 11 years ago. The regime has responded to the protests by blaming foreign conspirators.

Given the risk of more violence and killings, Europe must take the lead in demanding change and reform in Syria. EU foreign ministers’ call earlier this month for an immediate end to the use of force by security forces against peaceful demonstrators should be followed up by forceful action – trade and aid sanctions, visa restrictions, financial assets freeze – if there is no satisfactory response.

The European Parliament is right to demand a suspension of talks on a future Association Agreement with Syria until Damascus agrees to carry out “expected tangible democratic reforms.”

The resignation of Syria's government on March 29 "will not be enough to satisfy the growing frustrations of the people", the Parliament’s resolution said, adding that in addition to lifting the state of emergency, President Assad must put an end to repression of political opposition and human right defenders and undertake genuine political, economic and social reforms.

The Parliament has also called for independent investigation into the attacks on protesters and an end to arms sales to Syria.

EU foreign ministers have been more cautious but said they could “review policy” if the situation does not improve. Recent events are proof that the EU needs to get much tougher in its message to the Syrians.

EU unity needed on Libya (Originally published 10/03/11)

European Union governments must not break ranks over how to end the prolonged crisis in Libya. They must also urgently agree on a new blueprint for stronger engagement with Egypt and Tunisia.Discord at the EU summit on March 11 or other meetings in the coming weeks will send a message of weakness and lack of resolve to Colonel Gaddafi, emboldening his supporters as they step up the offensive against rebels seeking his removal.Given the difficulties in getting a complete picture of the quickly changing situation in Libya – and different national concerns of the 27 EU states – Europe is not alone in struggling to find a coherent policy on Libya. The US is similarly divided on how best to tackle a very complex situation.European governments have imposed sanctions on Gaddafi and his family and sent millions of euros in humanitarian aid to refugees seeking to leave Libya. They remain rightfully wary of direct intervention, fearing entanglement in another prolonged war in the Middle East.In recent days, however, EU unity appears to be unravelling as member states set off in different directions.France has recognised the Libyan rebels as the country’s rightful representatives. The European Parliament says other European governments should do the same. Portugal, however, has held talks with an envoy despatched by Gaddafi, prompting Britain and German to insist that EU governments show pledge not to work or co-operate with Gaddafi. There is no EU agreement on setting up a no-fly zone although the UK and France are most clearly in favour of such a move.EU governments clearly need time to assess, reflect and consult on the right actions to take on Libya.  But while they do so, they should avoid sending mixed signals to Gaddafi and his supporters.Urgent action is also needed on a new EU strategy for Egypt and Tunisia as well as other countries in the region.EU High Representative for Foreign and Security Policy Catherine Ashton has prepared a paper for the EU summit including measures that include more EU financial support, through the European Investment Bank and the European Bank for Reconstruction and Developmnent, help with the training and exchange of students, the emergence of a vibrant civil society, more inclusive governance. Food security, further trade opening and mobility partnerships form part of the overall package.Ashton’s approach may be too modest and cautious for some but this is not the time to quibble over details. These can be worked out later, in cooperation with the new emerging leadership in these countries.Events in North Africa and the Middle East undoubtedly represent an enormous challenge for the EU. Oil prices are rising and there is concern about the number of North Africans seeking asylum in Italy and other southern European countries.Europe’s global reputation is also at stake. How Europe responds to events in the south will determine how it is perceived not only by its immediate neighbours but by EU-watchers in many other parts of the world.

Finally, some EU action on Libya (Originally published 03/03/11)

Belated EU unity has been found on sanctions against Colonel Muammar Gaddafi and his family, the EU has earmarked ten million euros in humanitarian aid to refugees stranded on Libya’s borders with Tunisia and Egypt while Britain and France are creating an air and sea bridge to take some of the Egyptian refugees back to their homes.Europe now also needs a new strategy to deal with the influx of North African refugees arriving on its shores. This is not the moment for hand-wringing over the large number of new arrivals, irresponsible talk of an “invasion” from the south or laments over the failure of multiculturalism in Europe. Urgent and intelligent measures are needed to help southern European countries provide better treatment to the new arrivals. This means more EU assistance for Italy and other southern European states and a quick agreement on a share-out of the refugees.The EU’s humanitarian operations are laudable but Europe has acquired an unfavourable reputation worldwide for the cold welcome it extends to many foreigners. Strict Schengen visa requirements hit foreign business leaders, students and artists. This is a chance to prove that “Fortress Europe” can open its doors to those in trouble. It is also about being a good neighbour.Clearly, the Italian government – and others like Malta, Greece and Spain – cannot be left alone to deal with the problem. Italy’s Interior Minister Roberto Maroni says his country could soon find itself “on its knees” if the refugee “invasion” continues. He has asked for a solidarity fund to assist countries that are the first to absorb the influx of refugees. However, not for the first time, EU states are divided.Meanwhile, Mustapha Nabli, Tunisia's newly appointed central bank governor, says that instead of crumbling under pressure, Europe could in fact benefit from the wave of new workers. “So it is a positive sum game, it is not a negative sum game,” he says.It’s a point worth making – but one that is unlikely to find an echo in today’s Europe. In remarks that have reverberated across the world, British Prime Minister David Cameron, German Chancellor Angela Merkel and French President Sarkozy have said Europe's experience in building a multicultural society has been a failure.The three EU leaders are right to question the bloc's patchy history of integration. But they make no constructive suggestions to improve the situation. And they put the onus on immigrants to melt in or get out. However, European governments have not done enough to embrace and promote diversity, enforce anti-discrimination legislation and create a more inclusive labour market.The reality of multicultural Europe is less gloomy than Merkel and others claim. True, some young Muslims fall prey to radical ideologies while others demand special privileges, including the establishment of faith-based schools, permission to wear the burka and segregation by gender at public swimming pools and hospitals. Tribal customs prevail in some communities.However, across Europe, Muslims and other minorities are becoming more active in demanding rights, organizing themselves into pressure groups, and emerging as influential politicians, entrepreneurs and cultural and sports icons. This new generation of European Muslims believes it important to focus on citizenship and integration rather than on religious identity alone.The irony is that while politicians fret about immigration and foreigners, low fertility rates and an ageing population mean that Europe needs young foreign workers to fill labor shortages in both the skilled and unskilled sectors of the economy and to fund Europe's creaking pension and health care systems.It’s easy to consider tough new frontier controls, repatriation schemes and other measures to keep out North Africa’s refugees. But EU policymakers should also focus on job-generating investments in the region, come up with a more intelligent common immigration policy and possibly seek changes to the Dublin Convention to ease current pressure on first-arrival border states.EU leaders speak loudly and often about projecting European values of democracy and human rights. It’s worth remembering the people of North Africa are voicing these very aspirations.

EU SHOULD BUILD A REAL “RING OF FRIENDS” IN THE SOUTHERN MED (Originally published 23/02/11)

To create a real “ring of friends” in Europe’s neighbourhood, the EU should stop dithering and act quickly to help meet peoples’ aspirations in North Africa and the Middle East.Lecturing Gaddafi on human rights or fretting over immigration from the region – as EU foreign ministers did earlier this week - is not good enough. As his long rant on Libyan TV illustrated, Muammar Gaddafi is not listening. The EU’s focus should be on urgent, bold international action to stop the massacre in Libya. Innocent lives depend on it – and so does the EU’s much-damaged credibility in the region.It’s not too late: Europeans can throw their weight behind existing initiatives such as appeals by Libya's deputy ambassador to the UN, Ibrahim al-Dabashi, for international intervention in the country, including the establishment of a no-fly zone to help stop "a real genocide". Former British foreign secretary David Owen wants a UN Charter Chapter 7 intervention - meaning the authorisation of both military and non-military means to “restore international peace and security” – to be enforced by NATO air forces. UN secretary general, Ban Ki-Moon has warned, meanwhile, that the killing of civilians is “a serious violation of international humanitarian law”, opening the way for action in the International Criminal Court.European countries, having supplied Libya with weapons that are now being used for internal repression, have a special responsibility to make sure the killing stops. It is also a question of acting on the “right to protect” principle espoused by Europe.Elsewhere in the volatile region, visits to Tunisia and Egypt by senior EU and national policymakers are useful in establishing contact with both countries’ transitional authorities. Consultation with the US, World Bank and others is also helpful in forging a coordinated new international blueprint for the region.But actions speak louder than words. Moaning about the danger of increased immigration flows, the threat of extremists on Europe’s borders and other recent comments made, among others, by Italian Foreign Minister Franco Frattini, reinforce the increasing perception worldwide that Europe is inward-looking and fearful of change. They also reveal a striking lack of understanding of events in the region.To start off, the EU should ditch the discredited “Mediterranean Union” dreamed up by French President Nicolas Sarkozy. The blueprint is timid, technical and out-dated. The EU focus should now be on further opening up its market to southern Mediterranean exports, including farm products, making job-generating investments in the region and unleashing the potential and energy of the much-trammeled private sector. Among other things, such schemes will help stop the desperate human tide into southern Spain and Italy.The outlines of a new strategy – minus any reference to bigger trade benefits or increased aid for the region – are included in the statement released by foreign ministers on February 21. However, the focus needs to move from the backing of personalities and the military to the building of institutions, ensuring the rule of law, and strengthening the judicial system. Support for civil society, which Middle East governments have always opposed, should be reinforced and the fight against corruption emphasized. The EU can also share its experience in regional integration.Many of these ideas have been tried in the past – and failed because of lack of support from wary governments in the region. Hopefully, the changing landscape in North Africa and the Middle East means Europe will soon be able to engage with more credible and accountable state authorities as well as entrepreneurs and civil society representatives who are ready to embrace change.The EU has experience in promoting economic and political reform in eastern Europe – it should now be ready to give similar support and advice to its neighbours in the south.

ASIAN LESSONS FOR THE MIDDLE EAST: AFTER CHAOS, DEMOCRACY (Originally published 09/02/11)

European and American policymakers worried about further chaos and confusion in Tunisia, Egypt and other Arab states should take a close look at the way years of authoritarian rule gave way to democracy in three leading Asian nations: Indonesia, the Philippines and South Korea.All three Asian countries went through long and difficult transition periods following the fall of entrenched, corrupt, dictators. There were riots, uncertainty and pain. The economy suffered. The army watched warily as protests spread.Today the three countries are functioning democracies, allies of the West and active participants in Asia’s rise. Historical parallels are never perfect of course; Arab countries, with their mix of disgruntled young people yearning for change, under-developed or non-existent political parties and well-organised Islamists present a complex challenge to Europe and America.Not surprisingly, ever since Tunisia’s “jasmine revolution” – and with the Iranian “Islamic revolution” circa 1979 on their minds - policymakers in Brussels and Washington have been struggling to balance their support for change and democracy with a desire for stability and continuity in the region.There is justified concern that anti-government protests could be hijacked by Islamists. But also unjustified assertions that the region is not “ready for democracy” and that chaos will be destructive and long-enduring. The West’s mixed message risks feeding a perception on the streets of Cairo and elsewhere that Europe and the US are putting stability ahead of democratic ideals and leaving hopes of nurturing peaceful, gradual change in the hands of an old guard which has little reason to speed up the process.Such sentiments do not augur well for future relations between the West and the Arab world. Better and wiser therefore to give a supportive hand, sound advice and good counsel to the real democrats than to throw a lifeline to those clinging to power.For inspiration, Arab and Western policymakers should read up on recent Indonesian history and especially the country’s successful –albeit sometimes painful - transformation to democracy following the fall of President Suharto in 1998.Also worth a read is the success of the “People Power movement” in the Philippines in 1986 which drove President Ferdinand Marcos into exile and installed Corazon Aquino as the new president. In South Korea, meanwhile, the democratic uprising of June 1987 represented a nation-wide uprising and the main goal was to make the authorities to give green light to democratisation.Despite their flaws, Indonesia, the Philippines and South Korea are proof that countries can change direction, peoples’ aspirations for democracy can be met and that chaos can give way to peace and development.For lessons on managing change and transformation, perhaps Arab and Western policymakers should stopping fretting about Iran and start consulting some of Asia’s new democracies.