VIEW FROM ABROAD: We live in interesting times: Trump, Muslims and Europe

AHEAD of Donald Trump’s inauguration as US President, New York City is as vibrant and dynamic as ever. Locals mingle with tourists, immigrants and foreigners in the icy cold. The ferry to the Statue of Liberty is brimming with excited Chinese visitors. The stores and restaurants are full.

This is New York, proud global city, still basking in a soft post-New Year glow. It is also in combative mood, braced for a fight with the new president.

“Are you here for Trump’s inauguration,” my Dominican taxi driver asks. I say no, I’m attending a high-level forum on anti-Muslim hate being organised at the United Nations by the European Union, Canada, the Organisation of Islamic Cooperation — and the US.

“So it’s Obama’s parting shot,” he chuckles. “These Americans are crazy to elect Trump. They are already regretting it. At least here in New York.”

ADVERTISEMENT

http://tpc.googlesyndication.com/safeframe/1-0-5/html/container.html#xpc=sf-gdn-exp-2&p=http%3A//www.dawn.com

Certainly, the new US President is not this city’s favourite son. The 58-storey Trump Tower may be the fanciest, glitziest building among other fancy, glitzy luxury stores which line Fifth Avenue, but New Yorkers are fed up with the increased security, the barricades and the gawping tourists.

A small but stalwart and loud group of protesters stands outside the Tower, shouting, “No Trump, No KKK, no fascist USA”. Policemen look on warily as tourists take pictures.

Ever since Trump won the election, the protective measures around the Tower, which is his primary residence and where his wife Melania will stay while their son finishes his school year, have caused a dramatic slowdown in business in the neighbourhood, according to PBS journalist Rhana Natour.

Shopkeepers say they are not happy with the chaos. Tourists and shoppers aren’t keen to get caught in the protests or run into policemen and police dogs. If Trump keeps coming to New York, as he has said he will, business just won’t pick up.

Americans are gearing up for a struggle. On Jan 21, a day after the inauguration, a massive Women’s March will be held in New York and other cities across the US and the world.

This city has its own heroes. New York Governor Andrew M Cuomo and New York City Mayor Bill de Blasio, both Democrats, have made clear that they will stand firm on their principles.

Cuomo has called New York “a safe harbour for our progressive principles and social justice”. De Blasio joined actors Alec Baldwin and Mark Ruffalo, as well as film-maker and activist Michael Moore, for a protest against Trump. “This is New York. Nothing about who we are changed on Election Day,” de Blasio promised in a tweet.

Trump’s shadow looms large over the UN meeting. Outside the UN building, flags from across the world still flutter. But in the rain, they have a forlorn air. Colleagues worry about the future of the UN. Trump is not a believer in multilateral cooperation. “But this is why we have to stand firm and speak out,” says a friend.

As the forum begins the mood is understandably sober and reflective. It’s also surreal. The keynote speeches in the first hour warn of rising anti-Muslim hate and discrimination without mentioning Trump by name.

UN Secretary General Antònio Guterres refers to a recently launched initiative “Together — Respect, Safety and Dignity for All” which is designed to strengthen bonds between refugees, migrants and host countries and communities.

David Saperstein, American Ambassador at large for International Religious Freedom warns, “Anti-Muslim hatred does not occur in a vacuum…the rise of xenophobia across the world creates challenges that focus our attention and the data leaves us no doubt that this is happening.”

But then the discussions get more animated. No one can say whether Trump intends to implement his campaign promise of setting up a “Muslim registry” but there is little doubt that his election has triggered an increase in anti-Muslim hate.

In Europe, there is concern that populists are riding high in polls in the Netherlands, France and Germany. Intolerance and anti-Muslim diatribes have become the norm for leaders in Hungary, Poland and other Eastern European countries.

But the forum is not about Muslims as victims but about empowering Muslim minorities in America, Europe and in other parts of the world.

There is talk of creating civil society coalitions against xenophobia, working with other faith groups, countering misinformation and forging positive stories of Muslims in the news and popular culture.

“Some say we live in a post-truth world,” says EU human rights envoy Stavros Lambrinidis. “We must have the courage to confront narratives when they are based on prejudice, or blatant lies, so that they do not become part of the mainstream.”

Several panellists highlight the importance of establishing relationships with local political and law enforcement agencies, saying that as New York has shown, mayors are key to ensuring that cities are more open, tolerant and diverse.

I head home to Brussels just hours before Trump moves into the White House. The New York Times has an editorial chiding the new president for his pro-Russian and pro-Brexit rhetoric and his anti-Nato and anti-EU diatribes.

There is no immediate Trump tweet in reaction. But we know: it is going to be an interesting four years.

—The writer is Dawn’s correspondent in Brussels

Published in Dawn, January 21st, 2017

VIEW FROM ABROAD: As EU-Turkey relations crash, it’s time to consider ‘Trexit’

TURKISH President Recep Tayyip Erdogan may have succeeded in convincing Pakistan’s government to expel Turkish teachers accused of links to an alleged terrorist organisation — a decision now put on hold by a Pakistani court — but the Turkish leader’s links with the European Union have hit an all-time low.

There is talk of “Trexit” or an end to Turkey’s decades-old bid to join the EU. Erdogan has hinted that he is fed up with the EU and ready to move on and seek other partners.

But the message from Ankara is confusing. In Brussels this week, Turkish officials were adamant that “full membership” of the EU was still their aim. And they insisted that Turkey wanted above all to talk about “rule of law” with the EU.

Yes, readers, EU-Turkey relations are complicated. They are difficult, tetchy and at times amusing. Both sides need each other but don’t trust each other. “Can’t live with you, can’t live without you”.

Deep inside where it matters, EU policymakers are wary of opening their club to a majority Muslim nation. And similarly, deep inside where it matters, Turkish officials think Europeans are arrogant and Islamophobic.

Both assumptions are correct. Blame it on history, the crusades, Christian-Muslim rivalries that cast a dark shadow even in the 20th Century. But the love-hate EU-Turkey relationship is entering an even more fraught era.

The EU agreed years ago that Turkey could join the EU — and negotiations began in earnest in 2005.

The talks have never been easy — not least because of the shadow cast by the divided island of Cyprus.

Things are now coming to a head. The European Parliament voted last week to freeze negotiations on Turkish membership of the EU, saying Ankara was guilty of a “disproportionate and repressive” response to the failed military coup against the government on July 15.

“Since the failed military coup in July 2016, tens of thousands of people, including military personnel, public servants, teachers and university deans, prosecutors, journalists and opposition politicians, have been fired, suspended, detained or arrested,” the European Parliament said in a press release.

MEPs are also concerned about the crackdown and the threat by the Turkish President to reintroduce the death penalty.

The non-binding parliamentary resolution calls for a temporary freeze on the EU accession negotiations until the “disproportioned repressive measures are lifted”.

But allegations of human rights abuse by the Turkish government against its own citizens are piling up at the European Court of Human Rights. The Strasbourg-based court said last week that it has received some 850 petitions from Turkish citizens in the past two weeks.

Not surprisingly, Erdogan has reacted angrily to the European Parliament move. The Turkish leader threatened to tear up a landmark deal to stem the flow of Syrian and other refugees into Europe. He also warned that he would seek other partners in lieu of the EU.

For all their anger and frustration at Turkey’s conduct, few in Europe think it wise to allow a further worsening of relations with Ankara.

But there is a growing number of people both in Europe and Turkey who believe that Ankara should push the “Trexit” button. In other words, instead of trying so hard to join the EU, Ankara should reflect on another form of partnership with the bloc.

The new arrangement would take into account massive changes in both the European and Turkish landscapes. Clearly, both the EU and Turkey are very different today than they were when they started their courtship in the 1960s.

The EU was still a modest club of six democracies seeking peace and stability after the devastation of World War II. Turkey was struggling with numerous economic and political challenges including efforts to keep the Turkish army away from national politics.

Fast forward to 2016, and the EU counts 28 members — with Britain on the way out. The bloc is big but chastened, still powerful but also increasingly fragile.

Turkey is an undoubtedly important regional power — but also less influential than many thought it would be in dealing with Syria and Iran.

Given the changes on both sides, there are calls for the EU and Turkey to put aside the long and difficult debate on membership and focus instead on a new 21st century strategic partnership which reflects new geopolitical realities.

“That Turkey’s accession is not a realistic goal for the foreseeable future should be the starting point of this new discussion; but that acknowledgement should not be a punishment but an opportunity to redefine the relationship according to mutual interests: the refugee crisis, economic integration, counterterrorism and energy, to name a few,” argues Sinan Ulgen, visiting scholar at Carnegie Europe.

The approach makes sense to many in Europe and to some Turkish scholars. But the Turkish government insists that past promises of membership cannot be cast aside.

Instead of looking for new avenues for partnership, both sides remain prisoners of the past, unable and unwilling to readjust their ties to a changing world order. The current impasse creates difficulties for both Europe and Turkey. Quite simply, it’s time to change tack.

—The writer is Dawn’s correspondent in Brussels

Published in Dawn, December 3rd, 2016

EU frets as ‘Populist International’ moves fast to win votes

Legend has it that the European Union thrives on crisis and shows its true colours — its strength and resilience — when life gets tough. Not this time.

As predicted in this column two weeks ago, Donald Trump’s election victory has dealt the EU a body blow. All 28 EU governments — and yes the EU still has 28 members until Britain actually goes out the door at a yet-undecided date — are still reeling from the surprise election result.

To be fair, the bloc has a lot on his hands. Brexit and the refugee crisis continue to weigh heavy. Relations with Russia and Turkey are at an all-time low. And populists, both in government and in opposition, stalk the land.

And now, their bedrock, the “transatlantic relationship” looks like it is in tatters.

As they bade a teary-eyed farewell to President Barack Obama last week, EU leaders had much to worry about.

First, Trump is certainly unlikely to be a pro-European president. He does not like the Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP), is sceptical of Nato and if Moscow is to be believed has promised to normalise relations with Russia.

Second, all this would be manageable if EU countries were able to put aside their differences and forge a united stance vis-a-vis Washington.

Alas. Hopes of a united front to deal with Trump have been dashed. A hastily scheduled working dinner of EU foreign ministers called by the German Foreign Minister Walter Steinmeier and EU special representative for foreign and security policy Federica Mogherini last week was boycotted by Britain and France.

British Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson, who once said he was afraid of running into Trump while in the US, decided he was tired of the EU’s “whinge-orama” over Trump’s election victory. France said it had urgent business to attend to at home.

Some EU officials like Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker have warned that Trump must get up to speed on how Europe works in order to avoid “two years of wasted time” when he assumes his new role.

“Mr Trump, during his campaign, said that Belgium was a village somewhere in Europe,” Juncker said in his frank remarks to students in Luxembourg, adding: “We must teach the president-elect what Europe is and how it works.”

Juncker said that Trump had called Nato into question, which could have “harmful consequences” because it is the model of Europe’s defence.

The US president-elect had also “taken a view of refugees and non-white Americans that does not reflect European convictions and feelings”, he added.

German Chancellor Angela Merkel has lectured Trump on “shared values” and hinted relations depended on the future American president’s respect for “democracy, freedom, respect for the right and dignity of every individual, irrespective of origin, colour, religion, sex, sexual orientation or political attitude”.

No surprise then that Obama’s farewell visit to several EU countries, including Germany, last week turned into a long and painful goodbye.

Emotions were running specially high in Berlin where Obama and Merkel praised each other as “outstanding partners”, with the US president expressing hopes that Trump would stand up to Russian President Vladimir Putin when he deviates from US “values and international norms”.

In a joint op-ed, Obama and Merkel defended aid for refugees “because we know it is our treatment of those most vulnerable that determines the true strength of our values”. They hailed the North Atlantic Treaty Organisation — from which Trump has threatened to pull back — as a cornerstone of peace.

Still, even Merkel knows it’s time to move on. As the de facto leader of the EU, the German chancellor has a lot on her plate. The next few months are going to be extremely difficult for Berlin and Brussels.

Italian Prime Minister Matteo Renzi has vowed to resign if he loses a referendum on constitutional reform on December 4, saying the “decrepit system” that would be left in the wake of his defeat would have to be taken care of by someone else.

Meanwhile in Austria, far-right Freedom Party candidate Norbert Hofer and former Green Party leader Alexander Van der Bellen will run again on Dec 4 after Austria’s Constitutional Court annulled the results of May’s presidential vote and called for a rerun.

The court said the May election, in which Van der Bellen narrowly beat Hofer, would have to be repeated after the discovery of irregularities in vote counting across several districts.

Although the presidency is a largely symbolic role in Austria, the Freedom Party’s potential success would herald a major victory for Europe’s far right parties ahead of elections next year in the Netherlands, France and Germany.

The fear in Europe is that far-right populists Geert Wilders and Marine Le Pen will give mainstream parties a run for their month in both the Netherlands and France.

Ominously, Breitbart, the so-called alt-right news organisation that is often described as “misogynist, racist and xenophobic”, is reportedly planning to expand to Europe ahead of the crucial elections next year.

Breitbart is believed to have been instrumental in helping Trump win the elections. Steve Bannon, executive chairman of the organisation, has been appointed senior counsellor and chief strategist for Trump.

Meanwhile, Aaron Banks, the millionaire who helped fund the Brexit campaign in the UK, has also promised to take his campaign to France ahead of the elections.

Members of “Populist International” are moving fast to gain votes while EU leaders wring their hands in despair.

FRANKLY SPEAKING | A good moment to reflect on tolerance

Did you know that 16 November is the ‘International Day for Tolerance’? This year, more than ever before, let’s take a moment to contemplate.Talk of openness and inclusion may appear quaint in a world dominated by hate and harshness. Who wants to “respect and recognise the rights and beliefs of others” – as the United Nations would like us to do on Wednesday – when there is so much fear to spread, and so many angry ‘strong’ men and women to elect?Life is just too short to be polite. People want tough leaders, not more soppy political correctness. Let’s leave softies like Canada’s Justin Trudeau to fight injustice, oppression, racism and unfair discrimination. The rest of us have better things to do.Actually, we don’t.Being mean and nasty can be exhilarating for a naughty moment. There is a thrill in breaking taboos, hurling insults and breaching red lines. Building walls and fences and deporting immigrants can sound like great fun.But the excitement won’t last. And a permanent state of hate and anger is not a recipe for societal well-being. Living together – even without ‘them’, just among ‘us’ – requires a degree of courtesy and polite interaction.Taming the demons of racism, nativism and populism unleashed by America’s president-elect Donald Trump during his election campaign – which may be cultivated over the next four years – will not be easy. But here are six ways it can be done.First, let’s remember that millions of Americans did not buy into Trump’s toxic rhetoric. While the Electoral College certainly voted for Trump, Democratic candidate Hillary Clinton secured a majority of the popular vote.In other words, those who embrace pluralism, tolerance, inclusion – and who reject the nightmare version of a new Trumpian world order – cannot be easily shunted to the side lines. Their voice will continue to count. It may become even louder.Second, it’s more important than ever to craft an inspirational narrative to counter and outsmart Trump’s European wannabes in France, Germany and the Netherlands.As elections in these and other countries draw closer, instead of pandering to the ‘Populists International’, mainstream political parties in Europe must reach out with more conviction and passion to the majority of Europeans who believe in an open and tolerant Europe. Their voices are currently drowned out by extremists and ignored by others.This is no time for old, wishy washy slogans and bland speeches. It’s time to fight fire with fire.Third, underlining the principles of liberal democracy – as German Chancellor Angela Merkel did in her message of congratulations to Trump – is a good first step. But it will mean very little unless EU leaders take tougher action against those inside the EU – including Hungary’s Viktor Orban and the Polish government – who violate these very values.Fourth, even as they lecture Trump, Russia’s Vladimir Putin or Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdoğan on human rights, EU leaders should make sure that they practice what they preach at home and that their own treatment of minorities – as well as migrants and refugees – is above reproach. For the moment, it isn’t.Fifth, even seemingly small things matter. Christmas traditions like ‘Black Pete’ in the Netherlands may seem harmless to white Dutch people but they send a harmful message of exclusion to the country’s many black citizens.Offensive language, of the kind European Commissioner Gunter Oettinger used recently when speaking of his Chinese counterparts, sends the wrong message to European citizens and a watching world.Last, let’s debate and discuss the reasons for Trump’s success, the rise of populists, the flaws of liberal democrats and the pros and cons of globalisation. As with Brexit, there are important topics to analyse and reflected upon.For the moment, the killing fields of the 21st century happen to be far away, in Afghanistan, Africa and the Middle East. But not so long ago it was here in Europe that racism and discrimination led to wide-spread devastation, death and destruction.History should not be allowed to repeat itself.Friends of Europe’s ‘Frankly Speaking’ column takes a critical look at key European and global issues.

VIEW FROM ABROAD: Trump victory will shock Europe — but not his many European fans

BY now, Europeans are used to shocks, both internal and external. There’s been Brexit, the mass arrival of over a million migrants and refugees, sporadic terror attacks and a continuing economic slowdown, not to mention earthquakes in Italy.

But the jury is still out on whether Europe will be able to cope with the “mother of all shocks” in the shape of an election victory for US Republican candidate Donald Trump.

The short answer is no. Most Europeans are rooting for Hillary Clinton and can’t think of anything worse than having to deal with “President Trump”. He’s a populist, a bigot, offensive, outrageous and unpredictable. He’s too close for comfort to Russia. And he’s not sure about the significance of Nato.

The long answer is more complex. While most EU policymakers go pale at the thought of Trump in the White House, others are hoping against hope that he will get the job.

Marine Le Pen, the leader of France’s far-right National Front, has said that she would vote for Trump. Nigel Farage, a major figure in the successful campaign for the UK to leave the EU, has appeared on the campaign trail with Trump.

Anti-Islam Dutch politician Geert Wilders appeared at a fringe event of the Republican National Convention in Cleveland in July, praising Trump’s proposed ban on Muslim immigration into the United States.

In fact, whether he gets to be president or not, Trump has already been a gift from heaven for Europe’s far right. He’s shown them how to talk the rough talk, to be rude and coarse, to break taboos and to get away with it.

He’s also boosted the credibility of some of the leaders of Hungary, Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic who think like him (keep out the Muslims), talk like him and are building the fences and walls that Trump wants to construct.

But it’s the far-right parties in opposition in France, Netherlands and elsewhere who love Trump so much, their leaders even want to look like him: blonde, wild-haired and blue-eyed.

Like Trump, they like to think themselves as “anti-establishment” and “anti-globalisation”. They rant against “Brussels” just like Trump rages against “Washington”.

Much to the delight of the Brexiteers, Trump cheered Britain’s vote to leave the EU. He sees the Union as outdated and said nations needed to take back control over their future.

They share Trump’s dislike — dare I say “hatred” — of Muslims and hark back to the imaginary Utopia of a Christian and white Europe unsullied by outsiders.

Even though elections in France, Netherlands and Germany are some months away, just like Trump, Europe’s populists are giving mainstream candidates a run for their money.

In some ways, they have already won. Instead of countering the toxic populist narrative, many mainstream European political parties are embracing their ideology.

That’s the case for Nicolas Sarkozy, the centre-right French politician who wants to come back as president to replace Francois Hollande. Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May sounds like Farage in many of her comments.

However, while Hillary Clinton has spoken openly of her desire to welcome immigrants and Muslims as part of the American story, here in Europe only German Chancellor Angela Merkel has taken a public stance in favour of tolerance and openness.

The shrill tone of the US election, where fiction and simple slogans count for more than facts, is likely to be reflected in the upcoming polls in Europe.

As German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier underlined recently, “hatemonger” Trump and his cronies in Europe prey on people’s fears.

Clinton’s popularity in Europe is no surprise. She was respected as Obama’s Secretary of State. And although there was some concern that her “pivot to Asia” would leave Europe out in the cold, that fear was eased when America continued to engage with the EU on many issues, including climate change.

Trump is feared by the mainstream for his closeness to Russia, his sceptical view of Nato and he has explicitly discussed rapprochement with Russia, a renegotiation of Nato’s budget. Small surprise then that in response some in Europe are now talking of building an EU army.

Significantly, most people in Europe believe that neither Clinton nor Trump is likely to want to complete already difficult negotiations on a Transatlantic Trade and Investment Partnership (TTIP) agreement.

That’s probably just as well given the obstacle course the EU had to run to get approval of the Canadian free trade deal, with last minute objections from Belgium’s Walloon regional government almost scuppering the deal.

The CETA deal with Canada was done at the eleventh hour — but not before that too had sent shock waves across Europe.

—The writer is Dawn’s correspondent in Brussels

Published in Dawn, November 5th, 2016

Young, gifted Arabs hold the key to peace

Helle, Hajer and Hussein are young, articulate and ambitious. They dream big and aim high. They want the best for themselves and for the countries – Tunisia, Libya and Syria – they live in.You won’t read about them in traditional newspapers. They aren’t making headlines just yet.But more, much more, than their governments, these young people and millions of others like them hold the key to our future.Almost 65 per cent of the population in the Middle East and North Africa (MENA) is under the age of 30.  The choices that Helle and her friends make will determine the fate of their own countries. But they will also have a strong impact on Europe and the world.I met these “Young Mediterranean Voices” – teachers, journalists, environmentalists, social entrepreneurs, peace and democracy activists – at the MedForum 2016, organised last week in Malta by the Anna Lindh Foundation.The energy and enthusiasm of more than 500 savvy, young Europeans and Arabs whom the Anna Lindh Foundation had identified as “change-makers” rang through the Valetta conference centre. The talk was of crafting a narrative of hope, dialogue and cooperation that runs counter to the extremist discourse of hate and violence.‘No-one is born a terrorist’, says one young man. Instead of trying to counter the extremists’ poisonous voices, many underline the need to articulate an inspiring vision of societies where people can live in peace.Religion is the last thing on their minds. These young people want to fight for better education, jobs, clean government, stability and hope. And forget the stereotypes: the girls – including the small number who wears headscarves – are even more confident than the boys.The focus on civil society and young people as agents of social change is not new. But there is a consensus on the need to act urgently.The good news is that the Anna Lindh Foundation is getting the attention and support it deserves. The message of the EU High Representative, Federica Mogherini, to the Forum highlighted Europe’s commitment to engagement with young people.And there are growing opportunities for young people to make a difference.United Nations Security Council Resolution 2250, agreed last December, emphasises the crucial role they can play in managing conflicts and establishing peace. And building stronger Euro-Mediterranean bonds is going to be a key priority for Malta, which takes over the EU Council presidency in January 2017.The conversations in Valetta provided many lessons for policymakers.First, stop obsessing about religion and start putting money where it really matters: into schools, job creation and investment schemes.Second, engage with civil society – don’t fear it. MENA governments too often reject the ideas and passion of young people instead of seeking to channel their enthusiasm for change and reform into positive contributions to national policymaking. And while many EU cooperation agreements include an important people-to-people component, these programmes need to be made more crucial and more exciting.Third, even as it seeks to engage with MENA governments, the EU should invest in the region’s young people. This is essential if the region is to have long-term peace and stability.Certainly many parts of the Arab world are jolted by conflicts and wars. Violence and economic deprivation are driving many young people to come to Europe.But the gathering in Malta is proof that Europe’s southern neighbourhood need not be a place of death and destruction. With the right policies, the right people in charge, and sustained support, it can be a region of hope and peace.

The curious contours of a new European conversation

As the European Union gears up for its 60th anniversary next March, there’s good news and bad news.Let’s celebrate the renewed interest in the EU, both at home and abroad. But let’s also be prepared for a long and difficult struggle with those working against Europe.The surge in interest in Europe is encouraging. Demands for change and new ideas to build a more dynamic, vibrant and relevant EU are not in short supply.Interesting ideas – some big, some small – came fast and furious at Friends of Europe’s annual State of Europe brainstorm and conference last week.The voices of those who have thought about, talked about and worked for Europe for many years are valuable. They should be listened to.But importantly, others across Europe are beginning to speak up too. They include young people, women and minority groups whose engagement in EU affairs has been minimal. Business leaders, trade unionists, civil society representatives, academics and journalists are making their voices heard. They should be encouraged to say and do more.Ironically, the shock of Brexit has enlivened the conversation. The Brexiteers may have damaged Britain’s economy (and much more) but they have, unintentionally, also sparked heightened awareness of and popular interest in the EU.Such renewed curiosity is an opportunity to start a new conversation about Europe. It should be one which looks at the EU’s past, present and future.  It must look at the achievements but also at the failures and weaknesses of the Union.The confrontation between different visions of Europe is already part of daily life. This contest was evident in the run-up to the 23 June referendum in Britain and will be an essential part of the negotiations on Britain’s withdrawal from the EU.There are Euro-enthusiasts and Euro-doubters in national capitals and parliaments, and in all EU institutions.And then there are the populists, both in and out of government, who are not just against the EU but also fighting actively to undermine liberal democratic values. In uneasy and uncertain times, their message of intolerance, xenophobia and “Little Europe” is already attracting voters.With elections scheduled in France, Germany and the Netherlands next year, the fight for the hearts and minds of Europeans is going to get even fiercer.France’s National Front, the Dutch Party for Freedom and Germany’s Alternative für Deutschland – like Hungary’s Viktor Orban and his friends in Poland, Slovakia and the Czech Republic – have no scruples about publicising their dark vision of Fortress Europe. Their voices will get louder.But those who believe in an open and compassionate Europe should be equally passionate about voicing their beliefs. Contrary to what the populists want us to believe, a majority of Europeans do not share their nightmare version. They also need to be seen and heard.In a new world where truth and facts appear to matter less than lies, perceptions and fiction, the confrontation between the two visions of Europe is going to be dirty and ruthless.The naysayers’ simplistic anti-EU diatribes must be countered by equally simple but clever slogans.Those in favour of Europe should be proud of what has worked, and what makes the EU relevant and important – for example, contrary to conventional wisdom, the EU “peace project” still makes sense in a world where violence and war still rage just a few kilometres from Europe’s borders.But enthusiasts must also be frank enough to say what has not worked.Gentle speeches in comfortable settings just won’t do the trick. Those who believe in the EU will have to take their arguments to the people, not wait for people to fill the conference halls.Those who favour Europe must be as charismatic, eloquent and single-minded as those who oppose it.Next March’s anniversary of the EU should trigger a discussion on repairing and renewing the EU, but must also be a moment for reflection on what it means to be European in a complex and challenging world.As former Australian prime minister Kevin Rudd told the Friends of Europe conference, Europeans must ‘buck up and not talk yourselves into a funk’.More than ever, Europe is a vibrant mix of people, cultures and religions. The EU is an important part of peoples’ lives, often taken for granted, often criticised and much too often under-estimated and under-sold by self-seeking politicians.French statesman Georges Clemenceau famously said that ‘War is too important to be left to the generals’.  Today, Europe is too serious and too important to be left to politicians.

VIEW FROM ABROAD: Britain, Europe and the Brexit ‘pantomime’

LONDON in early October and I’m reassured: nothing appears to have changed since the June 23 vote to take Britain out of the European Union. The bustling city is still home to millions of happy “foreigners” of all colour, creed and race. The cafes, theatres and shops are doing a thriving business. Nobody looks at me with hostility or even interest. This is London as we know and love it.

My passport is stamped by a border policeman who is clearly of South Asian descent. The taxi driver is from Cyprus. The waiter at the trendy restaurant my son and daughter take me to is Dutch. Everybody and everything seem as they were before the Brexit referendum and I chide myself for worrying about the post-Brexit future of one of the world’s most wonderful cities.

Fast forward a few days and I am back home in Brussels, worrying again. As I watch and listen to the news coming out of the British Conservative Party conference, I can hardly believe my ears. British Prime Minister Theresa May has declared war, among others, on foreigners, Europe, global elites, and banks.

The rhetoric is straight out of the first half of the 20th Century. Britain is being taken back in time to an imaginary past when it was prosperous, white and Christian. There is no mention of the days of the Raj — but that may have been an oversight. Clearly, May’s version of Britain is a country stuck in a time warp and uncomfortable with life in an interconnected and globalised world.

Luckily, the prime minister’s views are not universally popular. Those favouring Brexit were and still are in a small majority. Many of my British friends are desperately looking for new non-British passports. There is a friend who is becoming Dutch, others are applying for Belgian nationality. Still others are looking desperately for similar deals. There is anger and confusion. The country May is building seems to be more science fiction than reality.

And London’s Mayor Sadiq Khan is adamant the London after Brexit will remain open to foreigners. “It’s not simply a state of mind or an attitude — it’s what we are: open for talent, for business, for investment,” Khan told the Financial Times newspaper.

But May is on a roll. Britain is going to become a “country that works for everyone”, she underlined at the conference in Birmingham as her party faithful gazed adoringly at her. The camera zoomed in on an uncomfortable looking Boris Johnson, the UK foreign secretary and one-time Leave campaigner. Everybody is laughing, nodding — and some are falling asleep.

May has called the Brexit vote in June a “quiet revolution” and insists that she is now in charge of the country’s future. No, parliament will not be consulted. The people have spoken — and they want to leave the EU.

Only of course it isn’t that simple. The referendum was an advisory one, Britain is still a parliamentary democracy and the Brexit vote is being challenged in courts. Also, while turning her back on foreigners and elites, May still wants to retain the maximum possible access to EU single market while ensuring full control over immigration.

As everyone knows, however, nobody in the EU — least of all German Chancellor Angela Merkel — will allow Britain full benefits of the single market without free movement of people. May has admitted that the upcoming Brexit negotiations — once she invokes Article 50 on taking Britain out of the EU in March next year, are going to be tough, requiring “some give and take”.

Worryingly for Europe’s liberal democrats, May, who was supposed to be in favour of “Remain” in Europe when she was in the last government, has suddenly started sprouting populist rhetoric which is reminiscent of Ukip, the British anti-EU party, of Marine Le Pen and other leaders of the many far-right groups which are proliferating in Europe and America’s Donald Trump.

In Birmingham, she described the June vote as a “quiet revolution”, when people “stood up and said they were not prepared to be ignored anymore”. She promised to change how the British elite related to the working classes. And then came the killer judgement: “If you believe you’re a citizen of the world, you’re a citizen of nowhere”, she said.

Amber Rudd, the British home affairs minister, added fuel to fire by insisting British companies should hire “British citizens first”. She promised a crackdown on companies, such as minicab firms, that hire illegal migrants, and on landlords that rent properties to people without papers. Only foreign students who graduated at top universities such as Oxford or Cambridge would be able to stay and work in the UK.

Fortunately, there is a backlash over proposals to force companies to disclose how many foreign workers they employ, with business leaders describing it as divisive and damaging.

And as the value of the British pound tumbled to another historic low, Scottish first minister Nicola Sturgeon described May’s vision of Brexit Britain as a “deeply ugly one” and warned that she could call for a second referendum on Scottish independence.

Britain’s exit talks are to start in March and last at least two years. Expect more poison and posturing from Britain and anger and stubbornness from Europe. Caught in the fire are the country’s young people — and the economy.

However, judging from their performance in Birmingham, May and her team are sanguine about the future and appear to view the upcoming EU negotiations as little more than a traditional Christmas pantomime. They are likely to be disappointed.

—The writer is Dawn’s correspondent in Brussels

Published in Dawn, October 8th, 2016

VIEW FROM ABROAD: A sober reflection on democracy today

I AM in the European parliament, participating in a discussion on “Democracy today and tomorrow”. We are supposed to be celebrating the “International Day of Democracy” decreed by the United Nations to review and assess whether the ideal of democracy is being translated into “a reality to be enjoyed by everyone, everywhere”.

We are reminded that the values of freedom, respect for human rights and the principle of holding periodic and genuine elections by universal suffrage are essential elements of democracy.

But the mood is sober, self-critical and reflective. Gone are the self-congratulatory speeches and back-patting which would have marked such occasions in the past.

Twenty-five years after Francis Fukuyama proclaimed the “End of History” and the victory of Western liberal democracy as the best form of government, liberal democracy, human rights and democratic values are increasingly being questioned and challenged.

In this troubled world can any country today really claim to be a ”model democracy”?

There is consensus that we are living in challenging times. Democracy in the US and Europe is in deep crisis. The problem is no longer “over there” in the non-Western world, but within the “mature democracies” of America and Europe.

The meeting is just a day after the televised encounter between the two American presidential hopefuls, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. There is general dismay — even horror — that Trump could be only weeks away from stepping into the White House.

For years, the US has been the champion of democracy, the gold standard for others also trying to experiment with a government of the people, by the people, for the people.

But democracy in the US is being tested as never before. The emergence of Trump as a credible candidate has shocked mainstream European political parties who fear that something similar could happen very soon in Europe.

Already far-right populists like Marine Le Pen in France, Geert Wilders in the Netherlands and the Alternative for Germany (AfD) are snapping at the heels of established political leaders.

Their xenophobic, anti-Muslim and anti-Europe message is striking a cord with angry men and women who feel uncertain and uneasy in the face of change. Le Pen is expected to do exceptionally well in national elections in France next year. The AfD has already made massive gains in recent regional elections in Germany.

The parliament is apprised of some surprising facts: surveys show a fall in the level of support for democracy among young people. Several seem to think it would be nice to have a “strong chief”.

There is no agreement on whether the economic slowdown, austerity and unemployment are making people ever more suspicious of politicians. But everyone agrees that there is a growing gap between the political classes and the electorate.

And as political parties lose credibility and relevance, populists step into their space and start spinning their tales of hate and woe.

The far-right populists in France, the Netherlands and elsewhere are often in the spotlight but it is time the illiberal leaders of Poland, Hungary, Slovakia and the Czech Republic, with their message of division and disunity, received equal attention.

As one participant put it, “We worry about what’s happening outside Europe but as we all know the fundamental rules of democracy are being breached inside Europe. Are we doing what is needed to stop the rot?”

“How can the EU impose principled, punitive measures on autocrats around the world when it has been unwilling to use any kind of sanction against the likes of Viktor Orban in Europe itself,” asked another.

Also, is it enough to hold elections in order to be a democracy? The response from participants is that it is important to think beyond the elections to models and structures of governance.

Political party reform is important for instance. And winners in elections have to learn that once they are behind the driving wheel, they must work for ALL their citizens, not just for those who voted for them.

The discussions are animated and open. There is concern about the growing polarisation of electorates, the rise in extremist ideologies, the lack of space for people in the centre who don’t want to vote for either the Left or the Right.

In addition, the Western liberal model is losing traction worldwide as countries look for help and inspiration to Russia or China. Many in China are already beginning to tout the “Beijing model” to countries as an alternative to democracy.

It is sobering stuff. We leave the conference in a muted state of alarm. It’s good to be aware of the dangers around us and of the even more perilous times ahead.

But I wish someone had come up with a solution to revive and reboot a form of government which — for all its weaknesses — is still the best one around. At least for the time being.

—The writer is Dawn’s correspondent in Brussels

Published in Dawn, October 1st, 2016

We should all be rooting for Georgieva

The United Nations is tantalisingly close to having its first woman - and Eastern European - secretary general. European Commission Vice President Kristalina Georgieva, who is Bulgarian,  now has the long-awaited backing of the Bulgarian government to get the top UN job. She is finally officially in the race to replace Ban Ki-moon and will be fielding questions from the UN General Assembly on October 3.We should all be rooting for Georgieva. Here are 3 reasons - among many- why I think she rocks:

• Georgieva will be transformational. At a time when the UN, like all international organisations, is struggling to reestablish its credentials in a complicated and turbulent world, Georgieva has the personality, skills and experience to break away from the repetitive "same old, same old" way of doing things.
• From the day she took over as the EU Commissioner for Humanitarian Affairs in 2010, Georgieva has travelled the world, standing out as a strong, no-nonsense but compassionate leader who goes the extra mile to engage and connect with people and countries.
• Having tried all different types of men (from different continents, different races,  different backgrounds) it's time the UN was led by a gutsy, hard-working woman who commands respect and knows her way around byzantine multilateral institutions, including the EU Commission and the World Bank.

Of course it's not done yet. Antonio Guterres, the much respected former Portuguese prime minister and head of the United Nations High Commission for Refugees, is still in the lead in the numerous "straw polls" held so far at the UN.  But that was before Georgieva entered the fray.Also, Irina Bokova, head of UNESCO and the former favourite of the Bulgarian government, is still in the race and reportedly has Russian backing.Not everyone - including Moscow and some Europeans such as the French and Portuguese governments - is pleased that Georgieva is believed to be the favourite candidate of German Chancellor Angela Merkel.But really should we care? Isn't it time to stop the petty political and geopolitical quarrels and focus on what's best for reviving the only multilateral body which has a mandate to tackle the many challenges of global governance?

Welcome to the world of new ‘diplomats’ who shout and insult

Remember as children we were told to be polite, courteous and to never use “bad” words either at home or in public? Especially never, ever in public.

It was difficult. When you hated a teacher and wanted to use an expletive to express your feelings, you wished you could do so without your mother hitting the roof. And all through life, you had to restrain yourself, turn the other cheek, keep a stiff upper lip and so on. And all you wanted to do was scream insults.

Now you can. You can be rude, abusive and crude and it’s alright. All you are doing is getting things off your chest. It doesn’t matter if you are a politician. You can let it all hang out. And you don’t have to apologise.

So what is this all about? Take the case of Dutch Prime Minister Mark Rutte and Filipino President Rodrigo Duterte. At first glance, they appear to have very little in common.

The blandly fresh-faced Rutte is not yet 50 years old and reportedly still takes his weekly laundry to his stepmother. Duterte at 71 is a firebrand politician whose ruthless campaign to wipe out the drugs trade has upset many at home and abroad.

Both, however, have been in trouble recently for using the F word in public. And with their coarse language, both have spotlighted the rise and rise of offensive and abusive language in the public sphere.

Donald Trump, the man who could soon be president of the United States, has of course perfected the art of being offensive to all and sundry. “Mexicans are rapists, Muslims are terrorists” and Hillary Clinton is so many nasty things it is difficult to keep track.

Here in Europe, Eastern European leaders and populists like Marine Le Pen, leader of the xenophobic Front National in France, breathe fire and venom against all and sundry but especially against Muslims.

Boris Johnson, the erstwhile leader of the Leave Europe campaign in Britain famously said Hillary Clinton had “dyed blonde hair and pouty lips, and a steely blue stare, like a sadistic nurse in a mental hospital”. He said Obama was against Brexit because as a “part-Kenyan” he had an “ancestral dislike” of Britain.

Interesting stuff. But let’s linger for a moment on Rutte and Duterte. The Dutch prime minister, criticised by some for being too close for comfort to the Dutch populist and Muslim-hater Geert Wilders, recently reacted to footage showing a group of men attacking journalists and their cars at a demonstration against the coup attempt in Turkey in July by saying: “My first reaction would be: Go away. Go back to Turkey. ‘Pleur op’ I would say in Haags”, he said, using the expression for “f… off” in the local dialect in The Hague.

As everyone knows by now, Duterte has of course jolted EU-Asia relations by telling the European Union to “f… off” after officials and parliamentarians in Brussels criticised the Filipino President’s brutal policy of extrajudicial killings of drugs suspects in his war against drugs.

Rutte has had the grace to say his remarks did not represent the position of the government, adding plaintively: “This is a personal opinion. I am not prime minister 24 hours a day.” Duterte, of course, is too macho to say sorry.

Instead, the Filipino President blasted the EU and the European Parliament for harbouring “guilty feelings” over the atrocities Europe had committed in the past. He also called Europeans “hypocrites”.

The EU has responded with dignity, saying relations with the Philippines remain strong and friendly. And of course the still-28 nation bloc is in good company. The Filipino leader has also lashed out at US President Barack Obama and UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon as well as Trump who he described — rightly — as a “bigot”.

Those shouting out the insults say it’s time to stop being politically correct. And since the Brexit referendum, opinion polls say there has been an increase in hate crimes and racial slurs in Britain.

So what is happening? Why the sudden burst of rudeness in public life? Why, as Simon Kuper of the Financial Times underlined in a recent article is “The Age of Diplomacy Ending”? Why are personal insults becoming the norm in affairs of the state?

Well, for one, politicians have to grab public attention. Being nice and mellow doesn’t get you noticed in today’s tough, dog-eat-dog world. To be noticed by a public used to the crudeness of reality TV, politicians have to be loud and rude. They have to be make things simple. And what’s simpler than a nice, coarse insult?

It’s not just about the public — it’s also about getting the attention of a fickle media. Journalists do not care about nice people doing nice things. It’s the bad boys and girls and the villains who get the spotlight.

So talk tough, ooze venom and get it all off your chest. Say it like it is. Be as rude and tactless as you like. Call a spade, a spade. Diplomacy in the 21st century is certainly not for the faint-hearted.

EU leaders must fight fire with fire

It’s easy to be sucked into the prevailing pessimistic EU narrative. You know the one: the Union is falling apart; Brexit will prompt an exodus of others seeking to leave the bloc; and pure, white Christian Europe is being invaded by nasty foreigners, most of them Muslim.So let’s close down the EU shop. Will the last one out please turn off the lights?Of course, it is not really that bad. As a visiting Chinese scholar speculated last week, Europeans are suffering from a particularly bad case of the blues – and instead of doing everything to make them feel better, dysfunctional European leaders may be making things worse.As she put it: “Why can’t European leaders get their act together and stop whining and whinging about their ‘first world problems’”?That’s harsh. Europe faces a multitude of crises: the Brexit vote and the uncertainty it has triggered; the rise of dangerous populism; the continuing, unresolved financial crisis.It’s bleak. And nobody seems to like anyone anymore.But the recent epic bouts of whining by Europe’s great and good are becoming increasingly tedious.First on the scene to highlight Europe’s grim reality was Jean-Claude Juncker. In his annual State of the European Union speech, the European Commission President told MEPs that the EU is in an existential crisis. It was stark stuff.Not to be outdone, European Council President Donald Tusk gave his own equally downbeat assessment. Then 27 EU leaders (minus British Prime Minister Theresa May) turned their Bratislava gathering – intended to be a show of solidarity – into yet another much-publicised bout of chest-beating over the fate of sad, old Europe.There were some ‘roadmaps’ put forward, but they bore an unfortunate ‘Fortress Europe’ watermark. The undercurrent was to put Europe back together by pulling up the drawbridge and talking tough on security, but to soften the impact with new initiatives designed to distract, deflect and dazzle. Free Wi-Fi in every European town by 2020, anyone?This approach is wrong-headed. The more EU leaders talk down Europe – and bewilder already-puzzled Europeans with more incomprehensible and makeshift initiatives – the more they perpetuate the myth of a lost continent.The truth is more complex. Yes, Europe faces many problems. Unemployment remains high. The European economy has been weakened by years of economic stagnation and budgetary austerity. The ‘Gang of Four’ leaders of Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic want a closed-off, white and Christian Europe that has little truck with diversity and inclusiveness.But despite policymakers’ moans and groans, the European story remains strong.Europe has room for – and a need for – the refugees and migrants who have arrived on its shores. Europe also needs foreign tourists who will pump money into Europe’s service industry.Europe’s intelligence agencies are getting better at working together, foiling plots and catching would-be terrorists who threaten Europe’s “way of life”.The EU still has peace. It has reconciled enemies. It has created a hugely-successful frontier-free single market and the free movement of people.The young people in Britain who voted Remain know the value of being part of the EU. Thousands of Europeans – individuals and companies – are working to welcome and integrate refugees and migrants.But these truths are going unsaid.By endlessly repeating, as Tusk did in Bratislava, that Europeans feel insecure in the face of migration and terrorism, EU leaders are amplifying the voice of populists and bolstering their power.If they are really serious about winning Europeans’ trust and support, EU leaders must fight fire with fire. This means putting as much passion, energy and hard work into crafting a European narrative of peace and openness as the populists are investing in their nightmare version.The populists already have their captive audience. With the battle over Brexit lost, EU leaders need to arm themselves with a vision of Europe that resonates with the aspirations of millions of Europeans who will not be voting for Marine Le Pen, Geert Wilders or the Alternative für Deutschland.The 60th anniversary of the Treaty of Rome next March provides the ideal opportunity for such a reboot. Europe is far from being a lost continent. But EU leaders have certainly lost their way.

EU struggles to deal with multiple ‘first world problems’

Living in Brussels, it’s easy to be sucked into the prevailing pessimistic and heart-wrenchingly grim European Union narrative. The one that says that the EU is falling apart, Brexit will prompt other countries to leave the bloc and there’s no common ground among the remaining 27 members.

So, let’s close the EU shop and will the last one out, please turn off the lights. And please do it quickly. Now!

Really? Is it that bad? Or is it the case — as a Chinese friend said to me this week — that European leaders are just suffering from a particularly bad case of the blues. Or as she put it: “Why can’t European leaders get their act together and stop whining and whinging about their ‘first world problems’.”

And whining they definitely are. In separate public statements last week both Jean-Claude Juncker, the European Commission President and Donald Tusk, the EU Council President — the two men and rivals who run two key EU institutions from their perch in Brussels — painted a very similar picture of a Europe ready to fall off the cliff.

It was stark stuff. “Our European Union is, at least in part, in an existential crisis.” Juncker confessed in an almost hour-long “State of the Union” speech to the European parliament.

“Never before have I seen such little common ground between our member states. So few areas where they agree to work together,” he complained.

EU member states — with Britain set to negotiate its way out of the bloc — were in a state of fragmentation. “Never before have I seen national governments so weakened by the forces of populism and paralysed by the risk of defeat in the next elections,” said Juncker.

Not to be outdone, Tusk in a similarly downbeat mood, called on EU leaders to take a “brutally honest” look at the bloc’s problems, declaring in a reference to the Brexit vote: “We must not let this crisis go to waste.”

“We can’t start our discussion ... with this kind of blissful conviction that nothing is wrong, that everything was and is OK,” intoned Tusk. “We have to assure ... our citizens that we have learned the lesson from Brexit.”

Interestingly, despite their differences and their rivalry, both men came up with a similar solution to putting Europe back together again: pull up the drawbridge, talk tough on security and come up with an array of new initiatives to distract, deflect and dazzle.

Tusk spoke of the need to bring back “stability and a sense of security and effective protection”. The former Polish prime minister echoed the demands being made by many other leaders from eastern Europe to enhance border security, step up counterterrorism and efforts to “bring back control of globalisation” — whatever that means.

Juncker also talked tough. The focus was on building a “better Europe that protects, empowers and defends”, he declared. His cure for ending the EU’s “collective depression” is to convince the UK to trigger the exit talks as quickly as possible, set up a common European military force and appoint an EU foreign minister.

Stronger efforts to “defend ourselves against terrorism” would include more information on “who is crossing our borders”. A so-far mysterious “automated” European Travel Information System will provide information on “who is travelling to Europe before they even get here”.

He insisted that the EU’s foreign policy chief, Federica Mogherini, should have a seat at the table in negotiations on Syria’s future. And in case you were wondering, the EU will also strengthen its trade defence instruments and make sure China curbed its steel exports.

And oh yes, there will be free wireless internet in public places all over Europe, in the next four years.

Both Tusk and Juncker have made the headlines of course. Bad news always does.

But the more EU leaders talk down Europe — and bewilder already puzzled Europeans with more incomprehensible and makeshift initiatives — the more they perpetuate the myth of a lost continent.

The truth is more complex. Yes, Europe faces many problems. Unemployment remains high and its economy has been weakened by years of economic stagnation and budgetary austerity policies.

The East-West divide is deep. The “Gang of Four” leaders of eastern European states — Poland, Slovakia, Hungary and the Czech Republic — want a closed-off white and Christian Europe which has little truck with diversity and inclusiveness. And so on.

But the bottom line is that despite all the moaning and groaning by policymakers, the European story remains a strong one. Europe has room for — and a need for — the million or so refugees and migrants who have arrived on its shores.

Terror attacks continue to threaten Europe’s “way of life” but intelligence agencies are getting better at foiling plots and catching would-be terrorists. The number of European “foreign fighters” heading off to Syria is going down.

The EU has brought years of peace, reconciliation among enemies, the creation of a frontier-free single market and the free movement of people.

Those watching Europe from outside recognise the EU’s strength and resilience. They also know that it is not the EU that has lost its way, its Europe’s squabbling, fractious and dysfunctional leaders.

The EU’s Georgieva should get the top UN job

I’ve long hoped European Commission Vice-President Kristalina Georgieva would be the next Secretary-General of the United Nations.  Fingers crossed, she may just get the job.True, Georgieva is going to be entering the race at (almost) the last minute. And it’s also true that the current frontrunner in the competition to replace Ban Ki-moon is the very capable and much-respected former UN Human Rights Commissioner Antonio Guterres.But it’s really about time the UN was led by a woman. The problem is that the leading female contender, Bulgaria’s Irina Bokova, lags firmly behind Guterres in the last straw poll. Bokova, who is current head of UNESCO, has also run into strong opposition from the United States and Britain.So it’s time to change tack.Georgieva, who is also Bulgarian and is now in her second term at the European Commission, has the qualifications, experience and personality to take charge of the global body.She should have been in the race from the start. But politics and the Bulgarian government’s decision last year to opt for Bokova as its candidate, got in the way. However, it now looks like the Bulgarians have finally seen sense and are ready to back Georgieva.Sofia’s change of heart is to be welcomed. Georgieva, formerly at the World Bank, has been an impressive European Commissioner. She shone as the EU Commissioner in charge of Humanitarian aid. And this year she also lead efforts to reform the international humanitarian system.Nothing is settled yet. The UN race is proving to be much more exciting and unpredictable than anticipated. As Richard Gowan points out “a Guterres versus Georgieva contest would be a dream matchup for many UN officials and analysts…Both have held top-level humanitarian portfolios and were widely praised for their performances.”But for all the reasons I’ve mentioned, I’m putting my money on Georgieva.

VIEW FROM ABROAD: Brussels scandal is about ethics, not money or sex

Perhaps I’m missing something but scandals appear to be few and far between in Brussels. And when they do erupt — as is the case just now over former European Commission president Jose Manuel Barroso’s decision to join the global banking giant Goldman Sachs — it’s about moral corruption, ethics and integrity rather than money or sex.

Maybe this is because Europeans are overall more worldly-wise, more tolerant and less easily shocked than, say, their counterparts in the United States. It could be that everyone here is so busy worrying about the fate of Europe that other things just pale in comparison.

Or perhaps people in Brussels are particularly well-behaved and orderly. After all no senior Eurocrat has been caught sexting like former US congressman Anthony Weiner. And unlike US Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, there have been no nude pictures published of senior European politicians’ wives.

And yet Brussels hosts thousands of European Union officials, foreign diplomats, people working for Nato and of course members of the Belgian government. There are also thousands of hangers-on in the form of lobbyists, lawyers, think tankers, journalists and business leaders — all trying to get a word in when the EU gets busy with legislating and regulating.

This exciting mix of nationalities, languages, interests, religions and colours is visible in the EU institutions and in Nato and in the cafes, streets and markets of Brussels. With so many people meeting, talking, lunching and partying, scandals of all sorts should be rife. They are not.

But the Barroso-Goldman Sachs affair has certainly got tongues wagging. So why all this wrath and fury? After all people change jobs all the time. Senior public servants with clout and influence are in great demand as lobbyists and consultants after they retire. That’s the case the world over. And Brussels is no different. Moving from cushy EU jobs to equally cushy private sector jobs has been the name of the game in this town for years.

Some cases of revolving doors have raised eyebrows in the past. But the noise and the fury soon die down. And then it’s business as usual. This appears to be the case for former EU trade commissioner Karel De Gucht who has joined the board of mining giant Arcelor Mittal. The former EU digital agenda commissioner Neelie Kroes has joined the boards of tech firms Uber and Salesforce.

The Barroso-Goldman Sachs partnership, however, appears to be a step too far even in this town of cosy arrangements. Thousands of people — including EU officials — have signed a petition denouncing Barroso’s new job.

French politicians have called the move “scandalous” and “morally unacceptable” and dozens of members of the European parliament have signed an open letter to current Commission President Jean-Claude Juncker calling for action.

In principle, Barroso, a former Portuguese prime minister who was European Commission president from 2004 to 2014, has not broken any rules. The EU stipulates that its senior staff must respect a mandatory 18-month cooling-off period before moving to a new job after retirement. The former Commission chief has done that.

But the criticism focuses on the ethics of his decision, not its legality. Critics allege that Goldman Sachs is implicated too strongly in the global financial crisis and has lobbied too voraciously against financial regulation to be a suitable employer for a former EU leader.

There is a concern that Barroso is being hired to help the bank navigate the uncharted waters of Brexit. And that the former Commission chief will use his inside knowledge and influence with his former staff to get things done his way.

The former Commission chief has been accused of showing poor judgement. There are accusations of conflict of interest and fears that his decision will further damage already discredited EU institutions.

According to the EU ombudsman Emily O’Reilly, “Public unease will be exacerbated by the fact that Mr Barroso has publicly stated that he will be advising on the UK’s decision to leave the EU.”

Certainly, the European public has a great deal to worry about these days. Fears of terrorism and wariness about the large number of refugees and migrants mix uncomfortably with uncertainty over Brexit, the continuing eurozone crisis and deepening divisions between East and West.

Barroso’s new job is hardly going to give any sane European sleepless nights. But at a time of multiple crises, Europeans want their politicians to be sensitive and responsive to their concerns.

The criticism is that the former Commission chief has shown a striking lack of judgement and understanding of the current anger and unease in Europe. So unlike in the US and other parts of the world, Europeans don’t mind if their politicians indulge in a bit of fun and frolics. But this is no time to be joining the ranks of rich bankers.

VIEW FROM ABROAD: Europe’s autumn of discontent: burkinis, borders and Brexit

SO it’s September and Europe is back at work. There is much to discuss and to do. Problems abound. Europe faces a host of difficult challenges, many internal, some external — and next year is set to be even more challenging. Everyone is braced for an autumn and winter of discontent. The world kept turning as the EU took a long summer break. The war in Syria continued to wreak havoc, refugees fled devastation, the earthquake in Italy killed and injured many, there were suicide bombs in Yemen, Turkey and Kabul and strongmen in Russia, Turkey and the US thundered poison and venom.

And oh yes, there were the Olympics, bringing some relief and excitement in an increasingly angry, intolerant and difficult world. There was also a landmark peace deal in Colombia between the government and the main left-wing rebel group, the Revolutionary Armed Forces of Colombia (Farc), putting an end to one of the world’s longest-running insurgencies.

Europe reacted to the events of course — but internal difficulties took centre stage. Europe’s focus is on itself, its challenges and dilemmas. Certainly, many EU policymakers keep a close watch on global events. But in the end, for many, Europe comes first.

Even when it comes to taking a holiday. Its certainly good politics for European leaders to take their vacations in Europe. Trekking in the Alps rather than in the Himalayas shows that a European leader — like Britain’s new Prime Minister Theresa May — is careful with money and committed to Europe.

But staying close to home has its disadvantages. Staying inside the cosy European cocoon may be cheap, comfortable and familiar. But it leads to complacency. If EU leaders had travelled a bit further, say to Asia for instance, they would know that the EU star is rapidly losing its sparkle.

Europe has certainly been in the news over the summer. But the headlines have been less than flattering. Media across the world has focused on three key questions which unfortunately appear to define Europe in 2016: burkinis, borders and Brexit. Gone are the compliments and the glowing words, the soft focus on European cities, museums, and food, abiding admiration for European integration efforts, the noble pledge to steer clear of war and turmoil. No longer, no more.

Step outside Europe and its clear: the EU has lost its reputation and clout. It’s political, diplomatic and economic influence is slipping, its standing is in tatters. Forget talk about European values. A watching world knows very clearly that Europe has lost its mojo. And nobody is celebrating.

For most of the summer, France grabbed the headlines with its bizarre decision to ban so-called ‘burkinis’. Images of Muslim women being ordered to undress on French beaches caught the global imagination, triggering animated debates on what had happened to a country known for its commitment to “liberte, egalite and fraternite”.

The burkini was of course only the tip of the iceberg. As the country heads for presidential elections in 2017, the French debate on Islam is expected to become even fiercer, with Marine Le Pen, the leader of the xenophobic and anti-Muslim Front National, calling the shots and other politicians including the centre-right presidential candidate Nicolas Sarkozy, frantically struggling to keep up.

The game in France over the coming months is going to be a simple one: who can sound tougher on Islam and Muslims. Le Pen is unlikely to become French president. But she will set the political agenda for the country and dominate the political discourse for months to come.

Which brings us to refugees and Europe’s ongoing struggle to deal with the large number of migrants and asylum seekers who keep knocking on its doors.

The EU once captured the headlines for its bold moves to eliminate borders to create a frontier free single market. The image now is of an EU determined to protect itself with barbed wire fences, armed policemen and more. This is especially the case in many eastern European states where restrictive new laws making life difficult for asylum seekers and refugees, anti-migrant rhetoric by decision makers and high-ranking politicians is commonplace.

Asylum seekers and refugees are called “intruders,” and “potential terrorists”, bent on destroying Western civilisation and Christianity. Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orban himself in July referred to migration as “poison”. Gyorgy Schopflin, a ruling party member with a seat in the European Parliament, suggested on Twitter that pigs’ heads should be placed on the border fence with Serbia to deter Muslim refugees from entering Hungary.

And then of course there is Brexit. The world can’t really believe that a country would willingly leave a much-coveted rich men’s club. And no one seems as confused as Britain’s Prime Minister Theresa May.

Her mantra of “Brexit means Brexit” is beginning to ring hollow, not least because the government has yet to decide on just when to invoke “article 50” which will kick-start negotiations on Britain’s withdrawal from the EU.

Many including former premier Tony Blair seem to believe that Britain could change course either through a second referendum or new elections. But others denounce this as wishful thinking.

Who knows? Europeans once stood out for their post-modern values and aspirations, their ability to make friends with former enemies. That’s no longer the case. Europe in the autumn of 2016 appears fragile, fraught and afraid. And it may stay this way for most of next year.

In a crazy world, we need to daydream

So here I am surrounded by evil, wickedness and hate, the world going mad all at once and all I can think of is this: if only Freddie Mercury and Nusrat Fateh Ali Khan had lived long enough to sing together.

Call it escapism. Call it cracking under pressure, the demands of an exhausted mind demanding some respite, a moment of rest in an angry vicious world. There’s just so much a person can take.

The rest of the world is going crazy over Pokemon Go! But as I read, hear and watch the loonies take over the asylum, the mad men raging and ranting, I’ve started daydreaming. And often as the mind wanders, I wish Freddie and Nusrat could have come together to sing and ease our pain.

What a concert that would have been, the meeting of two musical titans, sublime singers whose voices would have touched our souls in so many different unexplained ways, reaching places no one else could reach. Not John Lennon, not Elvis, not even Prince. Any yes, not even Amjad Sabri.

I can imagine their voices merging and mingling, Freddie’s haunting vocals soaring higher and higher and then dipping low — and then, slowly but steadily, Nusrat Fateh Ali adding his magical, spiritual sweetness to the duet. I can hear them now, singing a mixture of ‘Bohemian Rhapsody’ and ‘Dam Mast Qalandar’.

If only. My fantasy doesn’t last long. Both men are dead, their message of love and tolerance buried with them. So are Sabri, Lennon and others.

Instead of sweet music, we are doomed to listen to Donald Trump’s nasty rants. The man many once shrugged off as a freak show is now likely to be the next president of the United States. Interestingly, he is best friends with Vladimir Putin, the other tough guy on the block.

I’m sure it won’t be too long before both are bonding with that other angry middle-aged strongman, Turkey’s Recep Tayyip Erdogan, who, having escaped a military coup is now busy rounding up and punishing all and sundry. Oh yes, and there is talk of reinstating the death penalty.

Here in Europe, there are mad men aplenty too. Hungary’s right-wing Prime Minister Viktor Orban has described the arrival of asylum seekers in Europe as “a poison”, saying his country did not want or need “a single migrant”.

Geert Wilders, the leader of the Dutch far right Freedom Party told the Republican Party Convention in Cleveland that he is set to become the next prime minister of the Netherlands. “I don’t want more Muslims in the Netherlands…and I am proud to say that,” he told a cheering crowd of Americans.

To much applause, Britain’s new Foreign Secretary Boris Johnson lied and misled his way during the Brexit campaign that he headed. Nigel Farage, the xenophobic leader of the UK Independence Party has promised to help anti-EU protesters in France and other countries. Marine Le Pen, the leader of the French far right has become even more popular in the wake of recent terrorist attacks.

But there is hope yet. The world is not completely dark and dirty — at least not yet.

At their convention in Philadelphia, the Democrats called on Americans to reject what they called Trump’s politics of fear and division. It’s still not clear, however, if the message of hope and optimism offered by US President Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton can successfully counter Trump’s toxic rhetoric.

The divisions in society run deep — and not only in the US. Europe too is deeply divided between those who live in a permanent state of apoplexy over their inability to cope with a rapidly changing world and those who are ready to go with the flow.

For the last few years, like many others, I have been silently thanking the universe for Angela Merkel, the German Chancellor whose ability to show grace under pressure makes her the only true leader in a very messy and chaotic Europe.

Just recently, Merkel delivered a staunch defence of her open-door policy towards refugees, insisting she feels no guilt over a series of violent attacks in Germany and was right to allow hundreds of thousands of migrants and refugees to arrive last summer.

“A rejection of the humanitarian stance we took could have led to even worse consequences,” the German chancellor said. She repeated her wir schaffen das (we can manage it) mantra delivered last summer at the peak of the refugee crisis, adding: “We can manage our historic task — and this is a historic test in times of globalisation — just as we’ve managed so much already, we can manage it…Germany is a strong country.”

Interestingly, Merkel’s popularity remains high. In contrast, despite his hard-line response to terrorism and the extension of the national state of emergency, French President Francois Hollande remains intensely unpopular.

Go figure. Just when you think 2016 can’t get any worse, there is another terrorist attack and more innocent and gentle souls are killed.

As Freddie sang all those years ago: ‘this world could be heaven’. Sadly, tragically, it is not.

Lying is the new normal in the post-truth world

Is it just me or have politicians the world over really become nastier, more violent and more vengeful?

Perhaps it’s just a temporary phenomenon. Perhaps I’m feeling especially downbeat in the wake of Brexit, the terror attack in Nice, the attempted coup in Turkey, the nomination of Donald Trump as the Republican candidate for US president and Boris Johnson’s appointment as Britain’s Foreign Secretary. And oh yes, let’s not forget Mrs Trump’s botched attempt at plagiarism.

Recently it seems that everywhere I look, every time I go online, every word uttered by politicians that I hear, propels me into an unpleasant new era dominated by liars, bullies and cheats.

This is a time when being a successful politician means being dishonest, where nastiness is rewarded with votes and where fear and hate have replaced the discourse of tolerance and hope.

It’s not just politicians who lie and deceive of course — more and more everyone appears to have succumbed to the temptation. But while lying by ordinary people is hurtful and harmful, lying politicians are more dangerous because they are changing our world.

The transformation has been rapid. The “new normal” has come upon as almost unnoticed, changing our politics and with it our world in the blink of a Twitter feed.

It really has happened fast. Only a few years ago calling a politician a liar was the ultimate insult. When just like thieves, lying politicians were outcast by society, becoming objects of contempt and disdain. They were unceremoniously booted out, their lies exposed, their careers in tatters.

And remember a time when honesty in a politician was admired and considered a virtue? Promises were meant to be kept and men and women in charge were judged by their word. Just like ordinary fold, they were taught to speak the truth and never, ever cheat, whether at school, in the playground or in the family.

And facts. Remember when facts were important, nay even crucial in political discussions? Facts and figures — data and statistics — determined our views, informed our decisions and shaped our discourse. Elections were fought on the basis of correct, verifiable information.

Finally, think back to a time when politicians were polite and that mattered. People who were respectful and courteous were admired and looked up to as social models. Having good manners was an asset in society. Just like children, the people in power were taught to say “please and thank you”. And oh yes, they often also said “sorry”.

That was then. Today, more than half-way into 2016, it’s official: truth, vows, facts and manners are out. Lies, dishonesty, rudeness and fiction are in.

A close scrutiny of the Brexit and Trump campaigns provides ample proof we are living in what many commentators describe as a “post-truth” era.

“In the post-truth era, borders blur between truth and lies, honesty and dishonesty, fiction and non-fiction. Deceiving others becomes a challenge, a game, and ultimately a habit,” says Ralph Keyes, author of The Post-Truth Era: Dishonesty and Deception in Contemporary Life.

For proof look no further than Trump’s election campaign, and reports that 76 per cent of Trump’s statements are rated either “mostly false”, “false”, or “pants on fire”, which is to say off-the-charts false. By comparison, Hillary Clinton’s total is 29pc.

Boris Johnson and the Leave campaign lied notoriously about many things, including the 350 million pounds that Britain was supposed to be sending to the EU every week and which could be channelled into the National Health Service.

Turkish President Recep Tayyip Erdogan may or may not be misinforming his citizens by linking the attempted coup to his arch-rival Fethullah Gulen but his vengeful rounding up and mistreatment of those involved — and threats of bringing back the death penalty — are worrying signs for a country which was once viewed as a much-needed inspiration for Muslim democracies.

The media is full of other examples of liars, including of course former British prime minister Tony Blair whose “conviction” that Saddam Hussein had weapons of mass destruction has been revealed to be false.

Interestingly, however, he isn’t repentant. In the 21st Century, politicians found to have misled and deceived others go on to become authors and much-coveted conference speakers. Or like Boris Johnson, they shrug it off as unimportant. Or like Trump, they rage and rant.

The post-truth era is facilitated by the social media where “misinformation” spreads like wildfire and most mainstream journalists have abdicated their role as fact-checkers, preferring instead to swallow deceptions and lies without much questioning.

Bullies, ranting and lying politicians are certainly not just a phenomenon of the West. Asia, Africa, the Middle East and Latin America have more than their share of deceitful men and women who have turned lying into a long-standing political art form.

In the past, once unmasked, liars and cheats in the West beat a fast retreat. Today, they are foreign ministers and leaders of political parties - and possibly one of them could become the next leader of the “free world”.

ASEM: a right platform for conversation on shared global challenges

This is just the right time for a serious Asia-Europe conversation on shared global challenges. With Brexit around the corner, the world economy in poor shape, growing inequalities and discontent with globalisation on the rise, Asian and European leaders meeting in Ulan Bator, Mongolia, on July 15-16, have a great deal to talk about.Add to the list, an increased disconnect and mistrust between governments and citizens — especially between leaders and young people — the rise in populism, fears of uncontrolled immigration and violent extremism, and it’s clear that leaders at the Asia Europe Meeting (ASEM) summit in Mongolia will have a full agenda.Asian leaders and policymakers may believe that most of these issues are of relevance only to Europe. The truth is more complicated. The Brexit referendum last month has certainly highlighted the strength of these and other preoccupations among British (and other European voters). But many of these worries are shared by citizens across the world.Asia is as unequal a continent as is Europe. Winners and losers of globalisation exist on both continents and terrorists pose a challenge to Asian and European states alike. Even though they are masters of grabbing the headlines in Europe, populist politicians with simple messages exist in Asia as well. And leaders in both Asia and Europe need to build stronger connections with young people and respond to their worries about education, jobs, exclusion and marginalisation.It is important to have these discussions within ASEM. Given its informal format and structure, ASEM offers a unique platform for an open, no holds-barred high-level brainstorm on issues of mutual interest. The leaders’ retreat session is especially suited to the debate on shared challenges.In fact, it is the need for such a conversation that led to the creation of ASEM 20 years ago — and that is likely to give ASEM renewed geo-strategic relevance and increased credibility in the coming years.ASEM stakeholders — including policymakers, members of parliament, civil society representatives, academics and members of think tanks as well as young people and business leaders — are engaged in impressive efforts to make ASEM fit for purpose in the 21st Century.The emphasis should be on new ideas and increased connectivity as part of a potent new recipe for injecting new energy and dynamism into ASEM.Transforming ASEM into a hub or network of ideas and initiatives will give the Asia-Europe relationship a geo-strategic raison d’être, which it has lost over the last two decades. The platform for networking, dialogue and cooperation it provides today makes it even more essential in an interdependent and complex world. Asia-Europe connectivity is now a fact of life and reinforcing these networks through stronger institutional, infrastructure, digital and people-to-people linkages is rightfully emerging as a central element of efforts to revive and renew ASEM.ASEM has met many of its original goals by providing Asian and European leaders with opportunities to get to know one another, encouraging greater people-to-people understanding and providing the two regions with avenues to explore new areas of cooperation in the political, economic and social sectors.An array of ASEM meetings allows policymakers from both regions to exchange views on regional and global issues and strengthen their economic relations through greater trade and investment. Additionally, meetings between business leaders, parliamentarians, academics and civil society actors — and young leaders — have allowed ASEM to make important headway in enhancing mutual Asia-Europe understanding and upgrading the quality and diversity of the Asia-Europe conversation.While these connections are important, ASEM can do much more by playing a more central role than it has so far in generating, nourishing and disseminating new ideas about living and working together in a globalised world.This requires the setting up of an “ASEM Brains Trust” or network of think tanks/studies centres, which can help to enliven ASEM by turning into a market place for ideas and initiatives. Proposals and ideas generated within such a studies centre should be fed directly into the work of senior ASEM officials and the activities of other stakeholders. Such tasks could be performed by an ASEM coordination centre of the kind being recommended by Mongolia.This combination of ideas and connectivity allowing for a permanent circulation and exchange of thoughts, knowledge, experience and expertise can revive ASEM for the third decade. The summit in Ulaanbataar can and should set ASEM on the road to renewal. The 21st Century is proving to be turbulent, violent and unpredictable. ASEM can help increase Asian and European understanding of a very complicated world.

China seeks to enhance Asia-Europe connectivity

China is expected to contribute more to the Asia-Europe Meeting (ASEM) by promoting greater relations between the two regions at an upcoming summit.

Chinese Premier Li Keqiang will unveil new proposals in deepening cooperation between Asia and Europe during his first foreign visit this year.

Li will attend the 11th ASEM summit in Mongolian capital Ulan Bator from July 15 to 16, after an official visit to the country from July 13 to 14.

ASEM has provided an important platform for political dialogue, economic cooperation, and cultural and social exchange between Asia and Europe.

Launched in 1996, the biennial ASEM summit has served as a venue for dialogue between countries in Asia and Europe. ASEM now includes 53 Asian and European members. The 11th ASEM summit to be held in Mongolia marks the 20th anniversary of the group's founding.

Shada Islam, director of policy at the Brussels-based think-tank Friends of Europe, said that ASEM has performed well in terms of bringing together Asia and Europe.

"The revitalization of this important forum is to a large extent a consequence of the fact that China is very much engaged into it," said Shada Islam in a recent interview with Xinhua.

She explained that ASEM is very flexible but needs some fresh energy, and said she believes that discussions on connectivity will provide that kind of new dynamism.

"ASEM members are expecting more from China, the second largest economy in the world. It should show more courage and wisdom and allocate more resources in leading the interconnectivity between Asia and Europe," said Cui Hongjian, director of the Department for European Studies of the China Institute of International Studies.

Cui noted the importance of linking China's Belt and Road Initiative to existing ASEM projects such as the Asia-Europe continental bridge as well as to more new projects to boost their connectivity.

China attended all ASEM summits ever since its birth, and the proposals it made in the past 20 years have borne witness to its contributions to the platform.

The Mongolian summit is highly looked to as it will work out the plan for priorities in the next 10 years.

The ASEM faces the challenge to enhance its relevance in looking for more spots of common interests between Asia and Europe, said Ding Yifan, an economist with the Development Research Center of the Chinese State Council.

Ding suggested more cooperation between Asia and Europe in technology and environmental protection, as well as increased efforts in dealing with possible differences among Asian and European members.

Ding expects the Chinese premier will touch upon such topics during the summit in a bid to bring out more momentum from the ASEM in the next decade.

Meanwhile, Li is also likely to discuss with other Asian and European leaders the Brexit issue, the South China Sea arbitration unilaterally initiated by the Philippines, and other hot topics across the region.

The upcoming visit by Li is expected to seek more convergence between China's Belt and Road Initiative and Mongolia's Steppe Road program.

More cooperation in production capacity, major projects and finance is expected to inject more vitality in China-Mongolia ties.

There's opportunity for Mongolia's Steppe Road program to get aligned with the Belt and Road Initiative, which will greatly benefit the Mongolian economy as well as the construction of a tri-party economic corridor involving China, Mongolia and Russia, said Gao Shumao, the former Chinese ambassador to Mongolia.

On efforts to aligning the Belt and Road Initiative and the Steppe Road program, Gao said there is huge potential for the two sides to cooperate in rail and highway construction, clean energy, tourism, health care and people-to-people exchanges.

Chinese President Xi Jinping's visit to Mongolia in 2014 laid a sound foundation for China-Mongolia relations, and Li is expected to strengthen those ties during his trip, said Gao.